Court Alters '08 Landscape (McCain-Feingold takes a hit.)

The Hill ^ | June 26, 2007 | Alexander Bolton

[no dems]

Oh happy day, oh happy day...... "Liberal Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer dissented." Everyone who is surprised, raise your hand.

Being incumbents, Hillary and Barak Hussein Osama Obama will take a hit from this as well as John McCain. Oh happy day, oh happy day......

[Still Thinking]

Woo hoo! Now if we can just get McPain himself declared unconstitutional, we’re getting somewhere.

[TheDon]

Which side was for freedom of political speech today?

[pissant]

Excellent. The McCain-Feingold-Thompson bill is being neutered.

[what's up]

I believe Fred Thompson backed this atrocious bill.

I like Fred. But I question his judgment at times.

[xcamel]

Not nearly a big enough hit IMNSHO...

[ModelBreaker]

“Many critics believed this part of the law was designed to make it harder to criticize incumbents close to an election,” said Michael Toner, a former member of the Federal Election Commission now at the Bryan Cave law firm. “But the upshot of this is that the Supreme Court’s ruling makes it easier to criticize incumbents than [it is to criticize] other candidates who do not hold federal office, such as Mitt Romney and other candidates who are not in Congress.”

LOL. This guarantees Congress will find a way to fix this now very serious problem.

[Build_The_Fence]

Another slap in the face for Juan McStain.

[NonValueAdded]

Is Wisconsin Right to Life corporate or union funded? You’d think from the first paragraph that it was so. Yes, those entities will make their voices heard close to election day. So what? As long as we know who is saying the message, whether it is the Teamsters, AT&T, or a group of individuals who pool their money and run the ad, let them speak.

[Anti-Hillary]

Must you be reminded again that Fred has publicly stated that while at the time he thought it would be a good idea, he now regrets his vote. I suppose you have come up with the PERFECT candidate that can actually garner more than 5% of the vote....

[no dems]

Ooooooooh....that was a dig pissant. LOL!!!

[no dems]

THE SIDE THAT WON!!! Free Speech lives to see another day.

[pissant]

It was thompson who called it that. He was not just a supporter, but a very active member getting that albatross through.

I’m glad he has seen the light. A run for the GOP nomination tends to shift one rightward. Ask Mitt.

[Mr. Brightside]

Being incumbents, Hillary and Barak Hussein Osama Obama will take a hit from this

Yeah, that an angle I never thought of.

Can you imagine all of the issue ads targeting Hillary, while the liberal groups not being able to touch Thompson?

[maine-iac7]

I believe Fred Thompson backed this atrocious bill.

"Thompson went on the record as saying that while he supports the soft-money limits he voted for, the 30/60 day limits on political speech need to be repealed"

[elkfersupper]

Well, thank Goodness!

This crap could have and should have taken a fatal hit from George W. Bush, if he weren't so interested in trying to "get along" with every left-wing wacko and control freak that comes his way.

[what's up]

Thompson went on the record as saying that while he supports the soft-money limits

I don't think campaign contributions should be limited.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The dirty little secret is that even this ruling, with the Ginsberg 4 in the minority, is anti First Amendment.

The money that funded the startup of the newspapers was not necessarily all derived from journalism, was it? In fact, when towns were founded in the western territories, the townspeople attempted to attract printers to their new towns as a top priority. So the money for the new newspapers in such hopeful little villages as Chicago, IL and Ada, OK wasn't all from newspapering in Philadelphia and New York. It would have been local money, paltry as it was.

There is nothing pure as the wind-driven snow about the money that comes from journalism, either - the business of journalism is the business of advertising and the business of hype. So why is journalism free to criticize politicians and the rest of us are not? Splitting hairs over how many "express advocacy" statements can dance on the head of a pin is fatuous nonsense.

[goldstategop]

Incumbents voted for BCRA not to clean money out of politics but to shut up their opponents. That's the real reason they passed McCain-Feingold. It wasn't done to make government truly responsive to the American people. Besides, at the end of the day, our right to petition our government for redress is guaranteed by the Constitution and we don't need the government's permission to exercise it. McCain and the rest of the Congressional crowd have zero respect for the Constitution. Or they never would have passed "campaign finance reform" in the first place.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[no dems]

True!!!