Were you readers expecting legal analysis and reasoned arguments on your Sunday pages?
Don’t hold you breath. To read the most simplistic and ignorant editorial in years on the current state of campaign finance laws, go the blogosphere New York Times Sunday Opinion page and read the editorial entitled “The Campaign Jungle” to get your fill of hope fear and change corruption.
So you ask, why would ELC send you to an opinion piece with so much to look forward to? Besides the importance of understanding the ignorance of self-proclaimed journalists residing in Manhattan, the last paragraph is notably scary as it is indicative what depths the reformers would lower themselves to manipulate laws (even criminal) to suppress your free speech.
“The time has come for the Department of Justice to step in and pursue criminal complaints against the candidate PACs. Limits on spending used to prevent donations from becoming outright bribes, but now the limits are gone, and the path to corruption is clear.”
There you have it. The New York Times editorial team suggests the Obama Justice Department threaten criminal prosecution against campaigns and candidates where the Federal Election Commission (FEC) hasn’t determined the campaign speech in question to be either violative of law or regulation. In the name of combating imaginary corruption, the New York Times is trying to the chill the campaign speech of political committees.
Happy Belated Halloween.
Lefties are so simple, always projecting their own sins onto others, trying to deflect and distract. Clearly it’s Obama and the Democrats who have been recipients of donations that have become “outright bribes” – from Solyndra and other “green” companies run by big Obama bundlers, billionaire Dem-donor-owned smallpox drug manufacturer Siga, union pals at SEIU & AFL-CIO, etc.
The DailyBeast even acknowledges “The grant and guaranteed-loan recipients were early backers of Obama before he ran for president, people who continued to give to his campaigns and exclusively to the Democratic Party in the years leading up to 2008. Their political largesse is probably the best investment they ever made in alternative energy. It brought them returns many times over.”
The call for “criminal complaints” signals there’s undoubtedly justification for criminal complaints in the Dems donor dealings.
It also seems to be part of a larger pattern of lefties casually tossing out “reasonable” suggestions to subvert the Rule of Law: Hey, let’s throw people in jail who say stuff we don’t like! We outta bypass that rebellious Congress and just run the country without ‘em! Wouldn’t it be convenient if we just skipped the next round of elections? As if repeating this crazy stuff often enough will make it seem less crazy and more mainstream (like transgender Girl Scouts). But who is there to enforce the Law when the top law enforcement official takes marching orders from the Lawbreaker in Chief? It’s a pickle.