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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Ikonoklast

(23,973 posts)

25. I thought we were talking about private money.

Reply to skepticscott (Reply #22)

Sun Mar 23, 2014, 09:31 AM

Mar 2014

That is what the Citizen's United decision was really all about.

Public funding for all those who qualify to run for office. That would ensure more voices heard, more speech heard, from *all* viewpoints, not just those that can afford it.

As for the rest, I accidentally dropped a lit match and the straw all burned up and the ashes blew away.

Yes, more speech is good, not just from those that can afford to purchase it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

31 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Despicable SCALIA says cash is free speech when the KOCHes have it, not for everybody [View all] UTUSN Mar 2014 OP

Scalia surely sucks the big one as he gives America a rancid middle finger indepat Mar 2014 #1

Scalia can join... 3catwoman3 Mar 2014 #2

The Amendment: Loudly Mar 2014 #3

Yeah, leave it up to congress. That'll work. Scuba Mar 2014 #5

The gay community does have a higher disposable income, especially so with the male couples. A large okaawhatever Mar 2014 #4

As a member of that community I can say that that perception is not supported by fact.... Swede Atlanta Mar 2014 #8

I read that study years ago. It was actually a criticism of businesses who didn't actively solicit okaawhatever Mar 2014 #10

He is trash who doesn't follow the Constitution Faygo Kid Mar 2014 #6

I'm still trying to find the part of the Constitution NewJeffCT Mar 2014 #7

Citizens United never said that money=speech skepticscott Mar 2014 #12

O.K., legalese ends up with the outcome that "raise/spend money" = "political speech" and UTUSN Mar 2014 #16

I don't disagree that Scalia's language skepticscott Mar 2014 #18

Wow. Well, I did specifically include "contrary-donor-I-agree-with" meaning Dem donors, so UTUSN Mar 2014 #20

Yes, I know what you SAID skepticscott Mar 2014 #23

It's clear that it doesn't matter what I *say*... UTUSN Mar 2014 #24

In the end it all boils down to More Money = More Speech. Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #17

See my post above skepticscott Mar 2014 #19

You would be wrong. I want ALL money out of politics. Theirs, ours, yours. Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #21

All money? skepticscott Mar 2014 #22

I thought we were talking about private money. Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #25

Should a corporation be banned from publishing a book in the run-up to an election Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #29

Nope, they can print all they want. They'll just have to admit to political advocacy instead of Ikonoklast Mar 2014 #30

Are you just arguing to argue? DiverDave Mar 2014 #27

Say a Republican congress passed a law banning spending money on campaigning for Democrats. Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #28

Injustice Scalia vocally struts the same as asjr Mar 2014 #9

The Kochs are terrorists and traitors. Anyone who is supported by them is an accessory. Initech Mar 2014 #11

How did this idiot get on the court? nm rhett o rick Mar 2014 #13

Scalia and Thomas..... dotymed Mar 2014 #14

Free Speech ... is very expensive. GeorgeGist Mar 2014 #15

Unfit for office! n/t RKP5637 Mar 2014 #26

Antonin Scalia does not deserve the term "Justice" applied to his name. Enthusiast Mar 2014 #31