![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
The Republican Nat'l Committee asked 250 TV stations to pull a MoveOn.org ad on "soft money" grounds. Irony... it's FAN-tastic.
Also: Standard & Poor's demotes Sun's credit rating to "deliquescent turd".
The Republican Nat'l Committee asked 250 TV stations to pull a MoveOn.org ad on "soft money" grounds. Irony... it's FAN-tastic.
Also: Standard & Poor's demotes Sun's credit rating to "deliquescent turd".
That shit sucks you fag
Date: 2004-03-07 09:49 am (UTC)Re: That shit sucks you fag
Date: 2004-03-07 09:51 am (UTC)Re: That shit sucks you fag
Date: 2004-03-07 10:11 am (UTC)on to being substantive
Date: 2004-03-07 10:10 am (UTC)And, of course, the ads are exactly the sort of free speech that is abridged by mccain-feingold. all the hot air about 'omg evil kkkorporations have too much sway' and 'money isn't speech' boils down to exactly this -- a political group, arguably grass-roots, pooling the efforts of individual citizens to take out ads whose content is and ought to be protected political speech, may actually be breaking the law. That's pretty screwed up -- not saying the moveon ads violate mccain-feingold, because I'm not sure of the content of the law or of the ads. But just the fact that there's reasonable doubt over whether or not speech is allowed -- political speech, at that -- is pretty sickening. The Dems were the big push behind McCain-Feingold, okay. But the Rep-controlled legislature passed it. The President signed it. The Supreme Court okayed it. All three branches are, on this matter, in huge dereliction of their sworn, sacred oaths to uphold the Constitution, or at least not piss in its face.
Damn, I sure wish there was someone else to vote for. (don't blame me! i voted for kodos!)
Re: on to being substantive
Date: 2004-03-07 12:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-03-07 11:48 am (UTC)This is now my favorite financial term ever. Almost makes me wish I still worked at money.com.