[geeks] One of the things I love about America

[Chris Byrne]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: geeks-admin at sunhelp.org [mailto:geeks-admin at sunhelp.org]On Behalf
> Of Peter L. Wargo

> I would agree.  Lucky for us, we have the ability in the US to criticize
> the government (even if the republican party wishes otherwise),

As does the democratic. Shays Meehan and other bills. Personally I think the
whole current US political structure is dedicated only to self preservation.

Just as an example the recent "campaign finance reform" bills primary effect
is to prevent negative advertising against incumbents. It imposes both
additional individual contribution limits (whcich are already very low at
$1000.00 which was a lot of money when the limit was originally set. In
1974) and complete spending bans within 60 days of an election. It also bans
all co-ordination or co-operation between candidates and organizations,
commitees, corporations, funds, etc... that may support that candidate, or
be opposed to any other candidate.

Whis in and of itself severely limits the ability of small or third party
candidates to run. In fact it effectivley eliminates a third parties ability
to challenge for public office. Im convinced that this was the real primary
purpose of these bills.

Though the primary champion for this cause is a republica, John McCain (who
I worked for during the election and who I generally admire, but often
disagree with), he has gone against most of the republican party in this.
Most of the support for these bills, as well as most of the amendments have
come from the democrats.

The god thing is that this whole thing is patently unconstitutional. The
supreme court ruled in Buckley v. Vleo (1976) that while you could
constitutionally limit contributions to a  candidate you could not limit
spending as that is in direct restraint of speech. I related cases they also
ruled that restricting ones ability to freely associate in the manner
described above was unconstitutional.

So why did so many vote for them? Easy. Most politicians a re lawyers. As
lawyers they knew that the court would strike down the provisions of the
bill should it pass. That way they cna say "I stood and voted for campaign
finance reform" while really the knew it would amount to nothing.

Im sure that you were referring to the so called "Shadow governement" thing.
Well as much as people decry this situation as a violation of democratic
principle, Bush is acting within the powers granted him by the constitution
and the war powers act (which doesnt require a declared war).

I'm very unhappy with the many violations of civil liberties going on right
now, but overall Im satisfied with the conduct of the war, and of the
administration. I am not a Bush supporter, or a republican. But Im
definitely not a democrat, and I dont think Gore would have handled this
situation well. My read is that he would have asked us to restrain
ourselves. Not get angry. That we would try and pursue terrorism through the
courts which is  a suicidal folly.

Chris Byrne