Page 1 of 1
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 3:29 am
by Leisher
Article
So, no controversy over Fahrenheit 9/11, but if it's anti-Democrat it needs to be ruled on by the Supreme Court?
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:38 am
by thibodeaux
Thank you John McCain!
And the rest of Congress. And Pres. Bush. And the 5 justices who upheld it.
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:18 am
by TPRJones
So, now the first amendment has been altered to include the clause "unless a powerful Democrat doesn't like what you have to say"?
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:23 am
by GORDON
Saw a cover of Newsweek the other day, Rush Limbaugh with a gag over his mouth, and the title said something like, "How much is too much?"
Newsweek is now arguing for the end of free political speech.
Hope, change.
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:36 am
by thibodeaux
Jeebus H Cripes
The [government's] lawyer, Malcolm L. Stewart, said Congress has the power to ban political books, signs and Internet videos, if they are paid for by corporations and distributed not long before an election.
...
Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. asked... whether a campaign biography in book form could be banned. Mr. Stewart said yes, so long as it was paid for with a corporation’s general treasury money, as opposed to its political action committee.
“That’s pretty incredible,” Justice Alito said.
Justice Alito replaced Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, an author of the 5-to-4 decision upholding the McCain-Feingold law in 2003.
Edited By thibodeaux on 1238074594
Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:30 pm
by TheCatt
Well, at least Sc'Alito might be good for something.