Comments on: Constitutional Atrocity

By: SayUncle » It’s time

SayUncle » It’s time — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 12:15:57 +0000

[...] Here’s my offer: Any organization* that wants to run a political ad criticizing any politician in that window can do so here. Not only will I run the ad free, I�ll do a post on the ad on the front page. [...]

By: Traction Control » Blog Archive » McCain-Feingold does not Apply Here

Traction Control » Blog Archive » McCain-Feingold does not Apply Here — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 01:32:52 +0000

[...] Say Uncle gets an Instapundit link to this! [...]

By: SayUncle » For those InstaPundit readers

SayUncle » For those InstaPundit readers — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:07:49 +0000

[...] He linked you to a category. If you’re curious what I’m talking about, see here. Make your own pledge for free speech: Any organization* that wants to run a political ad criticizing any politician in the McCain-Feingold 60-day window can do so here. Not only will I run the ad free, I�ll do a post on the ad on the front page. [...]

By: Xrlq

Xrlq — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:41:11 +0000

Why the hell not? One group lobbies for the right to bugger little boys, the other one actually kills thousands of innocent dogs, and lobbies for the right to kill humans by denying them access to most forms of modern medicine. If anything the comparison is too hard on NAMBLA, who only wants to *()$ your kid rather than to kill him.

By: Paul Witt

Paul Witt — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:54:06 +0000

PETA might be a big loony but they’re no NAMBLA. Perhaps you shouldn’t lump them together.

Plus PETA get models to protest in the nude.

By: SayUncle » More sticking it to the incumbent protection act

SayUncle » More sticking it to the incumbent protection act — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:33:35 +0000

[...] First, Kim. Then me. Then xrlq and Jolie Rouge. Now, two more of joined the pledge that the McCain-Feingold incumbent protection act err Campaign Finance Reform doesn’t apply to them: [...]

By: SayUncle » More anti-McCain- Feingold blogs

SayUncle » More anti-McCain- Feingold blogs — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 12:25:58 +0000

[...] Make a pledge for free speech: Any organization* that wants to run a political ad criticizing any politician in that window can do so here. Not only will I run the ad free, I�ll do a post on the ad on the front page. [...]

By: BadIdeaGuy

BadIdeaGuy — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:36:17 +0000

I plan to join you. Excellent idea. You are not only gentlemen but also scholars. Well, I don’t really know if you’re gentlemen either.

By: DirtCrashr

DirtCrashr — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:11:03 +0000

I don’t run ads, yet…

By: Anthroblogogy

Anthroblogogy — Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:10:32 +0000

Free Speech

Following Say Uncle and the Constitutional Atrocity post:

This is a free-speech blog. Any organization* that wants to run a political ad criticizing any politician can do so here.

Actually since I don’t run ads, whatever – maybe I’ll start runn…

By: SayUncle

SayUncle — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 22:02:20 +0000

Joe, to my knowledge, the internets are exempt from these regulations. YMMV, consult your lawyer.

By: Joe Huffman

Joe Huffman — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:05:23 +0000

Hmmm… isn’t this the same a donating money to a campaign and doesn’t that have to be reported? In the case of my blog that might be worth something like $1.43 for 90 days, but for others you might run into some trouble with the law unless you are careful. And just because it’s ‘free’ does that get you out of the grasp of the long arm of this terrible law?

Assuming those questions can be answered satisfactorily you can “sign me up”.

By: SayUncle » Combating McCain-Feingold

SayUncle » Combating McCain-Feingold — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 12:38:44 +0000

[...] Yesterday, I made this pledge: Any organization* that wants to run a political ad criticizing any politician in that window can do so here. Not only will I run the ad free, I�ll do a post on the ad on the front page. [...]

By: Ron W

Ron W — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 01:27:01 +0000

Campaign Finance Reform: just another example of how the two-party establishment is attacking the Bill of Rights (First Amendment in this case). Usually the only difference between the two is which of the Bill of Rights they try to deny and take from us, but it seems now they’re joining forces for an all-out “assault” which reminds me of one of the few rollbacks of tyranny when the so-called “assault weapons” ban died a Constitutionally righteous death in Sept 2004 because of lack of support in “the peoples” House.

By: gattsuru

gattsuru — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 23:21:15 +0000

Because pointing them to a non-journalistic source ends up being the same problem? If you point out a non-journalist website or even shopping catalogs, it’s the same violation of the law as if you had printed them yourself.

By: beerslurpy

beerslurpy — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 23:16:55 +0000

Hey, whats wrong with the National Association of Marlon Brando Lookalikes?

By: tgirsch

tgirsch — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 19:48:10 +0000

It seems a bit retarded, but why not just run the same ad without mentioning names? If Congress passes some atrocity, you could run an ad that attacks the law and even tells you how to find out who voted for or against it.

As an aside, I have a coworker who grew up in Argentina, and he said that there they ban campaigning of any kind — in-person, advertisement, etc. — for 72 hours prior to the election. He brought it up because he thought it was odd that campaign workers were allowed to camp outside the polling places and campaign right there.

By: Captain Holly

Captain Holly — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 17:31:37 +0000

If anyone actually read my blog, I’d also make that offer.

By: Tennessee Values Authority

Tennessee Values Authority — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 14:52:28 +0000

If I still had a blog, I’d also make that offer.