...is a curious thing to me sometimes.
I was a conservative once but I was a lot more logically consistent in my positions. That's probably why that center didn't hold and I'm a liberal today.
Does anyone remember when I made my proposal as the way to save our democracy, to have our leaders care more about voters than lobbyists, to have substantive discussions replace 30-second soundbytes, to have everyone's voice count and not just those rich enough to buy the airwaves, to remove much of the money and corruption that has become expected practice in our current government?
I proposed a constitutional amendment banning paid political advertisement, replacing campaign ads with bi-weekly debates between candidates conducted under oath.
Needless to say, conservatives on this forum didn't like that proposal. It was "censorship" and a suspension of "free speech".
These same conservatives now say, "you know, free speech has limits" justifying the police actions against protesters in Ferguson.
So, when rich people buy elections, that's "free speech" which can't be restricted.
But when poor people demonstrate in public areas, that's when "free speech has limits".
I was a conservative once but I was a lot more logically consistent in my positions. That's probably why that center didn't hold and I'm a liberal today.
Does anyone remember when I made my proposal as the way to save our democracy, to have our leaders care more about voters than lobbyists, to have substantive discussions replace 30-second soundbytes, to have everyone's voice count and not just those rich enough to buy the airwaves, to remove much of the money and corruption that has become expected practice in our current government?
I proposed a constitutional amendment banning paid political advertisement, replacing campaign ads with bi-weekly debates between candidates conducted under oath.
Needless to say, conservatives on this forum didn't like that proposal. It was "censorship" and a suspension of "free speech".
These same conservatives now say, "you know, free speech has limits" justifying the police actions against protesters in Ferguson.
So, when rich people buy elections, that's "free speech" which can't be restricted.
But when poor people demonstrate in public areas, that's when "free speech has limits".
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
