Comments on: McCain-Feingold Act: Will the USSC strike it down?

By: steveegg

steveegg — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:49:38 +0000

If memory serves, the Supremes already gave a VERY strong hint that they will be overturning the portion of McShame-Slimeroad that is a direct violation of the Constitution. They previously sent this case back to the 7th Circuit with instructions to apply the First Amendment.

Looking through the summary to refresh and enhance my memory (which is better than Hiliary’s, BTW), the 7th did, in fact, apply the First Amendment upon getting this case back, ruling that not only is Section 203 (the 30/60-day bans on mentioning politicians by name) unconstitutional as applied to ads WRTL wanted to run in 2004 but were unable to (case #06-970), but that a separate ban on using a corporation’s general funds for “electioneering communications” is also unconstitutional as applied to those ads (case #06-969).

By: Lorica

Lorica — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:22:52 +0000

Ohhhh and I hope the Supreme Court does strike this sham law down. From what I understand the whole point of this lunacy was to “git the money outta politics”. So why did this law double the maximum gift from 2000.00 to 4000.00?? If campaign finance reform is the goal, there only needs to be full disclosure, and you will have your reform. How much Moron.org money would be returned if they had to disclose it?? – Lorica

By: Lorica

Lorica — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:06:50 +0000

I agree with Mekan. McCain Feingold and the Gang of 14 is all I see when I see this man. I would stay home and let Hillary win before I vote for John McCain. – Lorica

By: CZ

CZ — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:56:57 +0000

McCain is history. No chance to get past the first primary IMHO.

It’s too bad because I really like looking at his wife.

She’s quite hot for an older biscuit!

By: Mekan

Mekan — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:48:26 +0000

This legislation and the Gang o’ 14 are all I needed to know about Senator McCain to decide that he is not fit for government office.

By: Tango

Tango — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:40:16 +0000

…there are other implications. If this legislation is struck down by the Supremes, it may well be the death blow to Mr McCain’s (already floundering) 2008 presidential bid.

By: Who Will Answer - » Free Speech

Who Will Answer - » Free Speech — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:53:58 +0000

[...] Sister Toldjah Answered!Â This entry is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Leave a Reply [...]

By: Leslie

Leslie — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:31:19 +0000

I happen to agree with Justice Scalia’s comment:

“This is the First Amendment” Justice Antonin Scalia told lawyers defending the McCain-Feingold Act. “We don’t make people guess whether their speech is going to be allowed by Big Brother or not. If you are going to cut off the speech, there ought to be a clear line. . . . And you’re not giving us any.”

I also happen to think that campaign financing laws are useless, and it’s a waste of time to debate and enact them. The candidates will always find ways around them.

As for Justice Breyer’s comment: I take it this means that Justice Roberts and Alito joined Justices Scalia and Thomas in voting to grant certiorari to hear the case, while Justice Breyer did not.