Comments 1 - 4 of 4 Search these comments
Cruz is full of shit. What does regulating campaign contributions have to do with pastors standing up and speaking the ttruth? Cruz (and bubbabear) seems to have conveniently forgotten that churches have tax free status and are forbidden to engage in politics in the first place, much less campaign contributions. If pastors want to play politics then pay taxes like everyone else. This man is a senator? That's scary.
Schumer is an idiot? The churches that use the pulpit to promote politics (even though it's illegal) may not like him, but always promote his party.
Cruz is worse than useless, and practically everything he says is calculated to mislead. I followed the links, and the proposed amendment is about campaign finance:
`(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; and
`(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.
`Section 2. To advance the fundamental principle of political equality for all, and to protect the integrity of the legislative and electoral processes, each State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on--
`(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; and
`(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.
`Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress the power to abridge the freedom of the press.
`Section 4. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.'.
The only explanation I can think of for why Cruz said what he said is that he sees an opportunity to raise funds from the Kochtopus et al. in exchange for opposing any effort to limit their use of campaign finance to influence elections. Cruz goes to a bunch of pastors and gives them the talking point to tell their flocks of deluded followers to oppose the amendment, by distracting and frightening them with an imaginary tangent rather than debating the merits. Thomas Pynchon wrote, “If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers.†The amendment might be a good idea, or it might not be, but either way we don't get an honest debate as long as certain states continue electing charlatan clowns. I'm surprised Cruz didn't say it's all part of the alleged "war on Christmas", but I didn't read the whole article so maybe that came later.
http://www.examiner.com/article/senate-democrats-plan-to-regulate-the-first-amendment-political-speech
#politics