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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Crickets from the peanut gallery.... VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #1
Well--if corporations have a first amendment rights that can be expressed through political msanthrope Apr 2014 #2
Absolutely! So would I! VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #3
You will note that he refuses to discuss the corporate personhood issue---- msanthrope Apr 2014 #5
He Makes a Ludicrous Argument, Ma'am The Magistrate Apr 2014 #14
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
the same legal theory that underlies title 7 dsc Apr 2014 #98
But no person would be entitled to birth control...male or female. nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #99
they cover things like penis pumps etc dsc Apr 2014 #101
Indeed...but people do have the right to refuse under conscience laws. Why shouldn't Hobby Lobby msanthrope Apr 2014 #103
No they actually don't have that right dsc Apr 2014 #104
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
I have never heard Greenwald say the Civil rights law shouldn't apply dsc Apr 2014 #114
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
Indeed...I've written on this before... msanthrope Apr 2014 #124
She set up another goal post for you Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #117
Do you ever contribute to a discussion... polichick Apr 2014 #48
Signs point to no Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #52
Yep, kind of obvious I guess. polichick Apr 2014 #66
Well...aren't you (and I, speaking to you right now) doing just that? nt MADem Apr 2014 #62
Sure, but it's not what I normally do. polichick Apr 2014 #65
I don't think there's any shortage of pointing out hypocrisy on this board, or anywhere on the net. MADem Apr 2014 #70
True dat. polichick Apr 2014 #71
Yes I have...are you keeping score? VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #68
Using the OP's "logic" does that mean the ACLU is libertarian and should be distrusted? n/t NOVA_Dem Apr 2014 #51
Does the ACLU agree with today's decision? pnwmom Apr 2014 #88
Does Greenwald dsc Apr 2014 #96
Good to know. Then I'm not renewing our membership. n/t pnwmom Apr 2014 #105
Of course, because if they can't say "It's Obama's fault!!!" it's no damn fun, you see. MADem Apr 2014 #61
Heroes every one of you Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #69
Hey...greenwald's getting a medal for courage...how timely of you! msanthrope Apr 2014 #118
You deserve it more Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #119
Poor Glenn...if he only had a brain...nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #120
My 10 year old laughed Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #122
Thank you Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2014 #75
Did they teach logic at your school? Marr Apr 2014 #4
Well, I would never post pictures of puppies on a spit. But we aren't talking about two different msanthrope Apr 2014 #8
Greenwald's opinions--however idiotic--are irrelevant to his role Jackpine Radical Apr 2014 #26
+1 daleanime Apr 2014 #28
To fail to take into account the messenger means you've failed to critically msanthrope Apr 2014 #31
Ok, that settles it. They didn't teach logic at your school. Marr Apr 2014 #33
In an actual logic class, using Latin terms incorrectly only invokes laughter. msanthrope Apr 2014 #42
Oh my! A Jesuit, you say?? Marr Apr 2014 #49
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
Of course you did. Glance up the thread. Marr Apr 2014 #55
No...I never mentioned the NSA, only a general comment that one should take a messenger into account msanthrope Apr 2014 #84
This message was self-deleted by its author Marr Apr 2014 #87
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
How do you know she's a witch? Build a bridge out of her! Ed Suspicious Apr 2014 #109
Sloppy....you know it's a disservice to us all without the video. Bad form... msanthrope Apr 2014 #111
BINGO. eom BlueCaliDem Apr 2014 #34
Yes but that's not the topic at hand. Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2014 #77
It's the subtext of the topic at hand. Jackpine Radical Apr 2014 #79
It's not the subtext of the OP--I thought GG was an asshole long ago.... msanthrope Apr 2014 #85
So, why are you bringing up this old quote now, as opposed to-- Jackpine Radical Apr 2014 #89
Because I am rather interested on what a media conglomerate head has to say about corporate msanthrope Apr 2014 #92
GG's "secrets" = 1 FISA warrant + 1,000 tweets of FUD. ucrdem Apr 2014 #83
it makes for easy flame bait I suppose. Puzzledtraveller Apr 2014 #11
Actually, Glenn has been discrediting his stories without anyone's help Blue_Tires Apr 2014 #20
"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
Yeah, that's highlighted in the OP Hissyspit Apr 2014 #21
So that's why he wants a billionaire to run???? msanthrope Apr 2014 #13
IKR!? Rex Apr 2014 #128
This message was self-deleted by its author SidDithers Apr 2014 #9
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
Actually, Sir, It Certainly Should Be Banned From Doing So The Magistrate Apr 2014 #18
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
In Point Of Fact, Sir, That Is Pretty Much What Happens The Magistrate Apr 2014 #41
oh please. m-lekktor Apr 2014 #12
Welcome to DU!! nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #17
Serious question Bragi Apr 2014 #19
Pretty fucking pathetic, huh whatchamacallit Apr 2014 #22
I thought I was a cryptofascistcorpratistauthoritarian? Or something? Stasi, maybe? nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #23
Performance art Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #24
People dig up old "quotes" all the time. ProSense Apr 2014 #25
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
Yes, I get that you don't care what the truth is. Hissyspit Apr 2014 #73
"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
Well, that sucks for them, then.. because ol greenwald is not above anything. Cha Apr 2014 #94
And yet they continue to try. BlueCaliDem Apr 2014 #140
It is the most appropriate time to distinguish from Libertarians. joshcryer Apr 2014 #106
Courageous to the core. ucrdem Apr 2014 #32
Mr. Greenwald taking Koch money for writing whitepaper, and appearing at their msanthrope Apr 2014 #36
I'd prefer that he was simply being mercenary flamingdem Apr 2014 #39
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
K&R Jamaal510 Apr 2014 #40
K&R! BlueCaliDem Apr 2014 #43
For those who don't get why this is being brought up Larry the Cable Dude Apr 2014 #45
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 a funny comedian Larry the Cable Dude Apr 2014 #50
Larry the Cable guy is an unfunny, sexist, racist, and homphobic Republican. As for Mr. Greenwald, msanthrope Apr 2014 #54
Git Er Done! Bobbie Jo Apr 2014 #56
Greenwald and Larry the Cable Guy. I love DU. nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #64
Disagree Larry the Cable Dude Apr 2014 #58
How fortunate for you that McCutcheon was decided today. Welcome to DU! nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #59
So you disagree with this statement: SomethingFishy Apr 2014 #57
I don't think it was utterred in truth. nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #60
Well I guess you win then SomethingFishy Apr 2014 #63
I'm sorry, but you seem rather upset that I answered your question outside of the binary msanthrope Apr 2014 #82
Seriously? Hissyspit Apr 2014 #80
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'm glad you didn't hold your breath Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #115
You know it is amazing how much people on DU know about this guy! Rex Apr 2014 #129
I am constantly astounded how many people he still can dupe... Spazito Apr 2014 #67
DU was on to him a long time ago--- msanthrope Apr 2014 #86
I agree, there are very few posters of note who are fooled... Spazito Apr 2014 #125
I'm just as flabbergasted, Spazito. BlueCaliDem Apr 2014 #123
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
" they underestimate us at their peril." Capt. Obvious Apr 2014 #142
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
That was 2010. Octafish Apr 2014 #72
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 glad that Greenwald has an appreciation of the issues here. Vattel Apr 2014 #78
Hey thanks! Pholus Apr 2014 #90
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
I guess your dogma demands "deeply ambivalent" means something else.. Pholus Apr 2014 #134
Hey guess what? Hitler and I both like dogs. Vashta Nerada Apr 2014 #112
Oh shit...now I love the NSA!!! U4ikLefty Apr 2014 #127
The NSA is cool, they have an indoor theme park! Rex Apr 2014 #130
I prefer ponies. U4ikLefty Apr 2014 #132
Tell me what the NSA has to do with this? I am bemused at those who think msanthrope Apr 2014 #135
Oh, he loves billionaires, proving that money really is speech in GG's case. Tarheel_Dem Apr 2014 #133
That Obama NSA climbdown really stung. Didn't it -> cprise Apr 2014 #136
What does Greenwald's views on the NSA have to do with CU? nt msanthrope Apr 2014 #137
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"What the Supreme Co...»Reply #117