SNL Will Be Criminalized!

[Baldy]

Yes, and he was clearly pointing out the absurdity by being absurd.
Anyone with an IQ above 30 can see it.

Maybe you are that dense after all?.?.?.?

Just like his UN hobbit hole predictions I suppose. So clever he fooled Politico, ABC News, Mediaite, CS Monitor, Breitbart, News Busters…

And being the ace satirist that he is, he's letting everyone twist in the wind by not coming out and admitting it was such.

Thank god we have you and CID to carry his water.

Admit the obvious?

If you're too ignorant to realize what he was doing, him telling you won't make any difference.

[kalm]

Just like his UN hobbit hole predictions I suppose. So clever he fooled Politico, ABC News, Mediaite, CS Monitor, Breitbart, News Busters…

And being the ace satirist that he is, he's letting everyone twist in the wind by not coming out and admitting it was such.

Thank god we have you and CID to carry his water.

Admit the obvious?

If you're too ignorant to realize what he was doing, him telling you won't make any difference.

Maybe it was a double move by the Dems realizing it wouldn't go anywhere, and knowing that Cruz would make this type of response anyway?

But Cruz's satire is so good that he's fooled the entire media into thinking he was serious. So much so that he looks bad in the end.

Brilliant!

[CID1990]

You DO know this is a constitutional amendment the Dems are proposing, right? One that not only will require 2/3 of the senate but also ratification by the states?

You're blowing wind over something that the Dems never intended to pass, which is exactly what they want you to do- complain about the bad ol Republicans for being against it

OOPS wait a second

The GOP senators sent it through! Now what do we have to hang our hats on?

Ted Cruz's SNL analogy

Good job klam your handlers on the left knew just what buttons to push to get you going

Yes. I knew all of that. Doesn't change the fact that Cruz is quickly becoming the Louie Gohmert of the Senate.

Wait! Perhaps Cruz knew it wouldn't go anywhere and this is some clever ruse to make Dems look bad!

Well if we didnt get anything else put of this waste of a thread at least you did admit that corporations are entitled to free speech. So there's that

Im still wondering why Ted Cruz's analogous floor speech (a clever one according to CNN) is worthy of a thread but the epic political grandstanding waste of time (the original proposed legislation) was not

oh thats right-

Ted Cruz

living in the brains of liberals and other children everywhere

Good job!

[kalm]

Yes. I knew all of that. Doesn't change the fact that Cruz is quickly becoming the Louie Gohmert of the Senate.

Wait! Perhaps Cruz knew it wouldn't go anywhere and this is some clever ruse to make Dems look bad!

Well if we didnt get anything else put of this waste of a thread at least you did admit that corporations are entitled to free speech. So there's that

Im still wondering why Ted Cruz's analogous floor speech (a clever one according to CNN) is worthy of a thread but the epic political grandstanding waste of time (the original proposed legislation) was not

oh thats right-

Ted Cruz

living in the brains of liberals and other children everywhere

Good job!

You could have saved us all a ton of time by staying off the thread or admitting Cruz is a buffoon. So….

But in answer your point, corporations are not people. In so much as they have protected speech as an entity. Sure. But it can be limited, like I already said.

[Baldy]

Admit the obvious?

If you're too ignorant to realize what he was doing, him telling you won't make any difference.

Maybe it was a double move by the Dems realizing it wouldn't go anywhere, and knowing that Cruz would make this type of response anyway?

But Cruz's satire is so good that he's fooled the entire media into thinking he was serious. So much so that he looks bad in the end.

Brilliant!

The "entire" media has the same world view as you.
Dog whistles...Just as you made an idiotic thread about it, they wrote idiotic stories about it.

[CID1990]

Well if we didnt get anything else put of this waste of a thread at least you did admit that corporations are entitled to free speech. So there's that

Im still wondering why Ted Cruz's analogous floor speech (a clever one according to CNN) is worthy of a thread but the epic political grandstanding waste of time (the original proposed legislation) was not

oh thats right-

Ted Cruz

living in the brains of liberals and other children everywhere

Good job!

You could have saved us all a ton of time by staying off the thread or admitting Cruz is a buffoon. So….

But in answer your point, corporations are not people. In so much as they have protected speech as an entity. Sure. But it can be limited, like I already said.

How can something that is not a person have the right to free speech?

[kalm]

You could have saved us all a ton of time by staying off the thread or admitting Cruz is a buffoon. So….

But in answer your point, corporations are not people. In so much as they have protected speech as an entity. Sure. But it can be limited, like I already said.

How can something that is not a person have the right to free speech?

Because it's a group of people. But it's not a person.

[CID1990]

How can something that is not a person have the right to free speech?

Because it's a group of people. But it's not a person.

So a group of people cannot have the right to free speech?

[kalm]

Because it's a group of people. But it's not a person.

So a group of people cannot have the right to free speech?

In the context of campaign spending and money as speech, it should be limited. For both.

[HI54UNI]

So a group of people cannot have the right to free speech?

In the context of campaign spending and money as speech, it should be limited. For both.

Have I missed your threads bashing union spending on campaigns?

[kalm]

In the context of campaign spending and money as speech, it should be limited. For both.

Have I missed your threads bashing union spending on campaigns?

Yes. Unions should be limited too.

[CID1990]

So a group of people cannot have the right to free speech?

In the context of campaign spending and money as speech, it should be limited. For both.

And this proposed constitutional amendment- which increases Congress' power beyond that of the original intent- provides Congress with such a narrowly based, tightly focused power that it cannot be abused or have unforseen consequences?

[kalm]

In the context of campaign spending and money as speech, it should be limited. For both.

And this proposed constitutional amendment- which increases Congress' power beyond that of the original intent- provides Congress with such a narrowly based, tightly focused power that it cannot be abused or have unforseen consequences?

I didn't say I was for this particular bill, but I'm still guessing it wouldn't criminalize SNL...yawn.

[CID1990]

And this proposed constitutional amendment- which increases Congress' power beyond that of the original intent- provides Congress with such a narrowly based, tightly focused power that it cannot be abused or have unforseen consequences?

I didn't say I was for this particular bill, but I'm still guessing it wouldn't criminalize SNL...yawn.

And that's the point that is going over your head.

Does the Bill of Rights criminalize ANYTHING?

[kalm]

I didn't say I was for this particular bill, but I'm still guessing it wouldn't criminalize SNL...yawn.

And that's the point that is going over your head.

Does the Bill of Rights criminalize ANYTHING?

Jefferson felt we needed a constitutional convention about once a generation, so...

[HI54UNI]

And that's the point that is going over your head.

Does the Bill of Rights criminalize ANYTHING?

Jefferson felt we needed a constitutional convention about once a generation, so...

Let's also change the first amendment so billionaires or corporations can't own the press.

[CID1990]

And that's the point that is going over your head.

Does the Bill of Rights criminalize ANYTHING?

Jefferson felt we needed a constitutional convention about once a generation, so...

I'm guessing you finally clued in and see where I'm going with this.

I'll take your tap out as confirmation.

[kalm]

Jefferson felt we needed a constitutional convention about once a generation, so...

I'm guessing you finally clued in and see where I'm going with this.

I'll take your tap out as confirmation.

I'd like to see you do less guessing, wishing, hoping, and more thinking.

There's no way in hell congress, that has been filled with people like Harry Reid, Chris Dodd, Eric Cantor, and Tom Daschle is going to bite the hand and usher through meaningful reform. That's been obvious for some time. There's too much money to be made both in and out of office. An amendment would have to come from the states, which is almost as tough a road to finish. Especially considering the Supreme Court struck down Montana's attempt at ignoring Citizens United.

That's a different subject than Cruz's stupidity, but it's been fun watching you and Baldy defend it.

[CID1990]

I'm guessing you finally clued in and see where I'm going with this.

I'll take your tap out as confirmation.

I'd like to see you do less guessing, wishing, hoping, and more thinking.

There's no way in hell congress, that has been filled with people like Harry Reid, Chris Dodd, Eric Cantor, and Tom Daschle is going to bite the hand and usher through meaningful reform. That's been obvious for some time. There's too much money to be made both in and out of office. An amendment would have to come from the states, which is almost as tough a road to finish. Especially considering the Supreme Court struck down Montana's attempt at ignoring Citizens United.

That's a different subject than Cruz's stupidity, but it's been fun watching you and Baldy defend it.

And yet you saw fit to start a thread about Ted Cruz's rant et absurdum over what was a political grandstanding move by the Dems to begin with.


Brilliant!


Freedom of speech is not something that is granted by Congress. Either you have it or you don't. Either you COMPLETELY limit it on the part of corporations, or you don't. There is no middle ground there because you leave it in the hands of partisans to determine what speech is appropriate. Hopefully you can see what is wrong with this. Ted Cruz's analogy might have been absurd to you but maybe that is what it takes to get peoples' attention.

[kalm]

I'd like to see you do less guessing, wishing, hoping, and more thinking.

There's no way in hell congress, that has been filled with people like Harry Reid, Chris Dodd, Eric Cantor, and Tom Daschle is going to bite the hand and usher through meaningful reform. That's been obvious for some time. There's too much money to be made both in and out of office. An amendment would have to come from the states, which is almost as tough a road to finish. Especially considering the Supreme Court struck down Montana's attempt at ignoring Citizens United.

That's a different subject than Cruz's stupidity, but it's been fun watching you and Baldy defend it.

And yet you saw fit to start a thread about Ted Cruz's rant et absurdum over what was a political grandstanding move by the Dems to begin with.


Brilliant!


Freedom of speech is not something that is granted by Congress. Either you have it or you don't. Either you COMPLETELY limit it on the part of corporations, or you don't. There is no middle ground there because you leave it in the hands of partisans to determine what speech is appropriate. Hopefully you can see what is wrong with this. Ted Cruz's analogy might have been absurd to you but maybe that is what it takes to get peoples' attention.

You enjoy a good political gaffe as much as the next. Don't let your feelings get hurt because it was one of yours.

Regarding the rest, why is it all or nothing? Can you carry your gun onto school grounds or into a courthouse?

The courts decide what constitutes speech and a what a "person" is. Unless congress or the states amend the constitution.

BTW, the courts can be just as partisan.

Wanna get a room, big boy?

[kalm]