Send Us Hatemail ! mailbag@conservativecave.com
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
“The president will continue to make the argument that we don’t know where this money comes from and entities like the Chamber have said they get money from overseas,†Gibbs told reporters at the White House…“The president didn’t do a bunch of his stump last night,†Gibbs said. “I expect that the president will continue to bring up the notion that … you’re probably going to see $150-plus million spent on largely negative campaign attack ads where the identity of those funding those attack ads is not known.â€Gibbs was asked if it bothered him that several news organizations, from the New York Times to the Associated Press and also FactCheck.org, have published reports dismissing the accusation against the Chamber.“It doesn’t bother me at all,†Gibbs said. “If I was an enterprising reporter … I might ask the Chamber of Commerce to let me see their donors.â€
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) called on the Internal Revenue Service Tuesday to investigate the tax status of Crossroads Grassroots Political Strategies and "other organizations that are directing millions of dollars into political advertising without disclosing their funding sources."The request from the Senate's No. 2 Democrat comes in the midst of a push from the White House to cast doubt on the funding sources of groups like Crossroads GPS — founded by GOP strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie — or the traditionally Republican-friendly Chamber of Commerce.Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43496.html#ixzz12Bufx4Xq
The United States Supreme Court’s decision in NAACP v. Alabama ex. Rel. Patterson, 357 U.S. 449 (1958) turns 50 this year. For those who value privacy it is a birthday worth remembering.In NAACP v. Alabama, the Court affirmed that the constitutional rights of speech and assembly include a right of private group association. The idea that Americans are free to join private groups was not new in 1958. However, the Court’s decision to allow private groups to keep membership information confidential was an important constitutional milestone. In 1956, the state of Alabama demanded a copy of the NAACP’s membership list, as part of its effort to expel the group from the state for allegedly violating a state business law. But the Supreme Court held that the civil rights group had a right to keep its members’ identities secret, whether or not a technical business law had been broken. Revealing the group’s membership, argued the Court, “is likely to affect adversely the ability of [the NAACP] and its members to pursue their collective effort to foster beliefs which they admittedly have the right to advocate, in that it may induce members to withdraw from the Association and dissuade others from joining it because of fear of exposure of their beliefs shown through their associations and of the consequences of this exposure.†NAACP at 462-63.
“It doesn’t bother me at all,†Gibbs said. “If I was an enterprising reporter … I might ask the Chamber of Commerce to let me see their donors.â€
Shit. If we had anybody in the media with a set of ****in' balls on them, they would ask the imposter where his "donors" come from, where the imposter was born and what were his grades and his college papers.And that's just to start. I can think of many more I would ask the imposter.
