Wanna solve almost all our national problems? Then change campaign finance rules.

Not any more than they will address true campaign finance reform, or as the comedians say, "the best government money can buy".

 

Yep. Being a grownup, this does not bother me in the least. I realize that I don't always get to do what I want, that other people are sometimes the boss of me, and sometimes I am the boss of them. I have zero problem with that. Yelling "You're not the boss of me!" and slamming the door is normal behavior for surly teenagers, but adults should be ashamed to act that way. (That's one problem I have with libertarianism in general, the way it glorifies acting like an adolescent.)

Then we go after them next. Just because the problem is large doesn't mean we shouldn't start solving it.

I'll also point out that most of the western democracies use public campaign financing of some sort. None of them have turned into freedom-hating tyrannical states. Heck, most of 'em have better records on liberty than the USA. So, anyone claiming that public campaign financing will send us on a slippery slope that ends liberty needs to explain why such a thing hasn't happened elsewhere.

 

America's idea of freedom of speech is much more broad and all encompassing than other nations ideas. Our culture is not the same as those other nations. We literally see freedom and liberty differently than they do. Basically unlimited in all ways that don't cause direct physical harm to people.

 

Yes! Vote with your dollar! Guess I'll just stop buying that pesky gas and walk 22 miles to work. I'll eat all imported food because the agri-business is exploiting Congress and us. Forget banks, I'll eschew mortgage payments in favor of cardboard boxes-that'll get the message through! Of course all the while the corporations will be advertising with their millions to the low IQ **********s with the 15 second attention span making folks like me into "socialists" for fighting the system. Seems to work, just read above.

 

The problem with this is how do you legally say no to third party candidates? Are you going to give the NAZI candidate money?

 

More useless ranting about the symptoms while ignoring the underlying disease.

 

I'd say James Madison has it closest. A decidedly anti-populist stance I'd say.

The majority of the very society we live in is irredeemably corrupted by Government benevolence and demands ever greater benevolence at the cost of oppressing others.

 

So all I would have to do is announce I am a candidate for President and the government will send me the same amount of money as they would send to Obama???

WHERE DO I SIGN UP!!!

 

Institute the flat tax or fair tax.
Stop the myriad of government senseless regulations.
Repeal the 17th amendment.

That would do more to take the money influence out of politics than anything.

That being said why do you oppose free speech which being able to contribute to the candidate of your choice and NOT contributing to those you choose not to is.

 

Speech is verbal, money is material. Words will get you appreciation, but money will buy you favors, and it does.


Are you really so naive as to believe if I tell the waiter he did a good job (for a tip), that he will be just as attentive to my needs the next time I eat there, as the guy who tipped him $100 bill? Not likely!

 

It has been my experience the the big tippers are usually the ones who are least memorable. The lady who empty's her plate on the table so her kid can play doesn't leave a tip. The ones who make the biggest messes leave the smallest tips.

 

And money is speech according the courts, we express who we support by our donations to support their candidcy. No one has a right to a dime of any ones money in order to run for elective office and the government has no business engaging in it.
Are you really so naive as to believe if I tell the waiter he did a good job (for a tip), that he will be just as attentive to my needs the next time I eat there, as the guy who tipped him $100 bill? Not likely![/QUOTE]

But do tell me the candidates you have voted for because they spent the most money.

 

The courts are not infallible, and the current courts are split on party line BS just like the rest of the government, more than ever before. They are bias and well funded to be that away. This isn't the way our system of government was set up but that is the way it has become when it was infiltrated by deep pockets and corporate sock puppets.


I agree the government shouldn't be funding any campaign, it's a ridiculous prospect, but money accepted by a politician by anyone who cannot cast a legitimate vote for that candidate should be illegal, and considered bribery or at least an attempt to purchase a favor from an elected official by an outside party. We have foreign countries and businesses buttering the palms of politicians with impunity to the point they don't even know or care who their real constituents are, or who they actually represent in the office they assume.


In this country you will be taxed for leaving your children money that has already been taxed, but it is only considered tax free if you give it to your legal spouse or a political party. This is how dysfunctional our government has become. The two party system is destroying the legitimacy of our country's political landscape. They control it, before the people can even use their voice, and it is for sale to the highest bidder, purchased right before our very eyes, with little to no consequences.


NOBODY should be allowed to donate money to a politician they cannot cast a legal vote for, period. So that means corporations/businesses/unions, foreign nations, and yes even special interest groups should be exempt from interfering with or tampering with an election.


Tell me a candidate you voted for who didn't spend enough money?

 

So much for freedom of assembly then.

 

Where did you get that? So you are saying if a politician can only get funding from the individuals that can actually cast a vote for them, the right to assemble is taken away?

 

I don’t see anything about campaign contributions or elections.

How does not giving money to a politician, keep you from joining a picket line, or keep you from signing a petition concerning laws on the books?


Who gives you these notions?

 

Useless without tangible monetary support to the politicians that at least rhetorically share my values. I don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) about "equal speech" only "free speech" and freedom is rarely equal. I want my side to win at all costs.

 

This is the mentality that has us in a vicious continuous circle of reelecting failure time and time again, but expecting different results.


It's just amazing how the poor minorities vote democrat and the middle class wage earners vote for republicans since they fall into the class warfare rhetoric perpetuated by the most influential corporate controlled propaganda machine in the history of mankind that may have masterfully convinced you that you are on their side, but they surely are not on yours.


The two party system is the problem, not the solution.

That's because lobbyists purchase corporate sock puppets long before the campaign begins, behind closed doors once they are elected, or with untraceable off shore 'business' accounts just about anytime they choose too.

 

And you are silly enough to think that only corporations have lobbyists?

You wanna know what the easiest way to get corporations out of elections? Quit giving the government the power to pick economic winners and losers.

 

Quote Originally Posted by JoeSixpack View Post

NOBODY should be allowed to donate money to a politician they cannot cast a legal vote for, period. So that means corporations/businesses/unions, foreign nations, and yes even special interest groups should be exempt from interfering with or tampering with an election.

Me>> So much for freedom of assembly.

All the embolden are examples of how citizens freely assemble and use those assemblies to express and advance political issues. We are guarantied a right to do so by the Constitution.

 

Still obsessing about the symptom and forgetting the underlying disease, are we?

The disease if grossly excessive government power. Money in elections is just a reaction.

Cut the government power and the money goes away.

 

Thats a farce. For starters equal and free are diametrically opposed opposites. For everything to be equal everything must be brought to the lowest common denominator through the abolishment of freedom. A free society is inherently unequal. Some will succeeded some will fail. Some will have the means to get their message out to the people others will not. What matters is that everyone has the chance to succeed. That is what must be protected not equality.

 

And where do you find that in the Federalist Papers?

 

The Federalist Papers are not legal documents that hold any sway over how we run the country.

 

"The two party system is the problem, not the solution."

Taxcutter asks:
What is your alternative?