Cori Bush Just Threatened AIPC and DNC

[gatomontes99]

Was is violence always the left's goto?

[CouchPotato]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

Edited August 7, 2024 by CouchPotato

[NAME REMOVED]

Glad she is out of the picture. The Deomcrats don't need another progressive cop-hating Hamas-sympathising radical.

[SpankyMcFarland]

It should be up to any political party to choose its own representatives. That’s a basic principle of democracy. AIPAC’s spending in this election continues a disturbing pattern where critics of Israel are being purged from the Democratic Party by campaigns supported by unprecedented amounts of money, some of which originated with enemies of the party. Bush’s views are out there but AIPAC and its affiliates have no business interfering in these nomination contests. You can tell what they think of their own campaign when you look at the ads they financed. Israel is rarely mentioned. Let such contests be determined by debate, not money. 

[gatomontes99]

56 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

It should be up to any political party to choose its own representatives. That’s a basic principle of democracy. AIPAC’s spending in this election continues a disturbing pattern where critics of Israel are being purged from the Democratic Party by campaigns supported by unprecedented amounts of money, some of which originated with enemies of the party. Bush’s views are out there but AIPAC and its affiliates have no business interfering in these nomination contests. You can tell what they think of their own campaign when you look at the ads they financed. Israel is rarely mentioned. Let such contests be determined by debate, not money. 

Isn't the point of having democratic elections to have competing ideas expressed and let the people make their choice? AIPAC putting their ideas and criticisms out there isn't interference, it is participation.

Edited August 9, 2024 by gatomontes99

[Rebound]

58 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

It should be up to any political party to choose its own representatives. That’s a basic principle of democracy. AIPAC’s spending in this election continues a disturbing pattern where critics of Israel are being purged from the Democratic Party by campaigns supported by unprecedented amounts of money, some of which originated with enemies of the party. Bush’s views are out there but AIPAC and its affiliates have no business interfering in these nomination contests. You can tell what they think of their own campaign when you look at the ads they financed. Israel is rarely mentioned. Let such contests be determined by debate, not money. 

Money in politics is a massive problem. So is incumbency; California elected a 90 year-old woman to the US Senate. 

[User]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

It should be up to any political party to choose its own representatives. That’s a basic principle of democracy.

That is what happened here. 

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

but AIPAC and its affiliates have no business interfering in these nomination contests.

Oh really. How about if I said you had no business talking about this and should be put in prison for doing so?

It is called free speech. 

 

21 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Money in politics is a massive problem.

Money = Speech. 

 

[SpankyMcFarland]

Just now, User said:

That is what happened here. 

Oh really. How about if I said you had no business talking about this and should be put in prison for doing so?

It is called free speech. 

 

The money spent in these recent Democratic primary campaigns by AIPAC et al. is literally unprecedented in US history. Numbers matter at that scale. As the ads piled on, Bush saw her numbers falling. Democracy should not be for sale. 

[Rebound]

1 minute ago, User said:

That is what happened here. 

Oh really. How about if I said you had no business talking about this and should be put in prison for doing so?

It is called free speech. 

 

Money = Speech. 

 

Money is not speech. 

The concept of free speech is that you can express your ideas without being prosecuted or punished for it. The concept of money is that I have more than you do. These things are not the same. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

28 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Money in politics is a massive problem. So is incumbency; California elected a 90 year-old woman to the US Senate. 

75 is a reasonable cut-off for any public post - political, judicial, you name it. The former UK PM was 42 and the last two Irish PMs started at ages 37 and 38. That’s the right age for a senior executive post. 

Edited August 9, 2024 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

2 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Money is not speech. 

The concept of free speech is that you can express your ideas without being prosecuted or punished for it. The concept of money is that I have more than you do. These things are not the same. 

The US Supreme Court seems deeply confused on the issue, possibly because some of its members are being bribed on a regular basis by the same type of people who contribute massively to political campaigns. I just found out yesterday that Clarence Thomas’s special friend Harlan Crow was a big donor to the swiftboat campaign that destroyed John Kerry’s run for president.

[User]

3 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Money is not speech. 

The concept of free speech is that you can express your ideas without being prosecuted or punished for it. The concept of money is that I have more than you do. These things are not the same. 

Of course it is. 

How do you express your ideas, other than screaming into the void?

You want to create a poster to stand on the corner? That costs money. The poster costs $$$, the markers cost $$$, your car to get to the street corner costs $$$, the gas cost $$$, the time you took from your day has an opportunity cost to it is not direct if you were not working, that is $$$. 

Every practical aspect of how you or anyone else engages in speech costs $$$. 

 

6 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

The money spent in these recent Democratic primary campaigns by AIPAC et al. is literally unprecedented in US history. Numbers matter at that scale. As the ads piled on, Bush saw her numbers falling. Democracy should not be for sale. 

Democracy was not for sale. No one was bought, those that voted made their choices. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

36 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Isn't the point of having democratic elections to have competing ideas expressed and let the people make their choice? AIPAC putting their ideas and criticisms out there isn't interference, it is participation.

OK. I don’t agree with Bush’s ideas but her candidacy should have been decided on the basis of her policies, not on how much money could be spent in attack ads against her. If America doesn’t do something about this, its political candidates will be decided and controlled by an oligarchy of billionaires.

Edited August 9, 2024 by SpankyMcFarland

[SpankyMcFarland]

Thank goodness we have sensible limits on campaign spending in Canada. Most advanced democracies do. Once again, America is falling behind. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

18 minutes ago, User said:

That is what happened here. 

Oh really. How about if I said you had no business talking about this and should be put in prison for doing so?

It is called free speech. 

 

Money = Speech. 

 

You seem to be confusing the word spending with the word speaking. I’m afraid I can’t help you there. 

[User]

4 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

You seem to be confusing the word spending with the word speaking. I’m afraid I can’t help you there. 

Not confusing them at all. It costs $$$ to speak in every practical way. 

If you believe in freedom of speech, you need $$$ to do that. 

You might as well say that we can limit how much $$$ the press can spend on their "press" because no one is stopping the press from speaking if they want to or reporting, but we can certainly say they can't spend past a certain amount of $$$ to print materials or put out TV, radio, etc... 

That would be silly... 

 

[User]

17 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Thank goodness we have sensible limits on campaign spending in Canada. Most advanced democracies do. Once again, America is falling behind. 

Thank goodness America has the 1st Amendment with real freedom of speech. 

[Deluge]

On 8/7/2024 at 1:56 PM, gatomontes99 said:

Was is violence always the left's goto?

Yes. Violence is all they understand. It's why cities like San Francisco, Portland and New York are turning into complete shit holes. 

[Nationalist]

On 8/7/2024 at 5:21 PM, DUI_Offender said:

Glad she is out of the picture. The Deomcrats don't need another progressive cop-hating Hamas-sympathising radical.

Hmmm...

Guess you can't vote for Kamala then.

Good.

[Black Dog]

On 8/7/2024 at 1:56 PM, gatomontes99 said:

Was is violence always the left's goto?

Here you go buddy:

 

[NAME REMOVED]

31 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Hmmm...

Guess you can't vote for Kamala then.

Good.

Nope.

I am a proud Canadian.

Unlike some people...

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said:

Nope.

I am a proud Canadian.

Unlike some people...

Oh well then we're in the same boat. 

I know what you mean about proud Canadians. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/909350/protesters-block-traffic-burn-flag/

 

[gatomontes99]

2 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

OK. I don’t agree with Bush’s ideas but her candidacy should have been decided on the basis of her policies, not on how much money could be spent in attack ads against her. If America doesn’t do something about this, its political candidates will be decided and controlled by an oligarchy of billionaires.

What were they attacking? Her policies, right?

1 hour ago, Black Dog said:

Here you go buddy:

 

Ok, so she's making terroristic threats towards several groups, and you think I'm the problem?

[Black Dog]

2 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Ok, so she's making terroristic threats towards several groups, and you think I'm the problem?

Yes, anytime someone uses some heated rhetorical device you soil yourself in fear.

 

[gatomontes99]

Bitc# please. She made a terroristic threat against left wing organizations. That doesn't effect me one bit. But it is the kind of rhetoric you pu$$ys throw around all the time. It is time to tone it down and I'm going to call you out for it.