Maybe you will... Maybe you wont...

phobicsquirrel

mrpillow

I see no problems here. It's his money, he can do what he wants with it.

lilwing88

Vulchor

Why try Squirrel----what did you exoect here?

lilwing88

wwhwang

For some reason, I can't get that site address to work. Can anyone enlighten me as to what the article said?

Vulchor

PuroFreak

Vulchor

I have the same outrage....they are not buying time---their buying elections. Say what you will...but more money, more ad's, more face time generally means wins. If people did their homework, this would not be so---but unfortunately the TV ads often decide the winner. As Ive said on other posts, money is this countrys god and this is proof of it.

PuroFreak

Vulchor:

I have the same outrage....they are not buying time---their buying elections. Say what you will...but more money, more ad's, more face time generally means wins. If people did their homework, this would not be so---but unfortunately the TV ads often decide the winner. As Ive said on other posts, money is this countrys god and this is proof of it.

What would you say if these same brothers went around the country talking to people face to face instead of buying commercials? If they spent their money to travel around and say the exact same things to people in person that we hear on the TV and they had the same results? Would say this shouldn't be allowed?

lilwing88

Vulchor

I think people would be able to question them then, and it would show a conviction for what they believe. It would not be mindless advertising meant to sink in jsut enough to fill in the oval atthe voting booth. So no, I would not have the same issues with a more seemingly genuine approach to their convictions...not just trying to ascertain the price of a vote and using enough ad time to achieve that goal.

PuroFreak

Vulchor:

I think people would be able to question them then, and it would show a conviction for what they believe. It would not be mindless advertising meant to sink in jsut enough to fill in the oval atthe voting booth. So no, I would not have the same issues with a more seemingly genuine approach to their convictions...not just trying to ascertain the price of a vote and using enough ad time to achieve that goal.

Ok, so free speech depends on how the views are expressed? I missed that article in the Constitution... Hmmmm... That is interesting. I'll have to go back and re-read that whole "free speech" amendment again.

Vulchor

Not going to get into free speech---I know already...corporations are free speech, buying elections are free speech, ect. Islamic speak, flag burning, ect-----not so free.......but the others most certainly.

PuroFreak

Vulchor:

Not going to get into free speech---I know already...corporations are free speech, buying elections are free speech, ect. Islamic speak, flag burning, ect-----not so free.......but the others most certainly.

You've never heard me say Islamic speech is not free speech, and you've never heard me say any form of peaceful protest isn't free speech. That's where you fail in your arguments. You lump me into some preformed group of right wing nuts that exists in your mind, that you like to attack. I truly believe in our Constitution and the rights of all citizens.

Vulchor

Fair enough----that was not fair to you and was a grouping. However, I also take offense saying I do not believe in our constitution...because I do. What I do not believe however is that it is a black and white document...especially in areas where our founding fathers could not have imagined life and society 200 years later. I think that is what is at play here and where the defintion of freedom of speech as well as who/what/where/when/why its covered is up for some interpretation.

PuroFreak

Vulchor

I understand the court has ruled on it...but that doesnt make it something I have to agree with. Roe v Wade as an example of the court making a ruling that while it is black and white for legal purposes---not everyone agrees with the interpretation by the court. Same idea here for me.

stephen_hannibal

TatuajeVI

A simple idea to curtail many things that I think ALL of us here on these forums hate would be to pass the bill making it illegal to add "pork" spending onto any bill. A bill exists, but certainly will never pass with either this current Congress or the previous ones. If the Tea Party had their way, it would be the first bill to pass. No Pork Spending, please! It would be huge in preventing at least some Big Business, Union, etc influence on politics. Not to mention it would immediately cut spending, ha! That'll be the day - when our Federal government actually cuts spending.

Amos Umwhat

Vulchor

TatuajeVI:

A simple idea to curtail many things that I think ALL of us here on these forums hate would be to pass the bill making it illegal to add "pork" spending onto any bill. A bill exists, but certainly will never pass with either this current Congress or the previous ones. If the Tea Party had their way, it would be the first bill to pass. No Pork Spending, please! It would be huge in preventing at least some Big Business, Union, etc influence on politics. Not to mention it would immediately cut spending, ha! That'll be the day - when our Federal government actually cuts spending.

+1

laker1963

phobicsquirrel

phobicsquirrel

fla-gypsy

Well one thing is for sure, this forum is a dichotomy of the current political situation in this nation. We have the ultra left and the ultra right. The American voter will get to choose which should control the purse strings in short order.

Vulchor

Gypsy...I, and I will even say "we"....are not the ultra left. We are middle, to middle left. Its just the pendulum has swung so far to the right at this time that Ronald Reagan would not get the support of the modern Repubs. The middle is the new left, the right is the new middle, and the far right is too often the far wrong.

kuzi16

PuroFreak

Vulchor

I agree Kuzi, he is a modern day Jesus to the right (if you pardon the pun)...I am only saying that if that same Reagan ran today with the same ideas in this type of economic times---I think his opinions might be slightly different...and more importantly, I think the furthest on the right would see him as too centrist. When someone dies and historians start writing the books, they become much easier to like and find the best parts of, this is part of the Reagan mystique within modern day politics.

cabinetmaker

The thing I respected most about Reagan was the instead if moving to the center, he moved the center to him.