Comments on: U.S. District Court Turns Down Barr Request for Injunction in Saddleback Church Event

By: Bob Marston

Bob Marston — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 22:08:36 +0000

Larry West wrote: “If (when) that so-called news channel turns you down, you could sue them for false advertising and get an injunction to keep them from using that phrase.”

The FCC did away with regulations requiring Commercial Broadcasters furnish equal time to subjects of political programing in 2000.

The first group to exploit this opening was NARAL that unleashed a merciless barage of attack ads on Ralph Nader. And there wasn’t a thing Nader could do about it.

By: Larry West

Larry West — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:32:06 +0000

What is keeping Barr and the others from taking Warren’s questions and answering them, then going to the media that broadcasted Warren’s questioning and telling them “Rick Warren apparently isn’t ‘fair and balanced,’ but if you’re really ‘fair and balanced’ you’ll give Barr equal time”?
Warren never claimed to be “fair and balanced.”
If (when) that so-called news channel turns you down, you could sue them for false advertising and get an injunction to keep them from using that phrase.

By: ETJB

ETJB — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:28:02 +0000

Well, if a Church sponors a debate they should be able to invite or not invite the candidates that they want.

The problem is that if the Church is tax exempted/non-profit it is suppose to have objective standards in palce for which candidates it does and does not invite. The Church did not, but the judge did not seem to care.

Perhaps, he feels that such a requirement is a 1st amendment violation. Does anyone know where we can read the judge’s decision?

By: Larry Reinsch

Larry Reinsch — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 00:46:15 +0000

Well Richard how would a legal challenge of their tax exempt status be contested?

By: Bob Marston

Bob Marston — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 15:33:27 +0000

Michael Seebeck wrote : “Not surprising at all. Private event, private property, no IRS issues because this is a forum and not an endorsement.

This is just sour grapes by Barr.

BTW, the forum will be webcast on http://www.ktla.comNot surprising at all. Private event, private property, no IRS issues because this is a forum and not an endorsement.

This is just sour grapes by Barr.

BTW, the forum will be webcast on http://www.ktla.com”

The fact of the matter it was NOT A PRIVATE EVENT. The media covered it exstensively and the link provided by Mister Seebeck furnishes proof of that.

We all owe the Barr Campaign a tip-of-the-hat for exposing this travesty to the American Public.

By: Jim R

Jim R — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 08:47:11 +0000

It sounds like an argument for changing the tax code. Why should gifts of any sort be subject to administration and oversight by the government?

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 03:00:29 +0000

Richard Shepard is not entirely correct when he says the courts never do anything in cases of this type. In 2006 a US District Court Judge ordered a Florida debate to include the Reform Party nominee. That decision came just a few hours before the debate was to start. So the organizers had to add a third podium.

By: Steve Rankin

Steve Rankin — Sun, 17 Aug 2008 01:47:49 +0000

The news blackout evidently continues, as I haven’t seen anything about Barr’s legal move in the TV news.

Interesting that McCain mentioned Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) as one of the top three whose advice he’ll seek as president.

Interesting, too, that the “separation of church and state” has not been raised.

By: AFH

AFH — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 21:14:42 +0000

Having been in the courtroom, the judge conceded that there was merit, but not enough at the late hour to justify an injunction that would hurt those involved unduly. The Barr campaign waited too long trying to work with Saddleback Church.

The judge specifically left it open for appeal, and the campaign decided against pursuing it, because their objective was not to destroy other people’s hard work but to try and get the church to at least acknowledge the campaign and the issue of campaign finance laws. The big win was to raise the onus of McCain-Feingold upon McCain himself.

Yesterday’s Zogby poll shows that 55% of Americans want Barr included in such public events, the church deciding not to do so was not because he is fringe, but because they made a political decision. Its their right to make that decision, but the rules need to apply to everyone, or no one, and there is no way to change them except to challenge them and bring them to public light.

ALIVE * FREE * HAPPY
Libertarian

By: Michael Seebeck

Michael Seebeck — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 20:17:09 +0000

Not surprising at all. Private event, private property, no IRS issues because this is a forum and not an endorsement.

This is just sour grapes by Barr.

BTW, the forum will be webcast on http://www.ktla.com