JFK and McCain/Feingold...

[Larry Gude]

...anyone care to guess, as John Wayne Kerry appeals to a higher authority, who was a co-sponsor of McCain/Feingold?

As y'all know, McCain/Feingold was passed to make the political money game oh so much better.

Which, of course, led to moveon and George Soros and other 527 groups...including the men who Served with Kerry.

"Your honor, I'd like to change my vote!"

MORON

But... : a funny, funny, guy.

:

 

[Ken King]

...anyone care to guess, as John Wayne Kerry appeals to a higher authority, who was a co-sponsor of McCain/Feingold?

As y'all know, McCain/Feingold was passed to make the political money game oh so much better.

Yeah, he was one of 41 co-sponsors, but it wasn't passed nor was it signed into law, so again Kerry helped do nothing. It was Shays-Meehan, the House version that became law (HR 2356). S27 McCain/Feingold made it out of the Senate and into the House, but it never passed or became a law. I wonder why they still get credit for it? Something about telling a lie long enough it becomes the truth?

 

[Larry Gude]

Details...details...

...I don't give a dang about why it's called what it is and yeah, Kerry was only one of 41 co-sponsors.

To me it is both maddening that any sane person would try to argue that McCain/Feingold/Shays Meehan/Lenny/Squiggy in ANY way makes sense AT ALL and then hilarious that ol' John Wayne Kerry is crying foul about the real word effects of a STUPID law he helped bring into being.

One of the few real complaints I have with George Bush's leadership is that he signed this POS into law. The Supremes blessed this crap.

Of course, my alternative in a major candidate is to support...a co-sponsor of said POS???

Kerry wants to ban books.

Kerry wants free speech curtailed.

Modern liberals think in terms of the Church of Micheal Moore and Conspiracy World as though any two people who share an opinion or worldview NOT from their bible is a criminal.

Then, as a free standing opinion; banning books, federal control of speech, they put on their jack boots and march in lock stop behind their anti US military war hero.

"ABB. ABB. ABB."

 

[rraley]

Then, as a free standing opinion; banning books, federal control of speech, they put on their jack boots and march in lock stop behind their anti US military war hero.

"ABB. ABB. ABB."

I hope that this is all sarcastic. If it isn't, then my friend, you need to turn the partisanship down a little. My God.

 

[jlabsher]

It is OK for rights to be partisan but nobody else. You've been here long enough to realize that

 

[Larry Gude]

Oops...

...Sorry!

John Kerry wants a book BANNED and wants a political opponent silenced.

Yeah! Whoopie!

What was I thinking?

Anything else we're suppossed to celebrate that I've forgotten?

 

[Larry Gude]

Darn it...

...I keep forgetting this to:

ABB

ANYBODY BUT BUSH.

ANYBODY.

Except Nader. Shut him out.

Do I have this right?

 

[rraley]

...Sorry! John Kerry wants a book BANNED and wants a political opponent silenced.

I haven't heard him say that the book ought to be banned...you seem to be exaggerating and putting words into his mouth. But, if you remember from your Constitution, there are two types of speech that are expressly unprotected: libel and slander. If Mr. O'Neil and the others who wrote this book purposely used cooked facts and lies, then their book amounts to libel and they could be punished for that in the legal system. Once again, to say that Kerry wants a "political opponent silenced" is an exaggeration. He wants the lies about his service to be stopped. If Mr. O'Neil wants to talk about Senator Kerry's positions on the issues, he can do that. But if he engages in personal and unsubstantiated attacks on Kerry's war record, he should stop his attacks.

It just seems to me, Mr. Gude, that your partisanship level is too high.

 

[Ken King]

I haven't heard him say that the book ought to be banned...you seem to be exaggerating and putting words into his mouth. But, if you remember from your Constitution, there are two types of speech that are expressly unprotected: libel and slander. If Mr. O'Neil and the others who wrote this book purposely used cooked facts and lies, then their book amounts to libel and they could be punished for that in the legal system. Once again, to say that Kerry wants a "political opponent silenced" is an exaggeration. He wants the lies about his service to be stopped. If Mr. O'Neil wants to talk about Senator Kerry's positions on the issues, he can do that. But if he engages in personal and unsubstantiated attacks on Kerry's war record, he should stop his attacks.

It just seems to me, Mr. Gude, that your partisanship level is too high.

It is only libel and slander if proven. Now as I see it there are some military records and citations that say one thing and many others that were there when these events happened that say they are false. I ask, is it easier to get a handful of people to follow one story or hundreds of people? Let Kerry release all his records to the public about his service that he brought into the spotlight in the firstplace.

 

[SamSpade]

"It is only libel and slander if proven."

Exactly. But you don't need to go that far to win. You CAN get a cadre of lawyers to *threaten* to sue TV stations that carry the ad, citing slander as their case. Since the election is 80 some days away, you don't have to bother actually suing some one - you can just intimidate them. Which is what the Kerry folks have done.

Can you *imagine* the outcry if Bush had threatened movie theaters with lawsuits if they ran Fahrenheit 9/11?

 

[Larry Gude]

That so?

He wants the lies about his service to be stopped

Let's play a little game here.

What would you're thoughts be if the allegations of the swift boat vets against Sen. Kerry are true?

If you have seen any of theses guys on TV or read them in the papers you are aware that there are very specific charges backed by very specific evidence and known witnesses. They seem awfully credible.

The allegations against Bush lack these things.

So, what of Sen. Kerry?