tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post6690439694518054874..comments2024-03-10T23:01:51.493-05:00Comments on Stupid Motivational Tricks / Bemsha Swing: DworkinJonathanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-12370352268639005082013-02-17T14:15:53.539-06:002013-02-17T14:15:53.539-06:00Leslie, I agree with you completely about the ill ...Leslie, I agree with you completely about the ill effects of lopsided media spending. As with the second amendment, I fear this is a case where the repugnant conclusion is baked into the cake.Vance Maverickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07477306994564623348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-56877467948950041382013-02-17T12:25:01.921-06:002013-02-17T12:25:01.921-06:00If you need money to have speech then limitations ...If you need money to have speech then limitations on money are also de facto limitations on speech. I think the answer is to have enough money on both sides of any race so that speech is unfettered for everyone. I hate it when people complain that 6 billion was spent on a federal election. There are more than 300 million people in the country so that is just like 20 bucks per capita. How much doJonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-22805087678151213162013-02-16T19:29:50.257-06:002013-02-16T19:29:50.257-06:00It may be so since mega-dollars can always be give...It may be so since mega-dollars can always be given to Fox. I still want to know who actually paid for the myriad Jindal signs here, which started sprouting very early and gave the impression it would hardly be worth registering to run against him -- it seemed to be a fait accompli.<br /><br />I'm not for limiting free speech but I do note you have to have money to exercise this right.Leslie B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10020364290777579994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-14763713771682252912013-02-16T17:11:58.956-06:002013-02-16T17:11:58.956-06:00Good point. I'd guess that where the right is ...Good point. I'd guess that where the right is hegemonic they probably don't need to pour in billions more in extra campaign spending. The people get it from their churches, their relatives, and from the general cultural ambience. In principle, though, restricting free speecsh will not benefit the left in the long run. An entire new organization like Fox News which is exempt from campaignJonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-63421404022677558872013-02-16T16:33:33.101-06:002013-02-16T16:33:33.101-06:00They can in smaller venues. Where I live the Democ...They can in smaller venues. Where I live the Democratic Party has given up, no support for candidates here, and ownership of radio airwaves and billboards and television advertising and tv shows by oilfield and related mentalities conditions what is tweeted and put on facebook as well. And it is disingenous to say people should take personal responsibility and be sure to listen to alternative Leslie B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/10020364290777579994noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-33888311120586935302013-02-16T15:09:06.851-06:002013-02-16T15:09:06.851-06:00Right. It is restricting who can make and transmit...Right. It is restricting who can make and transmit messages that I find troubling. Of course, there are so many virtually free ways of getting out a message (blogs, facebook, twitter) that no mega corporation can monopolize the public discourse. Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09371893596402673898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-51560645704444805222013-02-16T12:01:18.821-06:002013-02-16T12:01:18.821-06:00I don't think anyone, particularly a liberal, ...I don't think anyone, particularly a liberal, would say they like the way elections work here. The question is what can and should be done about it. Guaranteeing the right to vote? Abolishing the Electoral College (or making it a formality)? Yes, please. But restricting who can make and transmit what kind of message? Attractive as it might be in some cases, it really does go against our Vance Maverickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07477306994564623348noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1055932257464975902.post-17341364534251482522013-02-16T11:30:39.553-06:002013-02-16T11:30:39.553-06:00"By saying you can't spend money to get t..."By saying you can't spend money to get the message out, you are effectively saying you can't get the message out at all."<br /><br />- The problems begin when one entity spends so much money on getting its message out that nobody else can afford to do so. If a mega-billionaire corporation decides to buy off all advertisement in a particular medium at a price that nobody can Clarissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11027134365260069910noreply@blogger.com