Who will defy 60-day "ban on free speech" before elections?

today - a day that WILL live in infamy | epluribus_2

[epluribus_2]

Here's your chance, Free Republic hero. If you are really incensed about the 60 ban on political speech (...congress shall make no long banning...) then step up with your intentions to excercise your formerly constitutional right next fall, committing a federal crime in the process. And when you get convicted - and you will - your recourse will be to appeal to the supreme court. While O'Connor and company stare down their noses at you and CNN reports. Doesn't get any better than this, does it?

[epluribus_2]

Anyone with a few years free on their hands? I hear a lot of words but this issue - is the foundation of this site.

[2banana]

I might even do it wearing a shirt that says "Merry Christmas"

[IGOTMINE]

It will be very, very difficult for me to violate this law.

I would have to buy airtime on a tv or radio station attacking or defending a candidate. There are significant barriers to this, the first being financial. Next, since the media represent a business, they can refuse to run my ads.

Nonetheless, if I had a spare $20K or so lying around and could find a willing media outlet, I'd do it.

[finnman69]

The trick is to get a radio or tv station to air your ad.

[The_Victor]

Do you think the RATs will try to shut down FR 60 days before the election?

[tomahawk]

They will be jailed for such speech. This nation is no longer free.

[LS]

It doesn't prohibit INDIVIDUALS from doing anything, but only from running campaign ads or "hit" ads during the 2-week period, so really the only Freepers who would have any chance to do anything would be those who owned TV stations.

[tomahawk]

In the 21st century, campaign ads and "hit ads" are the very essence of free political speech. Ban them and you have banned free speech. This is what has now occurred.

[epluribus_2]

I can hear Dustin Hoffman's lawyer character yelling "NO YOUR HONOR - YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER - YOU'RE OUT OF ORDER" as they carry out the first convict. Maybe a small town station with a news department that has a "Viewer Response" feature or "Talk Back". By the way, how are talk radio stations affected by this. OMG is this bad.

[epluribus_2]

How about buying time on a local cable outlet.

[apillar]

Everyone should do what the Democrats do in most elections. Blatantly flout the law... The result, in two or three years the FEC my give you a small fine or slap on the wrist, but the damage is done and the results of the election is never questioned.

[Captain Kirk]

A Bush....err....Free Republic Hero? Don't think so. This monstrosity was signed by Bush and most Freepers, despite some moaning and groaning, will loyally support him next year, hence he can safely ignore anything they do or say. He knows that they can be taken for granted. This law is now a permanent part of the landscape, thanks to the GOP.

There might be a more serious rebellion had it not been for the war. The war, however, trumps any conservative misgivings about domestic issues thus proving that Randolph Bourne was right when he said "war is the health of the state."

[Bob Buchholz]

I think epluribus_2 is absolutely right.

The way I read the law, it is illegal for a politically defined group (which FreeRepublic is) to run the ad. If we (or a subset of we which would have to divorce itself from FreeRepublic unless JR wants to go to jail with us) donate money to produce the ad and get someone to run it then we will have effectively broken the law. An individual on his own with his own money is still free to run any ad that he wants which Soros can and probably will do.

I think that what I have stated above is correct, but there is plenty of time to find out for sure. I guess I really don't want to go to prison, but I can't think of a better reason to do it.

[epluribus_2]

Think maybe some support from remaining constutionalists might help deliver the message? (Paging The Honerable Congressman BillyBob)

Other ideas - broadcast it on WIFI internet all over internet hotspots or do Cell Phone mobbing (google it). Or how about buying ad space on pop-ups (ugh) to put it in their face (www.democra... or www.nytimes.com). This is such offal I can't believe what I'm writing but it is the law of the land.

[doc30]

This is a ridiculus ruling on the part of the SCOTUS. It was also ridiculus that Bush signed the law. I hate saying this, but the constitution has no meaning. It is a worthless piece of paper that should be burned. The three branches of the government ignore it so why do we need it?

[foolish-one]

I have considered and am still considering doing something like this. The problem would be to find a way to stay within existing laws and only challenge the free speech infringement of the campaign finance "law". If, for example, the limit is $10,000.00 on ads paid for with other than an individual's personal assets that mention a specific candidate within 60 days of an election then someone would have to somehow receive that amount or more in cash donations in envelopes with no correspondence and no return address so that he or she couldn't later be prosecuted for accepting contributions and failing to properly record or track them. Then the individual could record each contribution as cash with no name in the 'contributed by' portion of the ledger.

Maybe FreeRepublic is the only way something like this could be done.

[squidly]

None of y'all need to worry about challenging this ruling, as George Soros is sure to give it a shot.

[goldstategop]

Any one prepared to go to prison for a felony? Cause that's what you're now facing for simply questioning a politician by NAME 60 days before an election.

[Dominic Harr]

At times like this I'm always reminded that the Supremes once declared a black man could be property.

The Supreme Court is just a collection of political individuals.

[foolish-one]

Does anyone have a copy of the law or a legal interpretation?