General Discussion

calimary

(81,220 posts)

51. Fits on a bumper sticker, too.

Wed Sep 17, 2014, 04:05 PM

Sep 2014

So that will reach some of the low-information voters out there, and those unable to wrap their "brains" around anything but the simplest and most briefly-worded concepts.

[IMG][/IMG]

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

107 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"If money is speech, then speech isn't free." [View all] riqster Sep 2014 OP

Perfect framing/slogan. Kick for exposure. grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #1

Thanks. Trying to find a pic. Drat this mobile device, anyway. riqster Sep 2014 #3

Do you know how to post a pic? grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #4

Never learned that. At home on a PC, it's easy. riqster Sep 2014 #8

Here ya go! Just post this in your OP: http://i.imgur.com/b68cvrl.jpg grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #15

Thanks! riqster Sep 2014 #28

Fits on a bumper sticker, too. calimary Sep 2014 #51

Good one! riqster Sep 2014 #52

That's a true statement - it costs money to get your message out. badtoworse Sep 2014 #2

Which is why it's an Animal Farm analogue: riqster Sep 2014 #29

Nothing in the 1st Amendment limits the number of people that hear what you have to say. badtoworse Sep 2014 #58

Define " you". riqster Sep 2014 #60

a person or an organization authorised by its members or owners to speak on their behalf. badtoworse Sep 2014 #61

Now, there is an interesting matter. Shareholders often do not thus empower executives. riqster Sep 2014 #71

That is not a 1st Amendment matter - it's a very different legal question badtoworse Sep 2014 #76

So there should be no regulations what so ever? Bandit Sep 2014 #62

Constitutional rights are subject to reasonable restriction. badtoworse Sep 2014 #63

The Point is that Speech is limited to those with the ability to BUY it. 2banon Sep 2014 #64

NYT should provide that space, free for anyone who wants it, right? X_Digger Sep 2014 #74

BIG FAIL 2banon Sep 2014 #84

My how eloquent. Care to expand your treatise? X_Digger Sep 2014 #107

That needs to be a viral meme. NOW! hifiguy Sep 2014 #5

Just posted a link to a pic, somebody else made the same sign. riqster Sep 2014 #10

And the top 20% in this country get an 85% say in how things should be bhikkhu Sep 2014 #6

It's Animal Farm realized. riqster Sep 2014 #11

Not a great analogy. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #24

We're all created equal. I'm pretty sure somebody wrote that down somewheres. riqster Sep 2014 #26

Kicked and recommended, that's a nice observation. Uncle Joe Sep 2014 #7

Thanks for the K&R, unc! riqster Sep 2014 #13

... napkinz Sep 2014 #9

Bright man. Thanks. riqster Sep 2014 #12

a few more .. napkinz Sep 2014 #16

Thanks for these!! hifiguy Sep 2014 #19

Money is a lot of things... lame54 Sep 2014 #14

I'm all right Jack. riqster Sep 2014 #22

as a practical matter, money in politics is the stifling of speech. unblock Sep 2014 #17

A crucial point. hifiguy Sep 2014 #20

To build on that: money is a finite resource. Concentration of wealth limits the supply to others. riqster Sep 2014 #39

so is airtime, and big money drives up the prices unblock Sep 2014 #40

Very nice catch. Thanks. riqster Sep 2014 #42

K&R Blue Owl Sep 2014 #18

T & Y riqster Sep 2014 #36

Actually, money is speech. Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #21

The problem is, relatively poor people often don't have extra money. riqster Sep 2014 #25

Whew. I was afraid I wouldn't be able to set my watch today. Orrex Sep 2014 #27

How would guaranteeing "freedom of political speech for natural persons" Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #32

We could easily set a cap on "speech" permitted in the guise of political spending Orrex Sep 2014 #33

Again, with such a cap, someone with no money would not be able to pay for newspaper ads, Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #38

I still don't accept that money is speech Orrex Sep 2014 #41

So you are proposing to limit every American to $310 of spending on political speech per year? (nt) Nye Bevan Sep 2014 #66

As opposed to some people getting to spend billions on it? Hell yes. Orrex Sep 2014 #73

Would you be OK if your other civil rights were similarly limited? badtoworse Sep 2014 #77

Would you argue that we have a right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater? Orrex Sep 2014 #78

I'm fine with that. Civil rights are subject to reasonable restrictions. badtoworse Sep 2014 #81

Why can't I simply buy an election outright, then? Orrex Sep 2014 #82

Because they're not for sale. badtoworse Sep 2014 #85

Of course they are. Orrex Sep 2014 #86

Now you're just being obtuse badtoworse Sep 2014 #88

And you're being naive. Orrex Sep 2014 #91

It costs money to communicate your message to people. badtoworse Sep 2014 #92

That doesn't mean that money is protected speech Orrex Sep 2014 #93

This whole thread and you especially are using a strawman argument badtoworse Sep 2014 #94

You use a strawman to accuse me of using a strawman. Cute. Orrex Sep 2014 #95

I'm done. Take it up with the SCOTUS badtoworse Sep 2014 #98

For the record, you haven't actually refuted anything I posted Orrex Sep 2014 #99

Exactly treestar Sep 2014 #90

Why just political speech? Dr. Strange Sep 2014 #37

Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #43

May your crysknife chip and shatter... Dr. Strange Sep 2014 #46

I'm not mad, but since we're sharing such Bon mots: riqster Sep 2014 #50

You can easily limit commercial speech. Don't consume it. riqster Sep 2014 #44

Would that it were true. Dr. Strange Sep 2014 #47

time is money ThoughtCriminal Sep 2014 #72

and space is a long long time Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #80

That is a good point treestar Sep 2014 #89

Nice catch KittyWampus Sep 2014 #23

If money is speech, then poverty is silence. Scuba Sep 2014 #30

Perfectly said, as you so often do. riqster Sep 2014 #31

Nice grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #35

Perfect. hifiguy Sep 2014 #49

Well, that certainly describes America, doesn't it? nt stillwaiting Sep 2014 #56

I can still go to a public library jamzrockz Sep 2014 #87

Human nature says otherwise dreamnightwind Sep 2014 #96

So true on so many levels. nt SunSeeker Sep 2014 #34

Yep. Wish I had come up with it. riqster Sep 2014 #45

If you don't arrest traitors on supreme court their treason will continue jonjensen Sep 2014 #48

We also need to frame the argument that Citizens United Ilsa Sep 2014 #53

We've been reading it wrong all along. We have a right to "Fee Speech". Kablooie Sep 2014 #54

Constitutional autocorrect, eh? riqster Sep 2014 #59

Yes, feedumb isn't free - eom dreamnightwind Sep 2014 #97

Recommended. (nt) NYC_SKP Sep 2014 #55

Thanks riqster Sep 2014 #67

K&R.... daleanime Sep 2014 #57

Seems like perfect English usage to me ... and an excellent way of putting it. MH1 Sep 2014 #65

The use of "free" for two different scales. Cost and liberty, conflated. riqster Sep 2014 #68

That's poetry for you (n/t) thesquanderer Sep 2014 #69

Indeed. I'm a wee bit of a pedant, in truth. riqster Sep 2014 #70

Simple and true Generic Brad Sep 2014 #75

money is property Man from Pickens Sep 2014 #79

If money is speech, why aren't bullets? moondust Sep 2014 #83

Then we need billion-round clips to get our message out! riqster Sep 2014 #101

I think it safe to say that Jefferson and Madison would hifiguy Sep 2014 #100

If money is speech, and speech is a right... Orsino Sep 2014 #102

Like I said in the OP, it could have been phrased better. riqster Sep 2014 #103

... napkinz Sep 2014 #104

... napkinz Sep 2014 #105

Sad, but true. riqster Sep 2014 #106