Jump to content

Would you support a Constitutional Amendment on campaign finance?


Support a Constitutional Amendment?   

25 members have voted

  1. 1. Support a Constitutional Amendment?



Recommended Posts

No, we think you're an idiot for wanting to make it an amendment to the Constitution.

 

That was your subject. Not whether or not we need campaign finance changes.

 

 

Are you aware of current First Amendment jurisprudence? Clearly not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep digging.

 

 

Your argument is that they should but they shouldn't enact an amendment to do so? They need one. It's legitimate to say you don't think we should. Or even then we would be well served to but ultimately we shouldn't amend to do so. But so say we should, but we shouldn't enact a amendment empowering us to do so, is nonsensical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So all you guys think we would not benefit from being able to control some of the money in politics?

 

That's not what you asked. You asked if controlling money in politics should be an amendment to the Constitution.

 

Those don't even come close to being the same question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what you asked. You asked if controlling money in politics should be an amendment to the Constitution.

 

Those don't even come close to being the same question.

 

I'm all ears as to what we should push that we can legally under current law.

Edited by TheNewBills
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably just worded something like "Congress can regulate the financing of political campaigns" ... and let the specifics go from there up to Congress.

 

How about a constitutional amendment forbidding the media for schilling for their liberal compatriots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why all the affecting laws need to be stricken and we need to start over. Editing won't fix the problem.

Jefferson agreed with you. However, we all know that's an impossibility. We're long past the point where we relied on the Rule of Law, and now work exclusively with the "Rule of Lawyer". Constitutionalism has long since been replaced by Constitutional Law, and our government is comprised of laywers to the tune of 85%. Those lawyers will never set in motion anything that would strip them and their profession of their privlidged powers. If Congress were comprised of fishermen, we'd all be eating cod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...