It sounds perfectly sensibleā¦ inside the echo chamber. The Republicans are clearly having issues with cognitive dissonance when they venture outside of the bubble.
christ weāre becoming worse than a parody of corruption.
Soon to be former Republican Kentucky state Sen. John Schickelā¦ if the voters have one iota of sense.
But do they? They voted him in, after all.
Your guess is as good as mine. This is Kentucky weāre talking about here. Smart enough to make bourbon, dumb enough for a creation museum. Iād say the odds are 50:50.
Not only are bribes people; theyāre unborn people. Think about the implications.
Tellll meeeee, I want to knowwww.
Stopping my bribe would be like aborting unborn babies. You donāt want to be known as a baby-killer, do you?
What a misunderstanding!
At least heās openly saying āIām in it for the handouts.ā
Honest in his dishonesty.
I canāt believe I actually found support for thisā¦
An important step was taken in 1925, however, when the Supreme Court ādecidedā that the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment applies the prin- ciples of the first amendment to the states." I use quotation marks to highlight the curious way in which the decision was made. The
Court said merely that it would assume that the principles of the first amendment applied to the states; no explanation for that assumption was given. The pertinent discussion in Justice Holmesā dissent (joined by Justice Brandeis) is equally terse.ā" Later cases repeated the assump- tion until it became a dogma, but there has never been a satisfactory judicial discussion of the issue and of course scholars remain divided over whether and to what extent the fourteenth amendment was in- tended to apply the Bill of Rights to the states.ā 9 The basic judicial attitude, well captured in Gitlow, seems to have been that since liberty of contract had been held to be a right to which the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment gave substantive protection, liberty of speech and of the press must also be such rights. After liberty of contract ceased to receive substantive protection this premise fell away-seemingly without the judgesā noticing what had happened.
pp 5-6 Richard A. Posner, āFree Speech in an Economic Perspective ,ā 20 Suffolk University Law Review 1 (1986).. I havenāt bothered to read it through, thought somehow I doubt that he finds this peculiarity of law to be too troublesome.
Thank you for your efforts 
I think Schickel will probably win this. A lot of Kentuckyās other campaign finance laws have already been overturned.
Hereās a picture of him:
Iām pretty sure the hobby lobby case said that you donāt have to pay taxes anyway, so donāt worry about it.
Whomever has standing in the 5th Circuit, please take this idea forward.
This seems historically wrong, or at least incomplete, if only because 1) the 1st amendment does not mention contracts, and 2) the constitution already contained a Contract Clause before the bill of rights was ratified, stating that "No state shallā¦pass anyā¦law impairing the obligation of contracts.
You just made a light bulb go off for me. Not on this subject, but another one that many people are trying to get legal rights for. This is useful info, thanks!
Youāre welcome, I suppose, though if course IANAL. BTW may I ask what
subject/issue?
