Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What problem? I never said giving money to politicians or a particular political ideology was a problem. Only the parasites who want to spend other people's money consider it a problem. I do not.
Money has always been part of politics. There is no escaping that reality. According to the Supreme Court, it is indeed protected speech. See Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976) and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. _ (2010).
You do not have to agree with the people's right to free speech, but as long as you stay in the US it is the Supreme Law of the Land so you had better get use to it.
We're talking about two different things. You're saying that folks should be allowed to throw their candidate $100 or so if they want them elected. Fine.
There should be limits though.
Just like when you give a government employee a gift of $24.99 it's not a problem. Spend $25 or more, and it's bribery.
Why doesn't the same rule apply to those who can ACTUALLY BE BOUGHT?
depends on the republican...if he/she is a PROGRESSIVE liberal in republican clothes (like bush)...no
my feeling,,, is there should be NO CONTRIBUTIONS what so ever,, not from corps, not from unions, not from individuals....give the two candidate an even amount of taxpayer funded monies, and let them duke it out on THEIR MERITS....not on the liberal "we have better hair" and "we have more money" garbage
AMEN to that. That's what we're talking about--money out of both sides, and let people stand on their merits. When they get in, the only support they owe are to the constituents who voted for them--not to who ever wrote them the biggest check. That's how it's supposed to work, and we've completely lost our way.
We're talking about two different things. You're saying that folks should be allowed to throw their candidate $100 or so if they want them elected. Fine.
There should be limits though.
Just like when you give a government employee a gift of $24.99 it's not a problem. Spend $25 or more, and it's bribery.
Why doesn't the same rule apply to those who can ACTUALLY BE BOUGHT?
Why would you want to limit my free speech? I should be able to give as much money as I desire to any politician and/or any PAC. It is my money, and how I spend it is entirely up to me.
More excuses. Who do you think will "clean it up"?
I think if public pressure builds to the point where it gets cleaned up or they lose their job, you might be surprised who gets behind this. The elections are a year away--talk to me in November 2012. This whole thing is just beginning....
Why would you want to limit my free speech? I should be able to give as much money as I desire to any politician and/or any PAC. It is my money, and how I spend it is entirely up to me.
The next time you get pulled over, exercise your right to free speech, thank the cop for his service, and being so dutiful by giving him $500.
Just make sure you give a few thousand to a friend so they can bail you out.
Why would you want to limit my free speech? I should be able to give as much money as I desire to any politician and/or any PAC. It is my money, and how I spend it is entirely up to me.
Bribes are considered free speech now?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's what we're talking about--money out of both sides, and let people stand on their merits. When they get in, the only support they owe are to the constituents who voted for them--not to who ever wrote them the biggest check. That's how it's supposed to work, and we've completely lost our way.
