• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Constitution is on fire

CSA_TX

Active member
Joined
Jun 3, 2004
Messages
254
Reaction score
14
Location
TEXAS
Found this to be an interesting read. I personally think the campaign finance reform law is a slap in all Americans faces. The First amendment was put in place to protect every citizens right to discuss and protest the government. The fact that the supreme court claimed the law was constitution shows how far removed the judical branch is from the meaning of our constitution. What do you think?

Attack on "Fahrenheit 911" documentary shows 'Constitution is on fire,' Libertarian says

WASHINGTON, DC -- The attack on Michael Moore's new documentary, "Fahrenheit 9/11," shows that free speech has come under an unprecedented assault in America, thanks to the campaign finance law passed by Congress last year, says Libertarian presidential candidate Michael Badnarik.

"The Constitution is on fire -- a fire that was set when Democrats and Republicans passed their so-called campaign finance reform law," says Badnarik, who was nominated by the party on May 30. "The attempt to gag Michael Moore demonstrates that McCain-Feingold was just an excuse to outlaw political criticism."

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is considering whether advertising for Moore's controversial new documentary, which is sharply critical of President Bush, can be banned as "electioneering communications." Under McCain-Feingold, corporate-paid radio or TV ads that identify a federal candidate are illegal to broadcast within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election.

Since Moore has publicly stated that his goal is to help defeat Bush, Democrats and Republicans are waging partisan warfare over "Fahrenheit 9/11."

But Badnarik -- who teaches classes on the Constitution -- says a much larger issue is at stake: Every American's freedom of speech.

"The truth is that Democrats and Republicans committed a bipartisan crime against the First Amendment when they passed the McCain-Feingold law," according to Badnarik. "This law allows politicians to determine what their critics can say, when they can say it and how much they can spend in the process -- which is exactly what's not supposed to happen in a free country."

Noting that the First Amendment clearly states that 'Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom speech,' Badnarik asked: "What part of the words 'no law' doesn't the government understand? The First Amendment doesn't contain exceptions for advertisements that might offend the president or cost him his job -- and it certainly doesn't authorize federal movie police.

"Empowering a government agency to ban movie ads might be expected in the former Soviet Union, Cuba, China, or Iraq -- but not in the United States. Every American should stand up for Michael Moore's right to advertise 'Fahrenheit 9/11,' regardless of how they feel about George Bush."
Found at http://www.libertyforall.net/2004/july18/Fahrenheit.html
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,971
Reaction score
6,080
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
First of all - the law has passed. Yes, it spits on the constitution! The supreme court has said that it does not violate Free speech. I totally disagree. It does indeed violate free speech without a doubt.

Second of all, Moore's movie is a political attack on Bush - so according to law it should be banned 60 days prior to the general election.

If you disagree with the law - write your congressman. God knows I have.
 

Attachments

Harshaw

Filmmaker ● Lawyer ● Patriot
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
38,750
Reaction score
13,831
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
McCain-Feingold is indeed an abomination and as clear a violation of the First Amendment as anything.

However, criticizing and condemning someone else's freely exercised speech is NOT a violation of free speech -- it IS free speech.

"Free speech" is not the freedom to say whatever you want and not be criticized or disagreed with in public. In fact, the disagreement is the whole point.
 
Top Bottom