Comments on: Volokh on McClellan

By: Jake McGuire

Jake McGuire — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 20:02:21 +0000

While I agree that it’s sort of amusing to see the “I didn’t understand the law that I signed”, this is hardly a unique to George Bush. There were a huge number of articles several months ago featuring Democratic congressmen saying “what the hell did we vote for?” McCain-Feingold was, is, and will probably continue to be, a bad idea. The more people realize this, the better, IMO.

By: pseudosophist

pseudosophist — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 18:04:24 +0000

Bush says, “what I do condemn is these unregulated, soft-money expenditures by very wealthy people.” Although I believe groups like MoveOn may have received considerable financial assistance from George Soros, most of the fundraising they engage in takes place on-line. People like me, not wealthy by a long shot, make contributions of $25, or $50, and collectively we are able to have our voices heard. Exactly who are these “very wealthy people” who have “said some bad things about” Bush?

By: Robin Green

Robin Green — Sat, 21 Aug 2004 13:39:31 +0000

You would think Volokh’s point would argue for a lower hard money cap, to make sure that the speech is really from little people pooling their money, and not those rich and powerful interests. The idea that you can stop “rich and powerful” interests from speaking under capitalism is, of course, quite fanciful. It would be absurd to make such an argument because the conclusion would be absurd.

By: fling93

fling93 — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 21:00:40 +0000

You would think Volokh’s point would argue for a lower hard money cap, to make sure that the speech is really from little people pooling their money, and not those rich and powerful interests.

By: dmm

dmm — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:38:30 +0000

I agree, Norbizness. It’s a very nuanced position.

By: norbizness

norbizness — Fri, 20 Aug 2004 19:17:55 +0000

Didn’t all this start with the President signing McCain-Feingold, a bill he had declared to be unconstitutional? Now that’s some punctuated equilibrium-style political evolution.