Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Are liberals beginning to embrace the Constitution?

  1. #1

    Default Are liberals beginning to embrace the Constitution?

    In recent days many radical liberals have changed their tune regarding campaign finance laws. The drumbeat of the past two years has begun to shift. President Obama is no longer assaulting Citizens United or Super PACs, instead he is encouraging his supporters to open their check books. Former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer now believes that “I think as a First Amendment principle, Citizens United was correct.” Even veteran Washington Post and Newsweek scribe, Robert J. Samuelson has declared “Except for contribution disclosures, campaign finance laws should be scrapped.”

    Unsurprisingly, the only ones still trying to rein in the First Amendment are those interested in silencing all other voices but their own. Whether they be incumbent elected officials (for example, a certain liberal congressman from Maryland or justices on the Montana Supreme Court), or media corporations like the Washington Post seeking a monopoly on political speech. Why is their speech more worthy of protection than others?

    Two prolific fundraisers, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) led the fight to curtail independent speech with their 2010 legislation, the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (“DISCLOSE Act”). According to Schumer and Van Hollen’s latest FEC disclosures they have $10 million and $1.9 million cash on hand respectively. They have the means to engage in political speech, but would rather their opponents be left without sufficient resources to respond.

    The 2010 DISCLOSE Act, with carve outs for labor unions and the nation’s largest special interest groups, failed to pass the Senate. Congressman Van Hollen has gone back to the drawing board and again released a DISCLOSE Act - same acronym, new title, same attempt to chill political speech. This Disclosure of Information on Spending on Campaigns Leads to Open and Secure Elections Act of 2012 is bound to meet the same fate as its predecessor.

    The Washington Post Editorial Board supports Rep. Van Hollen’s latest DISCLOSE Act. The Washington Post is a media corporation that is free to engage in political speech. While the editorial Bboard characterizes the legislation as a good governance measure, it’s clear their liberal biases are underlying their position. For example they site “the money spigot flowing with full force in the Republican primary” as the reason for the latest round of speech chilling legislation.

    It bears noting that over the years the Washington Post has shifted its focus from that of a media corporation to a for-profit educational institution. It’s investment in Kaplan educational programs has grown so large that in 2009 their revenue from for-profit educational activities (58%) eclipsed their media revenue (41%). If the Washington Post is in fact an educational institution that happens to produce a newspaper does the editorial board feel the Washington Post’s speech still warrants protection?

    Read more:

  2. #2



  3. #3


    Why is the free speech of citizens worth more than corporate money?


    They own the politicians, and they damn sure own you.

    Congratulations, you're a commodity, not a person.
    "When truth becomes unpatriotic, patriotism becomes worthless."

  4. #4


    Is Doctordog lonely? Bored out of his skull? Bitter?

  5. #5
    Conspiracy Monitor crowonapost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Virtual Space


    So. When can Exxon get a Colonoscopy?

    Just wanted some clarification on person-hood rights.....

    In OUR Country.

  6. #6


    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Bastard
    Is Doctordog lonely? Bored out of his skull? Bitter?

    Probably no more than an ex mod I know that couldn't hold her site together.

  7. #7


    Quote Originally Posted by doctordog
    Probably no more than an ex mod I know that couldn't hold her site together.
    "When truth becomes unpatriotic, patriotism becomes worthless."

  8. #8


    Quote Originally Posted by EldonG
    Before your time.

  9. #9


    Quote Originally Posted by doctordog
    Probably no more than an ex mod I know that couldn't hold her site together.
    RV? We've had another site up for a long time.

    Too bad you'll never find it
    "Argumentum Ad Numerum" ask your pollster about it today.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    No One Knows


    Invitation only?
    "The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater."
    - Frank Zappa

    When the fate of so many rests in the hands of so few, can the failure to be accountable ever be forgiven?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 06-15-2014, 11:47 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-02-2012, 12:49 AM
  3. Replies: 55
    Last Post: 06-30-2011, 01:39 PM
  4. The Tea Party Constitution Versus the Thomas Jefferson Constitution
    By Scottbrown2012 in forum Speak Your Mind
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-31-2010, 02:13 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-29-2010, 12:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts