RUSH TO DUB: IT'S GUT CHECK TIME ( Stand up for free speech. Veto this bill Mr. President)

rushlimbaugh ^ | 2/15/2002 | Rush Limbaugh

[Bad~Rodeo]

DITTO THE VETO

[oldvike]

Blah, blah, blah, blah...... same old tired crap. So you think it's a good idea to let media whores decide elections?

[DLfromthedesert]

Amen. When I see threads saying "Freep this Poll" on GW's job performance, they certainly don't mean me cuz I'd give him a 6 out of 10. Positive points for his prosecution of the war on terror and negative for increasing Federal control in his Education package; wanting to set up a massive federal "volunteer" program, the onerous "Patriot Act" that oblierates Fourth Amendment rights, plus more intrusion into health care

ALL social programs should be given back to the states. Let the Feds fight the wars and guard our borders, and he ain't even doing that .... he wants to give illegals resident status!!!

I take it back; he gets a 4!!

[nicmarlo]

money buys you influence and who has all the money here?

I am suspect of any liberal who says he's in favor of putting a cap on money spent toward campaigns........they have an idea in their heads about who this bill will be affecting, and it's not THEM! If Daschole is in favor of this bill, that already tells me all I need to know. There's something more than odious in the bill.

[IVote2]

"These two issues, for McCain, are not seperate, in my opinion. He is angry over the Keating thing, that gave rise to CFR. However, I bet a history check would prove he's felt slighted by the religious right in a campaign too. He wants revenge. He definitely feels slighted by them in the presidential primaries. He wants to outlaw the speech they used to defeat him.

My gut instinct is he was guilty of some impropriety concerning the Keating scandal, how much, we probably never know.

I think he is becoming profoundly evil. I wish he would seek professional help, and stop listening to the kudos from the ultra liberal left.

It's sad to watch his decline, as I used to have the utmost respect for him when I watched him in the House.

[DLfromthedesert]

Furthermore, if he signs this turkey, how can we say he truly has integrity? It will be time to look for a better candidate!!

[oldvike]

Don't forget about this new greenhouse gasses emmissions proposal. I'm shocked at how many FReepers were defending him on this issue last week.

[lawdog]

When I heard Rush I turned on C-Span and witnessed the spectacle of statists,socialists,anti-constitutionalists and their dupes.There were a few brave Patriots but not enough! Most of them are POWER DRUNK fools at the very least-many traitors to their oaths of office.The Republic is dying a death of a thousand cuts-it's called incrementalism.The First is about to be "restricted" just like the Second.God help us.

[nicmarlo]

My gut instinct is he was guilty of some impropriety concerning the Keating scandal, how much, we probably never know.

I think he is becoming profoundly evil.

May I so bold as to correct you? I think he's been evil all along . . . it's just that he hid it much better before. Now, since he lost his presidential goals, he has nothing to lose by showing his true colors.

[hjp]

Rush doesn't have any "guts" himself. He won't let the social issues on his show.

You are exactly right!

Roe v. Wade is a greater constitutional travesty than "campaign finance reform". Setting aside the issue of morality, Roe is bad law: it was a judicial usurpation of an issue that should be left to the states.

Rush misses the entire point: there is no constitution left. The federal judiciary has destroyed it. There is no system of federalism, no separation of powers, no moral code as the underpinning of the law; indeed, rule of law no longer exists.

This is precisely the reason why money is crucial in politics. The leviathian federal government intrudes into every facet of our lives and the buying of influence is the only means of portection as the hedge of law has been uprooted.

There should be a veto; however, all the discussion misses the point that the constitution has already been destroyed and liberty in large measure circumscribed by an activist judiciary and a congress that knows no limits.

[IVote2]

I believe GW will do the right thing, whatever it is. I don't pretend to know at this moment.

However that said, I have to add this. It was the DUTY of the House members to abide by the Constitution and those who helped pass this bill should take responsibility for their actions.

They voted to pass it. Now they look to GW to veto it. SAVE ME! SAVE ME!

Isn't that pretty cowardly??

One other point while I'm thinking about it. On Fox's Special Report with Brit Hume, Mort and Mariah thought this bill would help the Republicans in the short run.

[rep-always]

Couldn't agree more. I also have and do all I can, therefore, I assume I'm also an activist. No regrets, my friend.

[VRWC_minion]

Press for sound link In context its not about freedom, its about the use of the internet to smear people

Cut below from anti-bush website.

In April 1999, ®^TMark constructed GWBush.com, a website that at first glance appeared to be that of Republican Presidential candidate George W. Bush (his website is GeorgeWBush.com). ®^TMark's first version incurred Bush's wrath, and his lawyers sent a threatening letter. The domain's owner, Zack Exley, then took down the site and attempted to sell his domain to the Bush camp.

By the time ®^TMark's second version of GWBush.com was published, with much more content, the Bush campaign had complained to the Federal Elections Commission.

These attacks resulted in a major international news story, which was then magnified by Bush's televised response to a reporter's question about the site: "There ought to be limits to freedom," Bush said--a gaffe that has yet to disappear from public memory. (Click here for audio.)

The Bush campaign's intimidation tactics raised the eyebrows of several constitutional lawyers, who offered to support GWBush.com in potential copyright and electoral procedure lawsuits, arguing that although there ought indeed to be "limits to freedom", restricting free speech and limiting citizens' access to the political process was not the proper place to draw the line.

Shortly after the publicity's peak, Exley, the owner, struck out on his own with a value-added GWBush.com.

[MamaLucci]

The quote is a BJ Clinton quote.

[IVote2]

Sadly, you probably are correct. We didn't have the past eight years of experience to guide us to detecting exactly what that smell was.

[spycatcher]

Bush seems to be using his political capital as a chance to become more liberal. It has always failed for conservatives in the past and will fail again. No one cares for pols who have no backbone. They would rather see a tough conservative stand on principle than one on their knees begging to be loved by Demoncrats. As a powerful figure, Bush risks looking pathetic.

[nicmarlo]

We didn't have the past eight years of experience to guide us to detecting exactly what that smell was.

That's because the smell from the White House was so overwhelming, we were unable to detect the less offensive ones.

[rep-always]

Well, if Mort and Mirah think it will help republicans, watch out, it's gonna be extremely helpful to democrats. I would not trust these two liberals as far as I can throw them. Anyway, I don't care who it helps, it infringes on my freedom of speech. VETO.