Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

Gotta agree with you. They are being paid to do a job and giving them 60-90 days to campaign "on the clock" is more than generous. I know that I give up my rights to free speech the minute I start my work day!

You do not give up your rights to free speech when you start your work day. You are free to give your opinions but common sense tells you what to say and what not to say. Naturally, there are things you are forbidden to discuss with everyone but that has to do with privacy but your opinions are yours to express openly - but they may not be welcomed by everyone. That is where the common sense prevails.

Katz & Army - I agree with you. They WERE elected to do a job. But by the same token, they DO have their 1st Ammendment rights. That's the thing about artificial limits like that - they bump up against the Constitution. But if some Congressperson "does the right thing" and works harder to the point of neglecting a campaign, sure as the sun rises in the east, they'll be punished at the polls for it.

It seems like a Catch-22.

(Oh, and you certainly don't give up your free speech rights after 5pm or whenever your 'shift' ends)

Originally Posted by buggyone

You do not give up your rights to free speech when you start your work day. You are free to give your opinions but common sense tells you what to say and what not to say. Naturally, there are things you are forbidden to discuss with everyone but that has to do with privacy but your opinions are yours to express openly - but they may not be welcomed by everyone. That is where the common sense prevails.

If I wish to remain employed by my employer, my speech must conform with their rules. Politics and religion especially can get one into hot water. Sounds like prohibition on free speech to me.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I love this list, Coach. But a serious question...

The Supreme Court made the current distasteful operation of the super pacs a First Amendment right. In essence the super pacs are currently "anonymous donations". But they appear to have taken over the electoral process. In many cases, no one knows who they are or where their money comes from.

So how do you get rid of em if in essence the Supreme Court has enabled them?

Clearly the devil is in the details. I threw these proposals out there as food for thought, about where our democracy has gone wrong. One of the beauties of a message board is that you can propose solutions that do not have to have a clear connection to reality. Unlike many posters on this forum, I have no delusions that I actually have any influence, just passing time.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Clearly the devil is in the details. I threw these proposals out there as food for thought, about where our democracy has gone wrong. One of the beauties of a message board is that you can propose solutions that do not have to have a clear connection to reality. Unlike many posters on this forum, I have no delusions that I actually have any influence, just passing time.

I am sure that you are above responding to me, but how do you know how posters on here feel about posting and what delusions they might have ?

And I know you are just "passing time" with us deluded souls, but curious how you got us all pegged so easily. Perhaps we can learn from you.

And you certainly can post any challenges to anything I post that is not true !

First of all I love the OP idea and most if not all of the points in it. Great thread.

To djplong:

Katz & Army - I agree with you. They WERE elected to do a job. But by the same token, they DO have their 1st Ammendment rights. That's the thing about artificial limits like that - they bump up against the Constitution. But if some Congressperson "does the right thing" and works harder to the point of neglecting a campaign, sure as the sun rises in the east, they'll be punished at the polls for it.

I think that most of the politicians in Washington have proven that with out some of the limits they will rape the constitution!
And furthermore they don't have freedom of speech now. They say what their party tells them to say or hit the highway come the next election cycle.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I am sure that you are above responding to me, but how do you know how posters on here feel about posting and what delusions they might have ?

And I know you are just "passing time" with us deluded souls, but curious how you got us all pegged so easily. Perhaps we can learn from you.

And you certainly can post any challenges to anything I post that is not true !

Hmmmmm, you seem to have taken that personally.

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

Hmmmmm, you seem to have taken that personally.

Let me re phrase a bit then foryou...

you said "Unlike many posters on this forum, I have no delusions that I actually have any influence, just passing time. "


It appears that you feel there are posters that are deluded...just curious how you know all of this....

Originally Posted by bucco

let me re phrase a bit then foryou...

You said "unlike many posters on this forum, i have no delusions that i actually have any influence, just passing time. "


it appears that you feel there are posters that are deluded...just curious how you know all of this....

esp

Originally Posted by eweissenbach

esp

I can tell from your posts that you are just a tad above us all and now I know the reason...thank you SIR !

Originally Posted by Bucco

I can tell from your posts that you are just a tad above us all and now I know the reason...thank you SIR !

You are welcome.