General Discussion

progressoid

(53,148 posts)

30. I wish

Reply to sabrina 1 (Reply #29)

Tue Apr 10, 2012, 12:05 AM

Apr 2012

I don't hold much hope for that to happen.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court Agrees to Reconsider Citizens United [View all] Tx4obama Apr 2012 OP

it's ironic that if anything undermines Citizens United, it will be... mike_c Apr 2012 #1

IT'S A TRAP!!!! Ian David Apr 2012 #2

Why does a picture of Gingrich say 'It's a trap"? Kablooie Apr 2012 #22

That's unfair. bleever Apr 2012 #42

Only if by military, you mean crime syndicate. laconicsax Apr 2012 #48

Admiral Akbar is more handsome than Newt Gingrich thelordofhell Apr 2012 #52

They'll uphold it 5-4. MrSlayer Apr 2012 #3

Someone should track how the family members of the judges are doing. Baitball Blogger Apr 2012 #11

mmmmmmmmmm Skittles Apr 2012 #20

Sorry hon, it won't ever happen lark Apr 2012 #43

yeah I know Skittles Apr 2012 #54

Yes, someone would have to admit they made a mistake. A Simple Game Apr 2012 #24

The Supreme Corporation of the United States will use this case to strengthen it ProudToBeBlueInRhody Apr 2012 #4

Holy shit. aquart Apr 2012 #5

Calling Stephen Colbert..... tanyev Apr 2012 #6

He has become the 21st Century Court Jester cr8tvlde Apr 2012 #8

They thought it was good used against Democrats HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #7

True, but some of us thought it over and done cr8tvlde Apr 2012 #9

I certainly hope so. HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #13

Look what Adelson all by himself did for Gingrich. Ikonoklast Apr 2012 #44

A better headline would be: Supreme Court Gets a Chance to Extend Citizens United to State Level. Fool Count Apr 2012 #10

Unless the Dems hope another jackass ruling will make the SCOTUS a hot topic in this fall's McCamy Taylor Apr 2012 #26

SCOTUS conservatives doing the right thing? Ha! Never happen. They don't give a shit neverforget Apr 2012 #12

For Christ sakes, don't jump to conclusions longship Apr 2012 #14

And a tribute to the movement state by state to nail down their AG's on this issue: freshwest Apr 2012 #18

Bingo! Precisely. longship Apr 2012 #21

Signed nt duhneece Apr 2012 #33

Kudos to Montana! freshwest Apr 2012 #15

How many times to get it right? izquierdista Apr 2012 #16

k&r... spanone Apr 2012 #17

Now the contributions will tax deductible. briv1016 Apr 2012 #19

What really needs to happen is for corporations to be declared non-persons loudsue Apr 2012 #23

BS The Gang of 5 will use it to usurp state laws. Next election Super pacs in China will be funding McCamy Taylor Apr 2012 #25

Want to do something? RobertEarl Apr 2012 #27

No one here has yet suggested a good solution. eallen Apr 2012 #28

If your answers to the two questions above differ AlbertCat Apr 2012 #34

Yes, Citizens United was in the publishing business eallen Apr 2012 #36

Your logic is flawed. blackspade Apr 2012 #35

The NYT also publishes unsigned editorials eallen Apr 2012 #37

So you are not actually going to address my reply. blackspade Apr 2012 #40

What makes CU, Inc, NOT a media outfit? eallen Apr 2012 #47

You are either missing my point or ignoring it. blackspade Apr 2012 #55

How are those points relevant? eallen Apr 2012 #56

Citizen United is about treating money as speech. blackspade Apr 2012 #57

The CU case was about a corporation that made a movie and wanted to distribute it. eallen Apr 2012 #58

I think that legal constructs like corporations should be limited by charter to what their reach and TheKentuckian Apr 2012 #39

The history of the newspaper industry rebuts your claim about news being non-profit, non-revenue onenote Apr 2012 #41

But not TV, the source of most peoples news (if any) TheKentuckian Apr 2012 #60

Yes TV. TV news has always been a revenue source for stations and networks onenote Apr 2012 #61

So a Republican administration could remand NYT's charter? eallen Apr 2012 #49

Neither, though either or both might be granted such liberty TheKentuckian Apr 2012 #59

When they do reconsider it, they need to make sure that Clarence Thomas, sabrina 1 Apr 2012 #29

I wish progressoid Apr 2012 #30

Me neither. He has never recused himself when he has had a conflict of interest. sabrina 1 Apr 2012 #31

Too bad this thread wasn't about a dead artist, a dead religious figure, or a bad jury decision. Major Hogwash Apr 2012 #32

Oy otohara Apr 2012 #51

I think the article jumps the gun. onenote Apr 2012 #38

Thank you Montana ! KurtNYC Apr 2012 #45

Given how the SCOTUS currently does things... Prophet 451 Apr 2012 #46

I would be very cautious of reading too much into this...... Swede Atlanta Apr 2012 #50

HELL has indeed FROZEN OVER. ~nt 99th_Monkey Apr 2012 #53

Groovy! Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2012 #62