What's really odd is that Codified Media outlets have open reign to pontificate about a given politician because they're the Media. Joe Schmoe who has a blog and may write X number of times equaling Y amount of dollars even though he was not compensated for such which is $10 over the soft money contribution limit is in violation of Federal Election law and is now subject to arrest and charges. This is basically how the Speech Equals Money rule. In a way its almost how the Liberals disassemble the 2nd amendment by saying individuals are not the people, but the Federally Funded National Guard is. The 1st Amendment protects the Codified Press and Oficial News Media, not the individual as regards the McCain-Feingold Act.
I see what you're saying on Clinton, but wouldn't you say Bush is even more heavy-handed? I don't think anyone is for the little guy, nor will they be again. They'll get elected anyway, or find their way into power somehow, so they have no motivation to care unless people can somehow find a way to hold them more accountable.
We expect the Republicans to push for stronger police powers. We don't expect the Democrats to do so, yet they do. Both sides are hacking away at civil liberties in the name of either the war on guns/crime or the war on drugs. If you get anyone that's a serious gun owner that has a clue about politics, we all have a scowl on our faces when the Gun Owners Protection act of 1986 is mentioned because that's when the NFA registry was closed and then there's the Brady Bill. The "compromise" signed into law by a Republican. We don't trust them further than we can throw them when it comes to Anti-Gun legislation. That's why we try to kill the stuff in Committed when we can. We don't trust the Democrats an inch, because they've gone as far as to propose seizures (4th amendment, never heard of it) or 1000% taxes on ammo as a means of implementing their total disarmament of the US public agenda. Usually those bills don't make it out of committee. John Kerry's name was on a number of those kinds of bills so when he said he was a sportsman and supported hunting and gun ownership, the guffaws could be heard down the street.
I stick to first principles. Both sides of the Aisle are attacking free speech. CDA, COPA, McCain Feingold, etc. Only the Democrats are attacking the 2nd Amendment with any strength (save North Eastern Republicans like those from NJ, NY or MA). Katrina showed that we MUST have an ability to defend ourselves. Democrats want to take that away. That's why I dig in and help the republicans first. I can fight back if they knock down the 1st amendment or violate election rights and I have no recourse. I can't fight back easily if I'm not armed.
no subject
What's really odd is that Codified Media outlets have open reign to pontificate about a given politician because they're the Media. Joe Schmoe who has a blog and may write X number of times equaling Y amount of dollars even though he was not compensated for such which is $10 over the soft money contribution limit is in violation of Federal Election law and is now subject to arrest and charges. This is basically how the Speech Equals Money rule. In a way its almost how the Liberals disassemble the 2nd amendment by saying individuals are not the people, but the Federally Funded National Guard is. The 1st Amendment protects the Codified Press and Oficial News Media, not the individual as regards the McCain-Feingold Act.
I see what you're saying on Clinton, but wouldn't you say Bush is even more heavy-handed? I don't think anyone is for the little guy, nor will they be again. They'll get elected anyway, or find their way into power somehow, so they have no motivation to care unless people can somehow find a way to hold them more accountable.
We expect the Republicans to push for stronger police powers. We don't expect the Democrats to do so, yet they do. Both sides are hacking away at civil liberties in the name of either the war on guns/crime or the war on drugs. If you get anyone that's a serious gun owner that has a clue about politics, we all have a scowl on our faces when the Gun Owners Protection act of 1986 is mentioned because that's when the NFA registry was closed and then there's the Brady Bill. The "compromise" signed into law by a Republican. We don't trust them further than we can throw them when it comes to Anti-Gun legislation. That's why we try to kill the stuff in Committed when we can. We don't trust the Democrats an inch, because they've gone as far as to propose seizures (4th amendment, never heard of it) or 1000% taxes on ammo as a means of implementing their total disarmament of the US public agenda. Usually those bills don't make it out of committee. John Kerry's name was on a number of those kinds of bills so when he said he was a sportsman and supported hunting and gun ownership, the guffaws could be heard down the street.
I stick to first principles. Both sides of the Aisle are attacking free speech. CDA, COPA, McCain Feingold, etc. Only the Democrats are attacking the 2nd Amendment with any strength (save North Eastern Republicans like those from NJ, NY or MA). Katrina showed that we MUST have an ability to defend ourselves. Democrats want to take that away. That's why I dig in and help the republicans first. I can fight back if they knock down the 1st amendment or violate election rights and I have no recourse. I can't fight back easily if I'm not armed.