|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
![]() |
WillyT
![]() |
Tue May-17-11 09:25 PM Original message |
First Court Challenge to Citizens United v. FEC - DailyKos |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Tue May-17-11 09:53 PM Response to Original message |
1. What exactly are they seeking to overturn? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Tue May-17-11 10:01 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. Dont tell me you support the Citizens United decision? nm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Wed May-18-11 04:50 AM Response to Reply #2 |
5. There is a difference |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 01:38 PM Response to Reply #5 |
6. So you support the decision and consider it "legal" but dont like the decision? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:12 PM Response to Reply #6 |
12. I consider the decision |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 10:29 PM Response to Reply #12 |
19. I am sorry I stepped into your rudeness and arrogance. Good bye. nm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
treestar
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 08:25 AM Response to Reply #19 |
50. OP is not wrong |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bandit
![]() |
Tue May-24-11 06:44 PM Response to Reply #12 |
65. Anything that violates the Constitution is illegal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
toddwv
![]() |
Tue May-17-11 10:07 PM Response to Reply #1 |
3. The idea that corporations are people and have the same rights as people. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Wed May-18-11 04:49 AM Response to Reply #3 |
4. Why do people keep repeating |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 01:46 PM Response to Reply #4 |
7. The decision says that the legislature cant limit what is spent on an election because |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 07:53 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. The First Amendment says |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:00 PM Response to Reply #8 |
9. The difference is that corporations cant speak. They have no vocal cords. They are not human. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:15 PM Response to Reply #9 |
13. If corporations can't speak |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 10:25 PM Response to Reply #13 |
18. I see. We've gotten to rudeness have we. Sorry to bother you. nm |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 05:02 AM Response to Reply #18 |
22. Yes, I respond to repeated foolishness |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 03:58 PM Response to Reply #22 |
25. Listen to yourself. You've decided that unless I agree with you, I am not educated. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 04:41 PM Response to Reply #25 |
28. No, I've decided that when you make |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 05:58 PM Response to Reply #28 |
29. Calling someone names and threatening to "smack them down" are actions of a bully. You are afraid to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 09:53 PM Response to Reply #29 |
32. If you feel bullied |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Capitalocracy
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:54 AM Response to Reply #13 |
44. What I want them to stop doing is buying our elections. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
steve2470
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:00 PM Response to Reply #8 |
10. The First Amendment applies only to individuals, not corporations |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:20 PM Response to Reply #10 |
14. So the First Amendment right |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
steve2470
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:28 PM Response to Reply #14 |
16. I'm not here to discuss Mapp v. Ohio. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:58 PM Response to Reply #16 |
17. Individuals don't publish |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:05 PM Response to Reply #8 |
11. Paint it however you like, but this decision will allow foreign governments to literally |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 08:22 PM Response to Reply #11 |
15. Mapp v. Ohio |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 09:56 PM Response to Reply #11 |
33. So what about your plea |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:38 AM Response to Reply #11 |
39. Good. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Occulus
![]() |
Sun May-22-11 09:40 PM Response to Reply #8 |
63. The reason for that (from a modern standpoint) "apparent" omission has to do with |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:46 AM Response to Reply #4 |
40. The left is scared, that's all there is too it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:38 AM Response to Reply #3 |
38. Are unions people? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Thu May-19-11 11:41 PM Response to Reply #1 |
20. Congress can indeed restrict political speech if there is a compelling interest in doing so, and the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 05:00 AM Response to Reply #20 |
21. The First Amendment only says |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 02:33 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. Congress is not "sitting by passively." The very laws Congress has passed organizing the economy |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 04:33 PM Response to Reply #24 |
27. Sorry, but not actively providing equal access to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 06:14 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. Under your theory, could Congress split the US dollar into two types of currencies -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 09:49 PM Response to Reply #30 |
31. What in the world your rather silly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 11:20 PM Response to Reply #31 |
34. It goes to the very core of the first amendment. Do you have an answer to the hypothetical? Or no? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:30 AM Response to Reply #34 |
36. Of course it would be PERMITTED |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:54 AM Response to Reply #36 |
45. Oh, I'm not saying the First Amendment requires such an action. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
themadstork
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 07:26 AM Response to Reply #45 |
47. Bingo. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 01:39 PM Response to Reply #45 |
51. You're chasing your own tail and you don't even realize it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 03:33 PM Response to Reply #51 |
54. You are confusing two issues. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:15 PM Response to Reply #54 |
57. Can you name a single person |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 09:29 PM Response to Reply #57 |
59. Sure. Because Congress set up a libertarian "free market" for advertising, anyone who can't afford |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sun May-22-11 07:37 PM Response to Reply #59 |
60. You're on the Internet, telling me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sun May-22-11 09:22 PM Response to Reply #60 |
61. Now that is truly rich. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Tue May-24-11 06:38 PM Response to Reply #61 |
64. Oh, please..where to start? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Thu May-26-11 12:59 AM Response to Reply #64 |
66. You could start at answering my question. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 11:37 PM Response to Reply #31 |
35. "How many decisions that you approve of can you name where the Supreme Court ruled that ..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:51 AM Response to Reply #35 |
42. Those decisions have been |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 07:12 AM Response to Reply #42 |
46. Did you even read the opinion? Perhaps the problem is that you only read the summary. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 02:01 PM Response to Reply #46 |
52. Nice job of cherry-picking |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 03:23 PM Response to Reply #52 |
53. You seem to not grasp the distinction between a sufficient condition and a necessary condition. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:05 PM Response to Reply #53 |
56. Which is just a long-winded way of saying |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 09:16 PM Response to Reply #56 |
58. The crux of the issue was corruption, and the rest of the opinion was getting to the point where |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mmonk
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:50 AM Response to Reply #1 |
41. The belief that money is speech that cannot be restricted |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ThomWV
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 07:35 AM Response to Original message |
23. Since when can a lower court overturn a Supreme Court decision? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rhett o rick
![]() |
Fri May-20-11 04:01 PM Response to Reply #23 |
26. They arent trying to "overturn a Supreme Court decision". Tell us whether you support |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:37 AM Response to Original message |
37. Oh my god! Citizens United is a good thing! It enables Union political speech! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 06:53 AM Response to Reply #37 |
43. It enables political speech |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joshcryer
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 08:02 AM Response to Reply #43 |
48. Sure, but for all intents and purposes a union is a corporation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
skepticscott
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 08:23 AM Response to Reply #48 |
49. Well, perhaps partly because some people seem to think |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BzaDem
![]() |
Sat May-21-11 03:42 PM Response to Reply #49 |
55. I would entirely agree with that. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron
![]() |
Sun May-22-11 09:32 PM Response to Reply #43 |
62. No, I don't like that money going to candidates I support either |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
proud patriot
![]() |
Thu May-26-11 01:04 AM Response to Original message |
67. kick rec and shared |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sat Sep 07th 2024, 06:53 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » General Discussion |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC