Conservatives unable to silence opposition

[arsbanned]

Here
Sorry, Fascists...er..."Conservatives", but Bush apparently doesn't control the FEC...yet. Better luck next time. It won't be long before armed thugs are entering projection rooms to physically remove the film, similar to the thugs who stormed the recount stations to intimidate and harass workers after the last Presidential "election"?

In a unanimous decision made public Thursday, the Federal Election Commission found no evidence that the movie?s ads had broken the law or that distributors of the film intended any violations in the future.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Here
Sorry, Fascists...er..."Conservatives", but Bush apparently doesn't control the FEC...yet. Better luck next time. It won't be long before armed thugs are entering projection rooms to physically remove the film, similar to the thugs who stormed the recount stations to intimidate and harass workers after the last Presidential "election"?

In a unanimous decision made public Thursday, the Federal Election Commission found no evidence that the movie?s ads had broken the law or that distributors of the film intended any violations in the future.

This is a travesty of justice. We need a constitutional amendment banning anti-Bush documentaries. It should ban the FEC too. That first amendment needs to go. It supports terrorism.

 

[burnedout]

Meanwhile, liberals attempt to silence opposition:

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Club for Growth PAC ads (PDF format).

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Swift Boat Veterans.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: burnedout
Meanwhile, liberals attempt to silence opposition:

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Club for Growth PAC ads (PDF format).

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Swift Boat Veterans.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

D'oh!

 

[Orsorum]

As a conservative with liberal friends and family, I would like to point out that these actions are not indicative of all conservatives or liberals, and should more appropriately be labeled "Republicans unable to silence opposition" and the same with comments regarding the Democrats.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Here
Sorry, Fascists...er..."Conservatives", but Bush apparently doesn't control the FEC...yet. Better luck next time. It won't be long before armed thugs are entering projection rooms to physically remove the film, similar to the thugs who stormed the recount stations to intimidate and harass workers after the last Presidential "election"?

In a unanimous decision made public Thursday, the Federal Election Commission found no evidence that the movie?s ads had broken the law or that distributors of the film intended any violations in the future.

You don't think that election laws, if violated, should be enforced?

 

[Vadatajs]

Originally posted by: Ldir

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Here
Sorry, Fascists...er..."Conservatives", but Bush apparently doesn't control the FEC...yet. Better luck next time. It won't be long before armed thugs are entering projection rooms to physically remove the film, similar to the thugs who stormed the recount stations to intimidate and harass workers after the last Presidential "election"?

In a unanimous decision made public Thursday, the Federal Election Commission found no evidence that the movie?s ads had broken the law or that distributors of the film intended any violations in the future.

This is a travesty of justice. We need a constitutional amendment banning anti-Bush documentaries. It should ban the FEC too. That first amendment needs to go. It supports terrorism.

And the 4th, 8th and 9th too. we have too many rights.

 

[Kibbo]

We'll keep the 5th, we might need it later.

 

[arsbanned]

And the 2nd of course, we need assault rifles in every home to defend against people like Moore.

 

[TheBDB]

Originally posted by: Orsorum
As a conservative with liberal friends and family, I would like to point out that these actions are not indicative of all conservatives or liberals, and should more appropriately be labeled "Republicans unable to silence opposition" and the same with comments regarding the Democrats.

Good point. It is the party hacks on both sides, not the ideologies.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: burnedout
Meanwhile, liberals attempt to silence opposition:

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Club for Growth PAC ads (PDF format).

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Swift Boat Veterans.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

Oh YES. Comparing a MOVIE that one has to PAY to see is very similar/almost identical to ADS running for FREE on TV.

Get a fvcking grip.

 

[Oblivious]

This is such a troll thread. Stop trolling and post some real material.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: burnedout
Meanwhile, liberals attempt to silence opposition:

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Club for Growth PAC ads (PDF format).

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Swift Boat Veterans.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

Oh YES. Comparing a MOVIE that one has to PAY to see is very similar/almost identical to ADS running for FREE on TV.

Get a fvcking grip.

except for the fact that the RNC or the DNC has to PAY for that airtime, right? otherwise, sure, its free time.

 

[nutxo]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: arsbanned
Here
Sorry, Fascists...er..."Conservatives", but Bush apparently doesn't control the FEC...yet. Better luck next time. It won't be long before armed thugs are entering projection rooms to physically remove the film, similar to the thugs who stormed the recount stations to intimidate and harass workers after the last Presidential "election"?

In a unanimous decision made public Thursday, the Federal Election Commission found no evidence that the movie?s ads had broken the law or that distributors of the film intended any violations in the future.

You don't think that election laws, if violated, should be enforced?

Why sure he does. But only if the laws are enforced where
it concerns republicans.


I thought the fascist thing was cute. People should all call conservatives fascists and democrats pinko commie bastards from now on to add validity and spice to any argument.
:roll:

 

[piasabird]

This is good news for the Slip Boat Guys. Kind of hard to quelch their freedom of speech and then let Mr Moore's movie stay on the air.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: burnedout
Meanwhile, liberals attempt to silence opposition:

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Club for Growth PAC ads (PDF format).

Letter from DNC moonbat lawyers to stations regarding Swift Boat Veterans.

[Hat tip: The Sage of Knoxville]

Oh YES. Comparing a MOVIE that one has to PAY to see is very similar/almost identical to ADS running for FREE on TV.

Get a fvcking grip.

except for the fact that the RNC or the DNC has to PAY for that airtime, right? otherwise, sure, its free time.

I am speaking about the audience. If moveon.org bought the right from MM to air a 1 hour polital ad on network TV he might have a point. However, he is comparing movies to political ads. Not the same thing.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Oh YES. Comparing a MOVIE that one has to PAY to see is very similar/almost identical to ADS running for FREE on TV.

Get a fvcking grip.

Wow. liberalus headupasses can't distinguish the difference between attempts at crushing dissent.

BTW, I've had a "fvcking grip" for quite some time now, hero. YOU (and yes, I mean YOU) get a goddamned grip before blowing more hypocritical horsecrap out your ass.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: burnedout

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Oh YES. Comparing a MOVIE that one has to PAY to see is very similar/almost identical to ADS running for FREE on TV.

Get a fvcking grip.

Wow. liberalus headupasses can't distinguish the difference between attempts at crushing dissent.

BTW, I've had a "fvcking grip" for quite some time now, hero. YOU (and yes, I mean YOU) get a goddamned grip before blowing more hypocritical horsecrap out your ass.

I apologize for the profanity. It just floored me as it still does why you would compare the two. Moore has a movie out and has every right to promote it on TV. Personally, I don't want to see any F9/11 ads.

He put out his movie, made his money, made some people think... and now I don't want to see his face again for another year.

However, that said, if a group of vets have made an ad that flatout 'claims' JK is a bad, bad, soldier with nothing other than "Yes, I treated him and he is a liar" ... he is a FOOL if his lawyers don't go after these pukes like rabid dogs.

Again, I see this as comparing apples to oranges. Now if a Liberal organization trys to stop commercials promoting the Book they are peddling, then we have something to talk about and compare.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

I apologize for the profanity. It just floored me as it still does why you would compare the two. Moore has a movie out and has every right to promote it on TV. Personally, I don't want to see any F9/11 ads.

He put out his movie, made his money, made some people think... and now I don't want to see his face again for another year.

However, that said, if a group of vets have made an ad that flatout 'claims' JK is a bad, bad, soldier with nothing other than "Yes, I treated him and he is a liar" ... he is a FOOL if his lawyers don't go after these pukes like rabid dogs.

Again, I see this as comparing apples to oranges.

Why the comparison? Simple. Firstly, are not the actions by both the Republicans and Democrats attempts at limiting free speech?

Secondly, if one has indeed watched the ad by the Swift Boat vets, one could then argue that the letter from DNC lawyers seems disingenuous. The letter in itself plays fast and loose with facts. For example, the vets merely claim to have "served with" John Kerry, not on his boat.

Thirdly, are the Swift Boat vets such a big threat to John Kerry?

BTW, I'm retired military myself and have never criticized Kerry for his service. So don't even go there.

However, what pisses me off the most are those on this board who claim the so-called "middle ground" while simultaneously arguing points having little or no merit.

The bottom line is that both sides have made legal overtures in regards to free speech.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: burnedout

Originally posted by: umbrella39

I apologize for the profanity. It just floored me as it still does why you would compare the two. Moore has a movie out and has every right to promote it on TV. Personally, I don't want to see any F9/11 ads.

He put out his movie, made his money, made some people think... and now I don't want to see his face again for another year.

However, that said, if a group of vets have made an ad that flatout 'claims' JK is a bad, bad, soldier with nothing other than "Yes, I treated him and he is a liar" ... he is a FOOL if his lawyers don't go after these pukes like rabid dogs.

Again, I see this as comparing apples to oranges.

Why the comparison? Simple. Firstly, are not the actions by both the Republicans and Democrats attempts at limiting free speech?

Secondly, if one has indeed watched the ad by the Swift Boat vets, one could then argue that the letter from DNC lawyers seems disingenuous. The letter in itself plays fast and loose with facts. For example, the vets merely claim to have "served with" John Kerry, not on his boat.

Thirdly, are the Swift Boat vets such a big threat to John Kerry?

BTW, I'm retired military myself and have never criticized Kerry for his service. So don't even go there.

However, what pisses me off the most are those on this board who claim the so-called "middle ground" while simultaneously arguing points having little or no merit.

The bottom line is that both sides have made legal overtures in regards to free speech.

I respect your opinion but don't see it as a free speech issue.

Personally, and this is just my opinion, that during an election year no "issue ads" or "smear ads" should allowed to be run on TV.

Allow them to show them on their websites like they have been doing so no one is blamed of taking away anyone's right to free speech.

Only ads that are endoresed by either of the candidates should be seen. But again, that is just my opinion. The swiftboaters have every right to make whatever claims that want, I however don't feel that allegations, which is exactly what they are, should be allowed to play on TV during an election year in the form of a Political Advertisement.

It looks like we still have a long way to go on campaign finance reform.