Megacool Blog indeed!… if anyone else has anything it would be much appreciated. Great website Enjoy!…

The whole bill was simply a ruse from the get go to make it look like corporate America doesn’t own the branches of government.

The Calibur on September 19, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Other than the fact that the tax rate is not 100%, do you have the slightest bit of evidence that govt is owned by corporations? Or is that merely your paranoia speaking?

spmat on September 19, 2009 at 12:29 PM

What you said. No hiding, no BS.

The Supreme Court failed in its duty to protect the First Amendment when it had the chance, as did George W. Bush when he signed the legislation into law.

.
I seem to recall that GW signed the bill assuming it would be overturned by the courts. Its been a long time coming.

The whole bill was simply a ruse from the get go to make it look like corporate America doesn’t own the branches of government.

The Calibur on September 19, 2009 at 12:24 PM

.
The bad side of contribution restrictions;
.
Corporations are prohibited from making political contributions, but its officers are not. Such contributions are made by individuals.
.
On the other hand unions do not have such restrictions, because everyone knows unions are good and corporations are bad. /sarc

McCain-Feingold takes a hit

Good… Long overdue…

Interesting. I wonder how this is going to affect the the fairness doctrine.

Natrium on September 20, 2009 at 2:35 AM

This regime has attempted to go around the legis by installing czars in WH. WH will now find a way to go around the judis too.

I guess it all depends on whether you think money=free speech.
Terrye on September 19, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Without money, I cannot run ads on television and radio to counter the opposition, but I can send $10 to an organization of like minded who can

The wealthy buy enire television networks and install ‘newsmen’ to package the news their way, and run ‘historical’ programs to revise history, and craft entertainment filled with propaganda against various movements and groups. This is 24/7 12 months a year.

At election media-created politicians get to amplify their message with ads while poor folk like me are muzzled because our assemblies are banned from campaigning

Incumbents have a field day. It shows in the poor quality Congress we have gotten. When you have rigged the laws to give incumbents the advantage, incumbents become less and less interested in responding to the voices in the public

If you wish to evaluate McCain Feingold look at the Congress we have. Pathetic

Anyway I don’t care for McCain and I’m also one of those who only donated to him and worked to get others to suppot him because of Sarah Palin. I don’t even read the stuff he sends me anymore because I just don’t care…I too wish he would go home and let a eal conservative have his Senate seat…

McCain-Feingold takes a hit

Gee I wonder what MegMac has to say about it ?
Can’t wait AP

And…
Had McCain won, it would have been his recession and his two occupations going 4 more years until the next election. More midterms losses with an ultra angry democrat base. McCain might even have bombed a Iran……So I think it was best to protest vote against McCain and Palin.

Spathi on September 19, 2009 at 4:01 PM

Nice, but I’m just wondering what kind of country we will have left after MSNBC’S ‘victim in chief’ and the gang are done. The headlong rush toward a country I don’t even recognize is not yet a year running.

The USA insists on throwing the Almighty aside so now it seems like He’s setting us aside.

cjk on September 19, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Ain’t that the truth!

This was necessary to level the playing field. To get anyone with the ability to push a candidate on the airwaves silenced… except for the media.

Because the MSM deserves a monopoly on pushing candidates and tanking others in the run-up to an election. They’re the only fair, trustworthy, and responsible party who can be trusted to… BWAHAHAHA.

Damn, I thought I could get through that paragraph. Sorry.

maverick muse on September 19, 2009 at 4:29 PM

See SCOTUS’ F.E.C. v. Wisconsin Right to Life. Also the case on the Hillary movie that was just argued before SCOTUS.

I find it interesting that the D.C. Circuit didn’t wait for SCOTUS to rule on the Hillary movie case. It went ahead and sort of dared SCOTUS to disagree with them.

“[T]he concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment.”

Doesn’t this sentence apply equally to the fairness doctrine?