Posted on 06/29/2004 6:01:46 AM PDT by Undertow
You can't gag that fat bloviator.
Honestly, I don't see the connection between CFR and conservatives protesting F911
He is not a teacher at any school. He doesn't even have a law degree. Maybe he stands on a box in a park "teaches" on the Constitution.
I guess the Libertarians would demand silence from protesters of the film.
Hypocrites. They should stick to doing dope.
He's talking about the attempt to use the CFR law to prevent the movie from being advertised on radio and television because it is political.
Years ago I visited a L convention. I left after they spent the first 4 hours discussing whether or not lying was really a violation of contract. I'm not sure why anyone would want to be a part of a party that has no moral tether or immovable principles. It is clearly the party of relativism - where "right and just" is all in the eye of the beholder.
I think there's some kind of thing about the FEC (as mentioned) pulling the plug on it if they judge it's just campaigning for the election.
I do think the "reform" bill is pretty stupid. But then, if it's law, there is a question whether Moore is really channeling money from the DNC types.
Doesn't our free speech allow us to speak out against F911? Did I miss something here? Does freedom of speech have no responsibility or consequence? If Michael Fatboy Moore speaks, do I have to listen and worse yet agree?
True. And a shining example of the old adage "the way to get rid of a bad law is to enforce it."
The funny thing is, I'd be a Libertarian if I could figure out how to become a virgin.
David Bossie: Thanks to washingtonpost.com for having me today. First off, we know Michael Moore's intention, his ultimate goal, in the creation of his so-called movie, is to defeat President George W. Bush for reelection. Secondly, we also know that Michael Moore as a director, never lets the facts get in the way of a good story. He doesn't exactly have a track record of credibility.
We filed a complaint yesterday with the Federal Election Commission claiming that the advertisements for the film are "electioneering communications" as defined in "McCain-Feingold" and upheld by the Supreme Court.
These advertisements use the name, likeness, image or photo of a federal candidate for office. That can be President Bush or John Kerry.
All we want is Michael Moore to follow the law. McCain-Feingold limits my free speech as well as Michael Moore's
Let's be clear. 1. They are not a violation today, but will be on July 31st. 2. He is using corporate money to pay for his ads, which is illegal, and 3. He is using foreign money to pay for these ads, which is illegal....
I think largely they are on the right track.
But there does seem to be an over-anxiety about things that are just plain bad. The protesting about drugs, porno, etc, they do is kind of silly. After all, local gov's at least have been banning/penalizing these types of things since the days of the Founders. And who am I to question the Founders?
I had a friend who was a Libertarian (I am definitely of that bent except as indicated) and who said, regarding porn, he preferred to read the 1st Amend for what it says in plain words - after I told him what the true intention was (him supposedly worrying about what the Founders wanted). OTOH, he tells others who question the "plain words" of the 2nd Amend that the INTENTION was for this and that.
I think it boiled down to what he wanted to not feel guilty about. ;-) Guns and also porn.
As what's left of the (very little) credibility of the Libertarian party goes up in smoke, like a big fat spliff....
He's talking about the attempt to use the CFR law to prevent the movie from being advertised on radio and television because it is political.
Don't expect the knee-jerkers to understand that.
As soon as they see the word "Libertarian", they just start bloviating.
If the left uses this to shut down Hannity, Rush, and Ingram... I'm gonna spit on your shoes.
You people can be remarkably short sighted. Badnarik is right...
There are those who are protesting it under the guise of its violation of CFR.
I take Hitch's stance on the whole thing - Who Cares - It's bullshit.
The Libertarian Party is nothing but a bunch of left-wingers who want their dope. And I'm a semi-libertarian.
I have some small-L libertarian beliefs, and I don't normally agree with the big-L Libertarians, but in this case they're right. McCain-Feingold is an unconstitutional abomination, a huge abridgement of the First Amendment.
However, I do wonder, would the Ell Pee be screaming this loud if the Rats were trying to use McCain-Feingold to block a movie slamming JF'inK? Some of the LP's recent rhetoric makes me wonder if they aren't succumbing to some of the Rats' "Bush = Hitler and must be stopped at all costs" insanity.
}:-)4
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.