Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Fox News should be charged with Sedition I'm serious [View all]WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)133. Not for political discourse, even lies. Guess YOU forgot about THAT.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
207 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Posts are easier to read if you let DU format them instead of putting in your own line breaks.
Bernardo de La Paz
Nov 2012
#23
Actually, you can see that my screen is wider than the DU width, so just let DU break the lines.
Bernardo de La Paz
Nov 2012
#88
So why was the sample you pasted much more broken up than what I saw on my display? n/t
mojowork_n
Nov 2012
#92
Probably your DU window is about half the width of one of the poster's lines.
Bernardo de La Paz
Nov 2012
#102
And then you have the kind of stupid that NC Legislators wield - "banning" sea level rise!
NRaleighLiberal
Nov 2012
#28
Yes, he's definitely a lib. He's actually disappointed in the President
justiceischeap
Nov 2012
#106
Still doesn't jive with Fox News who hates the fact Obama doesn't push more war.
vaberella
Nov 2012
#153
Not once in my post say he didn't have a right to be disappointed in the President
justiceischeap
Nov 2012
#142
My nephew, a marine, was an Obama supporter than went on another tour, came back
jillan
Nov 2012
#86
that's because some of us think that trashing the First Amendment is kind of kooky.
onenote
Nov 2012
#94
"...you hear The First Amendment blah blah blah and your looked at like some kook"
sl8
Nov 2012
#101
Well, if this election will be such a tremendous landslide for Obama, why is Fox a problem?
ChillZilla
Nov 2012
#138
Airing false, scandalous, and malicious claims against the President of the United States
upi402
Nov 2012
#36
I think the newer revelations about the CIA will make people re-evaulate what went on
NoMoreWarNow
Nov 2012
#37
I'm not sure why you are proud of endorsing the application of a law that expired 200 years ago
onenote
Nov 2012
#96
And you're prepared to have the same principles applied when Republicans are in power?
brooklynite
Nov 2012
#54
"There was no Holocaust or extermination of Jews by Nazis"..... is that an interpretation?
KittyWampus
Nov 2012
#65
Good idea. He became a US citizen for the explicit purpose of selling propaganda here... nt
Comrade_McKenzie
Nov 2012
#60
Instead, designate Faux as "entertainment" as in National Enquirer, then sue them for libel
appacom
Nov 2012
#71
You apparently are unaware that the law you cite was repealed over 90 years ago.
onenote
Nov 2012
#72
Thank you. I stand corrected. The OP is based on a law that expired 211 years ago.
onenote
Nov 2012
#87
RW talk radio is the bigger problem, with paid callers and no pressure or monitoring from the left
certainot
Nov 2012
#74
You didn't include the "... obvious violation of the First Amendment ..." description of the Act.
sl8
Nov 2012
#99
Cannot believe this has 90 recs. Unconstitutional, and wrong. Thank god it will never happen.
NYC Liberal
Nov 2012
#109
Expect to see Noam Chomsky and Christ Hedges behind bars if they start charging people with that
Douglas Carpenter
Nov 2012
#110
I wonder who a Bush (or, godforbid, Romney) administration would go after w/ a law like that
fishwax
Nov 2012
#116
You're off the rails, honey. Of course the 1st protects Limbaugh and other repulsive
cali
Nov 2012
#193
What about people who claim the government is hiding little green men at Area 51?
davidn3600
Nov 2012
#131
Another OP post of UTTER lack of knowledge of the LAW on the 1st Amendment. A GOOGLE SEARCH =
WinkyDink
Nov 2012
#134
Any person who would trash the First Amendment over some cable chatter box
Bluenorthwest
Nov 2012
#149
I'm pretty certain that some of the strongest defenders of the First Amendment on DU
onenote
Nov 2012
#176
under British common law of the 18th Century, the board could have and would have
onenote
Nov 2012
#186