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

Recommendations

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

Well, ProSense Apr 2014 #1
Dumb slander from Prosense: "spin in an attempt to defend both decisions" cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #3
Now, you're proving that you don't know the definition of "slander." n/t ProSense Apr 2014 #4
Ummm. while I might be inclined to agree with your STRICTLY Kelvin Mace Apr 2014 #36
While your reply would be apropos in a courtroom, we aren't in one cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #40
It was Roberts who fast tracked Citizens United and it was likley the most egregious case imo, of Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #2
I believe the conservatives are motivated by partisan hackery cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #5
Clearly, and he knew who would side with him. We need to push it back. Senator Sanders: Jefferson23 Apr 2014 #7
The Supremes sort of did say corporations are people, in the sense that The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2014 #6
Well said. Yes, ProSense Apr 2014 #10
If only natural persons had constitutional protections, all sorts of horrible things could happen. Nye Bevan Apr 2014 #11
In the case of a hypothetical PP raid The Velveteen Ocelot Apr 2014 #25
Do you see another way to keep money out of the political arena? cheyanne Apr 2014 #12
The 1976 Court did Metatron Apr 2014 #8
Money IS speech. Sorry folks. Nye Bevan Apr 2014 #9
That doesn't ProSense Apr 2014 #13
Would you be OK with banning corporations from publishing books that criticized election candidates Nye Bevan Apr 2014 #14
Again ProSense Apr 2014 #15
Well, would you? (nt) Nye Bevan Apr 2014 #16
Ask me if I would ban "handmade signs." ProSense Apr 2014 #17
So where do you draw the line? Nye Bevan Apr 2014 #19
Well, ProSense Apr 2014 #20
I understand that these are difficult questions to answer for those who want to limit free speech. Nye Bevan Apr 2014 #23
Well, ProSense Apr 2014 #27
You will find that arguing with a nihilist approach to argument is fruitless cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #18
Did you look up the meaning of "slander"? n/t ProSense Apr 2014 #21
Yes. cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #26
"It said that slander is whatever Prosense says it is, at any given point in time." ProSense Apr 2014 #28
How is your name-calling somehow "fruitful"? BumRushDaShow Apr 2014 #22
In this context it is hardly name-calling. cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #24
Sorry but your argument for making ad-hominems is weak BumRushDaShow Apr 2014 #29
Have a nice day. cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #32
"In the context of any online argument, Prosense is a nihilist." ProSense Apr 2014 #30
There SHOULD be no context SunsetDreams Apr 2014 #31
Then alert on it. cthulu2016 Apr 2014 #33
No I think my point was made SunsetDreams Apr 2014 #34
I think your assessment of Pro is spot on. Laelth Apr 2014 #38
Well, ProSense Apr 2014 #39
Fair enough. Laelth Apr 2014 #41
No, ProSense Apr 2014 #42
I will let you have the last word on this. Laelth Apr 2014 #43
"Now, please, buzz off." ProSense Apr 2014 #44
Don't give them any ideas. eom Frustratedlady Apr 2014 #35
What is critical is that they did not say "Money is NOT speech and has no 1st amendment protection". stevenleser Apr 2014 #37
"It is vital to regulate....to prevent my speech...from being drowned out." BumRushDaShow Apr 2014 #45
Elections should be publicly financed, candidatees should have to campaign within tblue37 Apr 2014 #46
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The USSC does not say tha...»Reply #12