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: "What the Supreme Court Got Right" by Glenn Greenwald. [View all]Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,985 posts)77. Yes but that's not the topic at hand.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
142 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
Well--if corporations have a first amendment rights that can be expressed through political
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#2
Well said...we trump the rights of actual persons when we pretend that enities with money and power
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#16
for the same reason that those who have a first amendment right to hate racial minorities
dsc
Apr 2014
#95
Explain that. I can't discriminate in hiring because of Title 7. So tell me the legal theory
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#97
Indeed...but people do have the right to refuse under conscience laws. Why shouldn't Hobby Lobby
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#103
But HL is arguing that their corporate personhood allows for First Amendment protections.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#107
and use them to be exempt from a cc mandate (to provide insurance that complies with the ACA)
dsc
Apr 2014
#108
Indeed...and when Libertarians like Mr. Greenwald make the argument that you do, I
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#110
Given his racist stance on immigration, and his decision to defend Matt Hale
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#116
I think you should cite his opposition if it exists not extrapolate from stances you don't like
dsc
Apr 2014
#121
I don't think there's any shortage of pointing out hypocrisy on this board, or anywhere on the net.
MADem
Apr 2014
#70
Using the OP's "logic" does that mean the ACLU is libertarian and should be distrusted? n/t
NOVA_Dem
Apr 2014
#51
Of course, because if they can't say "It's Obama's fault!!!" it's no damn fun, you see.
MADem
Apr 2014
#61
Well, I would never post pictures of puppies on a spit. But we aren't talking about two different
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#8
To fail to take into account the messenger means you've failed to critically
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#31
In an actual logic class, using Latin terms incorrectly only invokes laughter.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#42
That's not what an ad hominem is. I'm not discussing his views on the NSA. Haven't mentioned them,
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#53
No...I never mentioned the NSA, only a general comment that one should take a messenger into account
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#84
Marr--I'm going to reply to your deleted post, since I had the window open....
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#91
"So if you wanna go, I'm gonna suggest you bring more than the Wikipedia knife to this gunfight."
Number23
Apr 2014
#100
The blue links stopped after that, didn't they? Maybe one day I'll get told who I actually
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#102
Sloppy....you know it's a disservice to us all without the video. Bad form...
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#111
Because I am rather interested on what a media conglomerate head has to say about corporate
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#92
"I believe that corporate influence over our political process is easily one of the top sicknesses
Hissyspit
Apr 2014
#6
"But there are also very real First Amendment interests implicated by laws which bar entities ...
ProSense
Apr 2014
#7
Should be possible to ban a corporation from publishing a book during an election campaign
Nye Bevan
Apr 2014
#10
I see your point, but I think CU is a travesty. I think the pushing of corporate personhood
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#15
So Charles or David Koch should be permitted to publish anything they like in an election campaign,
Nye Bevan
Apr 2014
#27
What does publishing a book have to flooding the political process with money?
ProSense
Apr 2014
#29
This thread is actually about the Citizens United decision, as opposed to today's ruling.
Nye Bevan
Apr 2014
#30
I thought I was a cryptofascistcorpratistauthoritarian? Or something? Stasi, maybe? nt
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#23
Yes, but they don't imply Greenwald is a member of the Libertarian Party as the OP does,
Hissyspit
Apr 2014
#35
Oh--I'm not implying. I'm stating forthrightly that Mr. Greenwald is a Libertarian.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#44
"Advertised as a Liberal." I wouldn't call that truth in advertising. Three Libertarians, on a
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#74
Yes, but according to his loyal flock around here at Democratic Underground,
BlueCaliDem
Apr 2014
#37
Mr. Greenwald taking Koch money for writing whitepaper, and appearing at their
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#36
He was wrong, and guess what, so was the ACLU which filed a brief in favor...
joeybee12
Apr 2014
#38
When the ACLU accepts billionaire money to run a media conglomerate, I'll be more
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#46
Larry the Cable Dude is a republican who has appeared on Hannity to speak against the ACA.
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#47
Larry the Cable guy is an unfunny, sexist, racist, and homphobic Republican. As for Mr. Greenwald,
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#54
I'm sorry, but you seem rather upset that I answered your question outside of the binary
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#82
Yes...I don't think Greenwald was telling the truth when he wrote that. I think he has no problem
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#81
I agree, I think a few actually do not recognize the cognitive dissonance associated with
Spazito
Apr 2014
#126
I wouldn't give them that much deference. They damn well know the difference.
BlueCaliDem
Apr 2014
#139
EXACTLY!! how do you reason with people who think it is okay to criticize a Democratic
Douglas Carpenter
Apr 2014
#131
Your attempt at being cute failed, Dougie. So did your "reasoning" in your defense of a Libertarian
BlueCaliDem
Apr 2014
#138
I don't know what you are talking about? We need to expose all the frauds!! From Gary Hart and Jimmy
Douglas Carpenter
Apr 2014
#141
Thus my point--if he backed CU, he's going to be just fine with today's ruling if he's held
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#76
I am sorry--are you suggesting that Greenwald didn't support the CU decision? nt
msanthrope
Apr 2014
#93
I know I'm stating who the fuck cares. George W Bush supports sending money to Africa to fight
Ed Suspicious
Apr 2014
#113
Oh, he loves billionaires, proving that money really is speech in GG's case.
Tarheel_Dem
Apr 2014
#133