Having been dragged through Bill Clinton's party messes only to learn that character doesn't matter when it comes to a man being president, we know learn that it DOES matter when it comes to REPUBLICAN presidential candidates!
Whew!
Who knew?
In fact, Moveon.org was specifically and originally formed as a response to "move on" away from the subject of Bill Clinton's rape and assault of women outside his marriage.
So hey! Let's all just move on past the Cain accusations.
Shall we?
This is all very tiresome.
We areTHE RESISTANCE.
Democrats lost all rights to the moral high ground when they failed to impeach Bill Clinton. How can you hypocrites even attempt to drag down a Presidential candidate who has only been accused and not proven to have sexually harassed a woman.
ReplyDeleteMonica Samille Lewinsky (born July 23, 1973) is an American woman with whom United States President Bill Clinton admitted to having had an "improper relationship" while she worked at the White House in 1995 and 1996. The affair and its repercussions (which included the impeachment of Bill Clinton) became known as the Lewinsky scandal.
=====
Although it frequently is difficult to tell the difference between news stories, editorials and political ads, campaign laws exempt the commercial press, because the 1st Amendment has been interpreted to prohibit abridging these corporations’ freedom of speech and the press. So the corporate media is free to spike, ignore or over hype stories and decide what views are presented as news.
The Federal ‘Press Exemption: 2 USC 431 (9) (B) (i) “The term expenditure does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;”
But the press exemption is contrary to the 1st Amendment. Campaigns are assemblies of like minded citizens using speech and the press to petition the government for a redress of grievances. And the 1st Amendment denies Congress authority to abridge those rights:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Unless corporations have taken up worshiping God; freedom of assembly, press and speech are intended for flesh and blood citizens. And equal protection is still a fundamental tenet of law.
If the United States Supreme Court defined freedom of religion using the logic campaign laws use to define a free press only the church "as an institution" would enjoy freedom of religion, not its parishioners!
Muzzling communications by grass roots does not reduce corporate influence? When citizens and grass roots are free to spend unlimited amounts balance is restored and challengers are more likely to win.
Individuals and grass roots organizations have formed 527 and 501(c)(4) corporations to level the playing field and overcome some of the unconstitutional campaign laws that hinder participation by flesh and blood persons in American politics.
To restore the 'equal rights' of flesh and blood and grass roots corporations, the language of the press exemption, above, should be modified to read: “The term expenditure does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed by any citizen, citizens group, broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication.”