Posted on 04/27/2008 9:29:30 AM PDT by moderatewolverine
Ugly locutions often crop up in the promotion of ugly politics. Consider the threat of “scrutinization.”
It has been made against some residents of Parker North, Colo., who expressed a political opinion without first getting their state government’s permission for political activity. Herewith another example of what is being done around the nation in the name of political hygiene, as that is understood by “campaign finance reformers,” those irksome improvers whose animating ideology is McCainism.
Parker North is a cluster of about 300 houses close to the town of Parker. When two residents proposed a vote on annexation of their subdivision to Parker, six others began trying to persuade the rest to oppose annexation. They printed lawn signs and fliers, started an online discussion group and canvassed neighbors, little knowing that they were provoking Colorado’s speech police.
One proponent of annexation sued them. This tactic—wielding campaign finance regulations to suppress opponents’ speech—is common in the America of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The complaint did not just threaten the Parker Six for any “illegal activities.” It also said that anyone who had contacted them or received a lawn sign might be subjected to “investigation, scrutinization and sanctions for campaign finance violations.”
The First Amendment guarantees freedom of association, “the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The exercise of this right often annoys governments, and the Parker Six did not know that Colorado’s government, perhaps to discourage annoyances, stipulates that when two or more people associate to advocate a political position, and spend more than $200 in doing so, they become an “issue committee.”
(Excerpt) Read more at primetimepolitics.com ...
Sharp.
"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
For those libertarian bashers on Freerepubic, notice that it is a libertarian organization that is protecting political free speech, not a Republican one.
I hear that, but would you prefer Hillary or Obama? We can’t agree with EVERYTHING a candidate says, it’s a list of priorities.
Anyway, this conversation will pick back up after I celebrate Greek Easter at a buddy’s house!
A good day to all.
McCain’s CFR says, in effect, that the politicians aren’t corrupt; it’s the money that’s corrupting. “The money made me do it.”
Branching out from that concept, if people join together to publish or broadcast a political message that benefits a politician, it’s like giving that politician the corrupting money they spent.
From there, it’s a short walk to declaring the citizens who do that guilty of corrupting. But the politicians, they’re not corrupt, ever.
McCain sucks, but Hitlery and Osama suck worse.
"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
The Seditious Meetings Act, bearing a strong resemblance to Colorado's restrictions, was so egregious that it was repealed in 1824.
Wonder if we'll be so lucky?
The Seditious Meetings Act restricted to parish level all public meetings that were called to discuss 'any public grievance or any matter on Church and State'. Organisers had to proved local magistrates with due notice of the time and place of the meeting. The magistrates were empowered to change the date and/or time of the meeting at will, to prevent any attempt to organise insurrection. This was, perhaps, the most serious infringement of public liberty but it was repealed in 1824.
McCain-Feingold speech police PING.
Somebody just shoot me next time they see me.
The two real rationales for laws regulating political activity are incumbent protection and the convenience of government—discouraging the governed from activism.
Great pull line.
IIRC, 4 years ago FReepers, the enemedia and most republicans were mocking the demonRAT mantra, "We aren't Bush!"
Today, the best FReepers and republicans can come up with is, "He's better than her royal heinousness or b HUSSEIN o. How pathetic!
Only if you promise to shoot me first!
Thanks for the ping ..... sigh
In the old day, the neighbor who made such legal threats or filed such lawsuits would have a little meeting with all the other men in the neighborhood and told that keeping his mouth shut and just dropping the cause was better for everyone involved.
The only reason libertarians get bashed is because of their open borders views.
That and their silly belief that first strikes against an enemy are necessarily bad.
While free speech is good, would it be appropriate to permit racketeers or out of State scoundrels like George Soros, to invade the process without fear of being exposed?
As unlikely as it sounds, local politics is already corrupted by scurrilous pressure groups, who rely on anonymity to advance their causes. Be it corporations who want access to the public trough, fanatics trying to change public policy in their favor, or businesses opposed by the community at large.
I’m not saying their solution is good, just that some protection might be in order.
I’m getting too old for scrutinization myself. Maybe some hormones, or maybe that there Con Agra or whatever it is ....
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.