Free Speech and the next election

[Ravens-Grin]

Link: CNN

When has free speech crossed the line of soft money? Why are the Republicans bitching about a group that is speaking against them? Also, a group of one of this big group also tried to get an advertisement during the Superbowl, which didn't happen because the company that did the Superbowl doesn't allow anything political as an advertisement.

Really, please read the article and don't be lazy. At the very least read the first 4 paragraphs.

[PlugDude]

i knew something like this would happen one day, but not so soon.
The media is obviously very biased, im glad an ad like that was able to get through and the attack against it proves just how much the government drive and control the media to be bias and not tell our people the real truths.
grrr.

[second-sun]

bush really does hate that first amendment doesn't he? i mean come on, freedom of speech and separation of church and state? how can a country exist with such an amendment? i wish i could meet bush, so i could think about what i would say to him. What would be the best insult ever to bush?

[bumcheekcity]

My thoughts say that if the Republicans can get billions of dollars from companied, then the Democrats can support a few ad campaigns froma fw liberals.

[automatic]

At 4/1/04 03:33 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: Link: CNN

When has free speech crossed the line of soft money? Why are the Republicans bitching about a group that is speaking against them? Also, a group of one of this big group also tried to get an advertisement during the Superbowl, which didn't happen because the company that did the Superbowl doesn't allow anything political as an advertisement.

Really, please read the article and don't be lazy. At the very least read the first 4 paragraphs.

I watched the ad they cite in that article, it makes no mention of Kerry or his campaign. In fact, it was originally submitted to http://www.bushin30seconds.org/ by an amatuer filmmaker. It wasn't funded by Kerry, and it clearly doesn't fall under the category of "using soft money" for campaign purposes. The whole thing is a joke.

[Ravens-Grin]

Woh, usually people don't respond too quickly about stuff, and at about the same time.

[A-Carrot-By-Dr-Riot]

Everyone has to follow the laws, even the Democrats. Personally, I don't like the election reform law, I think it violates free speech. But unless the Democrats want to get rid of that law, they've got to follow it.

[BeFell]

I feel that making 527s fall under the election reform laws would be a dumb move by the republicans. They have 527 organizations themselves that would run into the same problems. As far as cencorship during the Superbowl the company you are reffering to was CBS. Before the superbowl CBS had just had problems with public outcry concerning a ficticious Reagan movie and a Michael Jackson special. In the intrest of not alienating it's veiwers CBS decided not to rock the boat anymore. Bush and the Republicans had nothing to do with their decision it was all based on response from the public.

[Ravens-Grin]

At 4/1/04 04:49 PM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: Everyone has to follow the laws, even the Democrats. Personally, I don't like the election reform law, I think it violates free speech. But unless the Democrats want to get rid of that law, they've got to follow it.

But the Democrats aren't supporting it, that's the thing about it. They are neither supporting it nor prohibiting it.

[RedSkunk]

At 4/1/04 04:49 PM, Dr_Arbitrary wrote: Everyone has to follow the laws, even the Democrats. But unless the Democrats want to get rid of that law, they've got to follow it.

They are following it though. The moveon ad makes no mention of Kerry.

At 4/1/04 05:02 PM, BeFell wrote: In the intrest of not alienating it's veiwers CBS decided not to rock the boat anymore. Bush and the Republicans had nothing to do with their decision it was all based on response from the public.

The outcry about the Reagan movie, about Janet Jackson, and one or two ads attacking Bush are not outcry's from the people. They're outcries engineered by the Republican machine. Come on. If they were truly trying to not 'rock the boat', CBS wouldn't of shown Bush ads the week after the Super Bowl, playing off of 9/11.

Anyone else find it interesting that the Republican National Convention in NYC this year is the latest it's ever been? That they've pushed it back to as close to September as they could possibly get away with? And that Bush hasn't ruled out giving his nomination speech at ground zero? Vwery interesting..

[RedSkunk]

At 4/1/04 05:22 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: But the Democrats aren't supporting it, that's the thing about it. They are neither supporting it nor prohibiting it.

Yes they are. It's the McCain-Feingold law. Guess what party Feingold is a part of?

[Ravens-Grin]

At 4/1/04 06:17 PM, RoteStinktier wrote:

At 4/1/04 05:22 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: But the Democrats aren't supporting it, that's the thing about it. They are neither supporting it nor prohibiting it.

Yes they are. It's the McCain-Feingold law. Guess what party Feingold is a part of?

Dude I was talking about the ad bashing bush, not the bill.

[RedSkunk]

At 4/1/04 07:16 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: Dude I was talking about the ad bashing bush, not the bill.

Ok sorry. You had responded to the doctor, using the word 'it', and his post was only talking about the actual law.