U.S. Censorship of the movie Hillary

[SirJosephPorter]

The 'Buck Stops Here" is a Truman quote.

I know it is a Truman quote ironsides; we did discuss it once on the other forum. However, FEC is an independent organization, nothing to do with government, so the buck here has nothing whatever to do with Obama.

As I said before, if you are saying that Obama is running the FEC (or even influencing it), that is a gross misuse of power, and he ought to be investigated and perhaps even impeached. I assume it is a serious matter to try to influence the head of FEC.

But as I said before, for that we need evidence, and not somebody’s unsupported opinion. As far as I can see, this has nothing to do with Obama (or Hillary, as Petros implied); it is between FEC and Citizens United.

 

[Cannuck]

But as I said before, for that we need evidence, and not somebody’s unsupported opinion.

What's wrong with unsupported opinion and a lack of evidence. It hasn't hampered the American left for the last eight years nor the Canadian left for as long as I can remember.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

What's wrong with unsupported opinion and a lack of evidence. It hasn't hampered the American left for the last eight years nor the Canadian left for as long as I can remember.

Unsupported opinion remains just that, unsupported opinion. You don’t convince anybody with unsupported opinion, you are preaching to the converted. If that is your thing, by all means go ahead.

 

[ironsides]

The 'Buck Stops Here" is a Truman quote.

I know it is a Truman quote ironsides; we did discuss it once on the other forum. However, FEC is an independent organization, nothing to do with government, so the buck here has nothing whatever to do with Obama.

As I said before, if you are saying that Obama is running the FEC (or even influencing it), that is a gross misuse of power, and he ought to be investigated and perhaps even impeached. I assume it is a serious matter to try to influence the head of FEC.

But as I said before, for that we need evidence, and not somebody’s unsupported opinion. As far as I can see, this has nothing to do with Obama (or Hillary, as Petros implied); it is between FEC and Citizens United.

The commissioners are appointed by the President. Could be a conflict of interest.

"The Commission is made up of six members, who are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate."
About the FEC

 

[SirJosephPorter]

The commissioners are appointed by the President. Could be a conflict of interest.

"The Commission is made up of six members, who are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate."
About the FEC

So are Supreme Court Justices appointed by the President. Does that mean that there is conflict of interest there, that whenever Supreme Court hands down a decision, it was influenced by the President?

The fact that president appoints them means nothing. President appoints people to many independent bodies, that does not mean that they are all in the pocket of the President. Besides, how many of FEC Commissioners were appointed by Obama? My guess would be ZERO. Probably all of them are Bush appointees.

Besides, the decision was handed down by FEC before Obama was President, so what does this have to do with Obama?


No, I think you are grasping at straws here. As I said, I think it would be a serious offense if the President tried to influence the FEC Commissioners. It will constitute a major scandal. This is strictly between FEC and Citizens United.

You probably don’t like the fact that FEC ruled against Citizens United, and are trying (vainly) to blame it on Obama.

 

[ironsides]

He is the boss.

 

[Cannuck]

You probably don’t like the fact that FEC ruled against Citizens United, and are trying (vainly) to blame it on Obama.

That's just unsupported opinion with a lack of evidence.

 

[gerryh]

All the FEC comissioners were nominated by Bush

 

[SirJosephPorter]

That's just unsupported opinion with a lack of evidence.

That is your opinion, I think I have given plenty of supporting evidence.

 

[ironsides]

"I think I have given plenty of supporting evidence."

Except that the FEC has not made a decision yet.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

He is the boss.

Sorry, Obama is not the boss of FEC, FEC is an independent organization. That is like saying that Obama is the boss of the Supreme Court.

I think FEC has the same relationship with President as the Supreme Court, i.e., none. Once commissioners are appointed and confirmed (same as Supreme Court Justices), President has no control over them. That is why I think it would be a serious offense for the President to try to influence FEC Commissioners.

And since you don’t seem to have any concrete evidence that Obama was involved in any way, I can only conclude that you don’t like Obama all that much and will say and do anything to try to bring him down (like accusing him of trashing the 1st amendment, as you did in this thread), same as Bush haters did their best to try to bring Bush down, by fair or unfair means.

You probably are an Obama hater (just that there were Bush haters and Clinton haters).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"I think I have given plenty of supporting evidence."

Except that the FEC has not made a decision yet.

Reading the article, I get the impression that FEC made its decision during the last election campaign (it wouldn’t let Citizens United show their movie during the election campaign). Then Citizens United went to the Courts, lost in the lower court and Appeals court and it is now before the Supreme Court.

FEC made its decision when Obama wasn’t even the President. An FEC Commission, composed exclusively of Bush appointees, came to the conclusion that the movie was a political advertisement, and forbade Citizens Untied from showing it during election campaign.

 

[ironsides]

How can one hate Obama? Chavez dislikes Obama, so it stands to reason that I like Obama. By the way, I do not hate anyone just for the record.

I know, now we debate Chavez.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Ironsides, the lawsuit is between Citizens United and FEC. That means that Citizens United didn’t like the decision of FEC during the last campaign (they wouldn’t let Citizens Untied show their movie) went to the court and that is why the lawsuit arose.

So FEC made its decision long time ago, when Obama was a lowly candidate.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

How can one hate Obama? Chavez dislikes Obama, so it stands to reason that I like Obama. By the way, I do not hate anyone just for the record.

I know, now we debate Chavez.

No, let us stick to Obama. With your outrageous claim that Obama is trashing the first amendment with no evidence whatever for it except your personal bias, you have made perfectly clear what you think of Obama.

 

[ironsides]

Why do you want to stick it to Obama, Seems like a nice guy. Now Timothy Geithner on the other hand, who was appointed by??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAdJLLmpWBU&feature=channel_page

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Why do you want to stick it to Obama, Seems like a nice guy.

[FONT=&quot]You are being facetious, aren’t you? I said ‘stick to Obama’, not ‘stick it to Obama’[/FONT]

 

[ironsides]

"But the Supreme Court must now determine what the scathing, 90-minute anti-Hillary Rodham Clinton movie is: a slashing journalistic documentary protected by the First Amendment or a political attack ad that must be regulated by campaign finance laws during election season."

I do not know why they are bring up election's at this time, she is not running for anything. Not relevant, somebody is protecting her, and that could only be one or two people.

 

[SirJosephPorter]

"But the Supreme Court must now determine what the scathing, 90-minute anti-Hillary Rodham Clinton movie is: a slashing journalistic documentary protected by the First Amendment or a political attack ad that must be regulated by campaign finance laws during election season."

I do not know why they are bring up election's at this time, she is not running for anything. Not relevant, somebody is protecting her, and that could only be one or two people.

Nobody is protecting her, that is your political spin on the issue. The suit is being brought by FEC comprising exclusively of Bush appointees. The movie is not being banned. It will be shown, it can even be shown right now. The only question Supreme Court is deciding is whether it will be shown as a documentary or as a political attack ad.

The only people seeing something sinister in this are partisans like you (and Citizens united). If you want to blame anybody, blame McCain – Feingold, not Obama or Hillary (you will probably blame them anyway).

 

[SirJosephPorter]

I do not know why they are bring up election's at this time, she is not running for anything. Not relevant, somebody is protecting her, and that could only be one or two people.

But of course, ironsides, didn’t you know? All the Bush appointees on the FEC are in Obama’s pocket so are all the Supreme Court justices (after all, Obama is the boss, in your words). So what do you expect? Supreme Court justices such as Scalia, or Roberts are beholden to Obama, so of course they will vote to ban the movie and put the movie maker in prison for life, and throw away the key. After that, the Supreme Court will come after you.

Does that pretty much accord with your fantasy?