Ted Cruz drops bombshell: Senate Democrats to ‘repeal the First Amendment’ this year

originally posted by: kruphix


Facts don't matter...as long as it is something to hate the other side about the base will eat it up and spread it like wildfire.

And that fact is what makes politics and the "Theater of the Absurd" so damn much fun.

The fascist oligarchy is firmly in control and we need to pretend that the taxpayers really matter as long as we can.
Ted is Right about one thing...Freedom of speech is in jeopardy but it's not coming from a political party.

Something evil this way comes....

Oh....This is quite the gathering.

Does anyone actually believe our rights are not being stripped away ?

That the Government is involved in and invested in Election outcomes ?

Are you so partisan you can just close your eyes to what both sides are doing ?

Blind Partisanship works both ways. In the future the IRS could knock on your door.

When they do remember this day. Let's see if you all chuckle then.

We are all losing...Some just choose to have a blind eye...Cause your guy is in office.

News Flash...That guy could care less about you. Now with the weekend coming.

Enjoy your Freedom. It was won for you. It was given to most of us.

To the guys that served....A heart felt Thank You..

What is free about letting organizations spew propaganda to influence elections and subvert the votes of informed and thinking people like ourselves?!

This absolutely needs to happen and I will support it 100%.

originally posted by: thisguyrighthere
a reply to: theantediluvian

And the moral is: R = D

Blindfolded voting over the past 50 years would have gotten us exactly where we are today.

I was just trying to point out that as with 'Death Panels' (which Ted Cruz did also promote), this is just an example of this Tea Party Republican phony foisting a disingenuous misinterpretation on the public to manufacture some propaganda.

Of course death panels were front and center, with Cruz asking at one point if we want “the IRS determining whether our mother lives or dies.”

source

originally posted by: CB328
What is free about letting organizations spew propaganda to influence elections and subvert the votes of informed and thinking people like ourselves?!

This absolutely needs to happen and I will support it 100%.

But isnt that just politics?

The job is 10% sleeping and 90% pandering and lying to morons so you'll have a job next election cycle.

Informed and thinking people. I like that. Very funny. They make up, what, 5% of the public? The informed and thinking vote isnt what matters. It's statistically insignificant.

a reply to: theantediluvian

My post was deleted but it only makes sense to have records of people choices so medical people can decide quickly what level of treatment people should be given. Nothing could go wrong there with the great data system the government creates.

The Ted Cruz coloring book sealed it for me when it comes to listening to him. Lots of people out here don't think for them self, they just vote based on what some politicians tells them, right or wrong.

a reply to: buster2010

The sweet irony is the same Constitution that he claims is going to be demolished is the same Constitution that RESTRICTS HIM FROM BEING PRESIDENT. Born in Canada, to a Cuban and an american, but all those people who were "birthers" with Obama...are going to scream for this asshats right to be president.

originally posted by: CB328
What is free about letting organizations spew propaganda to influence elections and subvert the votes of informed and thinking people like ourselves?!

This absolutely needs to happen and I will support it 100%.

You want to end free speech are you mad?!

originally posted by: muse7
Sometimes I think Ted Cruz is actively posting here on ATS. Some of the threads are so full of right wing propaganda it's down right embarrassing and the saddest part is that the majority of the members here take them as facts because it exposes the EVIL LIBERAL AGENDA!!

Do you think Ted tag-teams ATS topics with Dianne Feinstein and her active account?

Seriously, ATS is an amalgamation of far rights, far lefts, and centrists. The problem is, if you view it from one of the "fars", then the other "far" and the centrists seem to be radicals to you. I'm not above any of thise, as I'm viewing things from a libertarian TEA Party view that has become further right than the modern GOP, seeing as how the GOP has shifted further and further to the left over the past 20 years.

originally posted by: CB328
What is free about letting organizations spew propaganda to influence elections and subvert the votes of informed and thinking people like ourselves?!



This absolutely needs to happen and I will support it 100%.

You do realize this will also silence labor unions and law firms, right? :evil-laugh: You know, I'll take that deal now that I think about it. Let's do it! I see no downside to snuffing out corporate America's bi-partisan campaign lobby dollars in exchange for also snuffing out big labor's single-party lobby dollars. I think we all know who will come out ahead in that contest.

originally posted by: roadgravel


The Ted Cruz coloring book sealed it for me when it comes to listening to him. Lots of people out here don't think for them self, they just vote based on what some politicians tells them, right or wrong.

Or they listen to Rush or Sean and think they are coming up with original ideas all on their own.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I'm viewing things from a libertarian TEA Party view that has become further right than the modern GOP

I guess we found Ted Cruz's account!


All levity aside, as somebody who is admittedly in the same camp as Ted Cruz (assuming you believe Ted Cruz), what about this statement bears any resemblance to the truth?

“This year, I’m sorry to tell you, the United States Senate is going to be voting on a constitutional amendment to repeal the First Amendment,”

Having read the text of the proposed amendment, do you agree with that?

Looks to me like they want "freedom of the press" to remain, but at the same time limit the amounts of money spent by any candidate.

Sounds like an oxymoron.

And naturally many politicians would prefer the "underground" / "under-the-table" financing that this bill would create.

And most Democrats would love to be cited in ultra Left Wing editorials free of charge and therefor exempt from and finance laws and regulations.


S.J.RES.19

W-O-W

We must be in an election year !!

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Disregard my last comment!

You do realize this will also silence labor unions and law firms, right? :evil-laugh: You know, I'll take that deal now that I think about it. Let's do it! I

Exactly! It's a win-win. Now why the hell is Ted Cruz trying to thwart efforts to reform campaign financing? Doesn't seem very anti-establishment to me.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

Having read the text of the proposed amendment, do you agree with that?

Man that's a loaded question... I don't *agree* with it, but I understand what he's saying. This is all about the SCOTUS ruling in the Citizen's United case. The justices ruled that, based on the First Amendment, campaign contributions and lobby dollars are a form of political speech and political speech is protected by the First Amendment. Perhaps a more correct wording by Ted would have been "They're trying to significantly alter and redefine the First Amendment and they're trying to repeal the First Amendment in regards to associations of citizens."

Essentially they are attempting to repeal the First Amendment for some, which I view as an extremely danger, extremely slippery slope.

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looks to me like they want "freedom of the press" to remain, but at the same time limit the amounts of money spent by any candidate.

Sounds like an oxymoron.

And naturally many politicians would prefer the "underground" / "under-the-table" financing that this bill would create.

And most Democrats would love to be cited in ultra Left Wing editorials free of charge and therefor exempt from and finance laws and regulations.


S.J.RES.19

W-O-W

We must be in an election year !!

How would the following create "underground" financing?

`(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; and
`(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

`(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; and
`(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

More relevant to the topic at hand, how is it a "constitutional amendment to repeal the First Amendment" as Ted Cruz stated?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

This is all about the SCOTUS ruling in the Citizen's United case. The justices ruled that, based on the First Amendment, campaign contributions and lobby dollars are a form of political speech and political speech is protected by the First Amendment.

Essentially they are attempting to repeal the First Amendment for some, which I view as an extremely danger, extremely slippery slope.

I see your point but in my opinion, the SCOTUS ruling in the Citizen's United vs FEC was in itself an abhorrent and knowingly dubious interpretation of the First Amendment's protections that skipped the slope altogether and went straight into WTF territory.

If true, then to all:

Say it now, while you still can.

a reply to: theantediluvian

How would the following create "underground" financing?

Don't be so naive. Cash talks. Always has.
"Supporters" buy candidates with campaign money. Doesn't matter how the candidate gets the money as long as the candidate ends up supporting the contributor. Under-the-Table cash would achieve the same results.



a reply to: theantediluvian

More relevant to the topic at hand, how is it a "constitutional amendment to repeal the First Amendment" as Ted Cruz stated?

Don't know. Depends on the context and the point of Cruz's statement.

a reply to: xuenchen

Don't be so naive. Cash talks. Always has.
"Supporters" buy candidates with campaign money. Doesn't matter how the candidate gets the money as long as the candidate ends up supporting the contributor. Under-the-Table cash would achieve the same results.

Except illegal campaign financing would be a crime? That's like saying that if the SCOTUS made theft legal, theft should remain legal because thieves steal.

Don't know. Depends on the context and the point of Cruz's statement.