Libertarian Party: Campaign Finance Reform Ruling is Assault on Free Speech

Libertarian Party press release ^ | December 11, 2003 | George Getz

[Sabertooth]

FWIW John Locke is one of my hero's, I have read every one of his treatists on the 2nd amendndment. I am a member of the NRA and do not even own a gun. I feel the same about the 1st amendment and all the rest. I just have this nasty habit of looking at the big picture, in the political landscape.

Can you please paint the picture that's bigger than the Constitution? Thanks.

From your #9:

I remember the political climate at the time. President Bush was under constant attack. I admit that I breathed a collective sigh of relief when he signed the damn thing.

Yes, people were saying mean things.

Whew! Glad that's over.

How many Amendments are left?

[Jim Robinson]

No, it's not ok. And I think most of the Republicans are fuming over this. It ain't over yet. Thank God that Gore did not get in. We'd still be negotiating with Osama bin Laden and Saddam Huesein if he did (if we hadn't already surrendered that is).

Course of action is to do all I possibly can to re-elect Bush and to build on the Republican majority. I have faith that a more conservative court will overturn this b/s first chance they get.

In the meantime, I suggest the best course of action is to start grooming a more conservative candidate for 2008.

[Jim Robinson]

The first amendment will be fine. This was a temporary blow by an insane court and it will be reversed. The ruling is idiotic and everyone knows it. The challengers will be lining up. Advocacy groups and legal foundations on both sides of the political spectrum will be challenging and working overtime to deep-six this b/s. Guarantee you that it will be overturned.

[Sabertooth]

Guarantee you that it will be overturned.

The SCOTUS rarely overturns any anti-Free Speech legislation out of Congress.

I don't believe they've ever revisited one of their decisions in this area.

[Sabertooth]

Should read:

The SCOTUS rarely overturns any anti-Free Speech legislation out of Congress under the guise of campaing finance law.

[Jim Robinson]

We'll see. There's a first for everything.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"Want to make the Supreme Court and all of the federal courts more conservative? Vote out the commie-loving rat bastards! Want to leave the godless America hating Democrats on the bench, vote Rat or third party."

That accounts for 1/3 of the problem. The exec and the leg branches knew this was unconstitutional, but rammed it thru anyway. Their message is 'shut up and take it."

The idea that our liberal Republicans in office will fight vehemently and install conservatives to the courts is a FANTASY. Their efforts thus far have been non chalant, except for that voter attracting melodramatic 'Mr Smith' inspired filibuster, where they showed footage of beds in hallways because a few people could not stay up for 1 damn night.

It is clear that we are on the socialist road to ruin in every way possible with the current mix of Republicans. The only answer is to get these liberal do nothing Republicans out of office ASAP at any cost. If they want socialism, let Dean give it to them for 4 years. Let the Reps in Congress go home.

Ford-Carter-Reagan

Bush-Clinton-Bush-Dean-CONSERVATIVE

Many are sick of the abuse. Death by 1000 cuts. Every day there is a new insult to the base. Yesterday, amnesty for illegals, social security for illegals back in Mexico...

Enough is enough.

[Jim Robinson]

By the way, it's also not impossible for a more conservative congress to pass a new bill overriding this one. I think there are a lot of pissed off people out there and this one is not over, either for the court or the congress.

[Jim Robinson]

The Democrats rammed it through. Check the votes. Want to make some change, vote out the rats!

[Jim Robinson]

And b/s on giving it to Dean, et al. Get rid of the RATS! We don't need more of the same.

[The_Eaglet]

It is clear that we are on the socialist road to ruin in every way possible with the current mix of Republicans. The only answer is to get these liberal do nothing Republicans out of office ASAP at any cost. If they want socialism, let Dean give it to them for 4 years. Let the Reps in Congress go home.

I say the same for the socialist Democrats and the Republican incumbent who is signing legislation to expand the federal government (outliberalling Clinton) and violate the First Amendment.

[Sabertooth]

By the way, it's also not impossible for a more conservative congress to pass a new bill overriding this one. I think there are a lot of pissed off people out there and this one is not over, either for the court or the congress.

No doubt, but we'll need better leadership from this President for round #2.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"LOL! High-fives, yall! Same page. At least we read and write with clsarity."

What are you celebrating? Totalitarian minded Socialists are close to winning the final battles in an all but won war.

[John R. (Bob) Locke]

In the meantime, I suggest the best course of action is to start grooming a more conservative candidate for 2008.

How do you propose we accomplish this? I'm not disagreeing, just wondering how you see it coming together.

To me, if we continue to vote for Republicans when they stand in the middle of the road then that's exactly where they are going to stay. Think back to '92 and '94. Bush got whacked in '92 for being a centrist, the Contract With America was born for '94, and the GOP whipped the Dem's up one side and down the other.

But it was the lesson learned from Bush running the country from the middle and losing the support of the base that eventually cost him the election that changed the direction of the GOP. I just don't see how Bush and the Congress can bash the Constitution this way and then reasonably expect to maintain support from conservatives.

And Bush is at least as much to blame as anyone, and more so than almost everyone else. He got the bill he bargained for with McCain, and he signed it, just like he said he would. It's not that he's breaking his campaign promises that scares me, it's that he's acutally keeping most of them. And he's also pledged to sign the "assault weapons" ban back into law if it hits his desk. I believe him. If he helps take a bite out of the Second Amendment like he has the first, are you going to change your opinion of him?

[Jim Robinson]

That's true. I'm sure he's getting more than an earful of complaints on this one from every side. Hoping for the best.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"Sometime during the next term, we'll have a couple vacancies on the Supreme Court."


By definition, activist judges will die before they give the positions to conservatives. And those odds are very very low.

Let's be honest. There will be no consevative SC appointments in the next 5 years.

[At _War_With_Liberals]

"I am also disappointed in the court. Kind of makes me realize how lucky we all were to NOT have them rule 100% in favor of Gore in 2000 because they are OUT-There!"

If the same thing happens in 2004, we will lose in the SC.

[John R. (Bob) Locke]

The Democrats rammed it through. Check the votes.

C'mon, Jim. How did it even get on the calendar for the House? You know that if Gephardt had the power, and a bill that he didn't want to come to the floor for a vote came up, he'd have it buried.

The Democrats certainly offered more support than the Republicans, but the GOP'ers could have prevented this thing in its entirety. All it would have taken was a little bit of courage.

And Bush is really lacking in that area, truth be told. He gets a pat on the back for going after the terrorists halfway around the world, but that idea was supported by a massive majority of the population here at home. It was a simple decision, politically, for him to pursue that course of action. And tax cuts are a no-brainer as well. Not too many average working folks are going to decry a little extra take home pay.

Vetoing this CFR bill would have required him to go against popular opinion somewhat in order to do the right thing. When faced with that, he choked.

The more I think about this, the less respect I have for him.

[Southack]

"we'll need better leadership from this President for round #2."

I think that it's safe to say that our President's eyes have been opened to just how activist/liberal/and flaky our current SCOTUS has become.

Like Bush, I would have lost good money betting that the SCOTUS would have easily overturned the most egregious parts of CFR...and then suddenly they didn't. O'Conner bolted and gave the 5-4 victory to the Dark Side.

So the bad news is that CFR got ruled to be legal.

The good news, however, is that the SCOTUS today told all involved parties to this case that they wanted them to come back with evidence of damages of CFR against 1st Amendment rights. I think that it's safe to say that such damages can and will be shown by the NRA, Senator McConnell, as well as even the ACLU. So the SCOTUS may yet overturn this beast.

Other good news is that President Bush has now seen the SCOTUS' true colors. This sort of gamble will never be made again with the current SCOTUS justices.

And this may even gain enough public momentum to force Congress to repeal CFR on its own. That's what we need to pro-actively, positively work toward. Far too many Bush-bashers (not you) have taken this opportunity to pile onto the President. That's not productive, that's venting or agitating.

Reasonable people thought that the SCOTUS would overturn this thing. Who knew?! Well, now we all know not to trust them.

And that goes double for the idiots who are trying to force the Court to take a new 2nd Amendment case now, rather than wait until Bush can reshape the SCOTUS with some new appointees. Ditto for those trying to ram through anti-abortion cases with these Justices still in their robes.

We can't risk sending our other cases up there until after we change the makeup of this Court, something that isn't going to go our way if Dean, Hillary, Clark, or Gephardt weasels into the White House next year.

[Sabertooth]

Like Bush, I would have lost good money betting that the SCOTUS would have easily overturned the most egregious parts of CFR...and then suddenly they didn't.

Dang, I'd be counting it now.

For 30 years SCOTUS has loved abridging speech on "campaign finance" and "public interest" grounds.