[QUOTE=kentonio;6140542]No **** Sherlock, but considering we've had to sit through months of hearing how its all about freedom of speech, it'd be nice to hear an admission that its about nothing more then massively increased campaign funding via the back door.[/q]
That's not an admission. First, those who assert that these laws restrict free speech are doubtless concerned to see each candidate free to express his or her views. Restricting their ability to use money fund their campaign is precisely one such restriction so far as they are concerned. Second, ultimately the legal responsibility for an ad put forward by an independent supporter or supportive group rests with that group. It's their choice to keep backing a candidate and put forward his views. The fact that they coordinate with that candidate is not to the point.
That's not an admission. First, those who assert that these laws restrict free speech are doubtless concerned to see each candidate free to express his or her views. Restricting their ability to use money fund their campaign is precisely one such restriction so far as they are concerned. Second, ultimately the legal responsibility for an ad put forward by an independent supporter or supportive group rests with that group. It's their choice to keep backing a candidate and put forward his views. The fact that they coordinate with that candidate is not to the point.
Comment