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
Woohoo! Let's hope this gets traction! meeshrox Feb 2013 #1
k&r nt steve2470 Feb 2013 #2
For the skeptics among you.....at least give it a chance! LongTomH Feb 2013 #3
Okay, I'm sure the Republican controlled House will give it due consideration and an open vote... brooklynite Feb 2013 #11
if they reject it, then it's something to blame them for Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #13
Their approval rating is 18%; how have responded to criticism so far? brooklynite Feb 2013 #14
Still no reason not to try Lydia Leftcoast Feb 2013 #21
Thank you for reminding us of all of this. SheilaT Feb 2013 #23
Think critical mass! vlyons Feb 2013 #74
Exactly. Those who feel something is impossible... OneGrassRoot Feb 2013 #88
Those who think something should be done should understand the consequences of what they are seeking onenote Feb 2013 #98
Mine was a general comment... OneGrassRoot Feb 2013 #99
Best to not only get the ball rolling, but get the votes on record for 2014 graham4anything Feb 2013 #76
Rhetorically we can sell this to conservatives as limiting unions Recursion Feb 2013 #4
They would have to be dumb as shit to fall for that radiclib Feb 2013 #26
Yep, a non-issue. harun Feb 2013 #89
So NY Times wouldn't have 1st amendment rights? Cicada Feb 2013 #5
Maybe I'm wrong, Glamrock Feb 2013 #7
Exactly...why do so many people on this site skepticscott Feb 2013 #12
There's no reason an amendment can't explicitly protect certain things. NYC Liberal Feb 2013 #19
Except that's not the amendment to be introduced skepticscott Feb 2013 #24
The language of the proposed 28th Amendment specifically says: LongTomH Feb 2013 #49
I see nothing about Fourth Amendment, Fifth Amendment.... Jim Lane Feb 2013 #67
RE: Raise a read flag... reACTIONary Feb 2013 #94
Not if all the individuals making up the corporation . . . caseymoz Feb 2013 #29
"Hillary: The Movie" was directed by Alan Peterson, and written by him eallen Feb 2013 #32
If they were working as employees caseymoz Feb 2013 #41
Except that this Amendment is being proposed by people skepticscott Feb 2013 #36
The problem, then, is that the Constitution should be scrapped. caseymoz Feb 2013 #48
Freedom of the press theKed Feb 2013 #66
ALL of the proposed texts I've seen have explicitly protected freedom of the press NYC Liberal Feb 2013 #17
Then they would have zero impact on the result of the outcome of Citizens United eallen Feb 2013 #25
+1 skepticscott Feb 2013 #31
I disagree. truebluegreen Feb 2013 #51
Are you willing to sacrifice the NAACP? onenote Feb 2013 #79
No, I am not willing truebluegreen Feb 2013 #80
We fix it the same way that we fix so many of our problems. Blanks Feb 2013 #93
It'll mean whatever they want it to, and it will only apply to meanies we don't like. X_Digger Feb 2013 #53
The NRA's right to advocate for PRD's will not be infringed, so I don't see your opposition? apocalypsehow Feb 2013 #56
Opposition to this particular wording? Strong. Opposition to overturning CU? None. X_Digger Feb 2013 #57
Glad we can at least both agree that Citizen's United needs to go. What would you suggest apocalypsehow Feb 2013 #58
Here's a suggestion, one that seems obvious to me. Jim Lane Feb 2013 #70
Rather than an amendment, do it via campaign reform legislation. X_Digger Feb 2013 #73
Sheesh, who writes these things? skepticscott Feb 2013 #30
Don't get me wrong, I agree that most of these proposed amendments NYC Liberal Feb 2013 #84
That would be a heckuva stretch truebluegreen Feb 2013 #44
That should still be considered "freedom of the press" and not person vs corporation. The Wielding Truth Feb 2013 #69
No, the 1st Amendment clearly states "the press". Newspapers are the press. tonybgood Feb 2013 #83
I do not see where the proposed amendment says the 1'st is revoked. Why all the concern Vincardog Feb 2013 #85
Hope this works!! one_voice Feb 2013 #6
the supreme court gave the unions the same rights as business madrchsod Feb 2013 #8
K & R AzDar Feb 2013 #9
good oldandhappy Feb 2013 #10
So Democratic Underground, LLC would have no right to prevent the government from searching RB TexLa Feb 2013 #15
Yay! corporations will continue to have rights as people!!! neverforget Feb 2013 #18
Good points but the problem will still remain of unlimited funds pouring in by corporations cstanleytech Feb 2013 #22
Why do we need a Constitutional amendment for that? eallen Feb 2013 #33
Because unless its an amendment a future court could rule it unconstitutional cstanleytech Feb 2013 #35
Because it's the only way to reverse Citizens United truebluegreen Feb 2013 #45
The court, in Citizens United, encouraged Congress to require more transparency in funding. eallen Feb 2013 #72
Like I said though the problem is 10 years down the road say congress could cstanleytech Feb 2013 #77
Ha... they do that now.... defacto7 Feb 2013 #27
DU is an LLC... Terra Alta Feb 2013 #16
You have my attention. What do you see as the "answer"???? nm rhett o rick Feb 2013 #37
not this. it's too broad. Terra Alta Feb 2013 #39
Corporations exist at the pleasure of us humans. We allow corporations to exist rhett o rick Feb 2013 #40
Corporations didn't have constitutional rights truebluegreen Feb 2013 #50
The answer theKed Feb 2013 #68
A fair question. My answer is in #70. Jim Lane Feb 2013 #71
K & R !!! WillyT Feb 2013 #20
I am for the idea.. defacto7 Feb 2013 #28
I'm not sure I agree with that wording bluestateguy Feb 2013 #34
So, we'll limit first amendment rights, but not second amendment rights OmahaBlueDog Feb 2013 #38
I hope this gets going! Apophis Feb 2013 #42
One can dream... n/t AAO Feb 2013 #43
If people inundate their representatives MAYBE it has a arthritisR_US Feb 2013 #59
This reminded me of what the TyT Lobo27 Feb 2013 #46
My rep! AllyCat Feb 2013 #47
For the critics of the proposed amendment, look at the language again: LongTomH Feb 2013 #52
Your statement contradicts the text you quoted (unintentional, I'm sure).. X_Digger Feb 2013 #55
An Excellent And Necessary Amendment, Sir The Magistrate Feb 2013 #54
The amendment is badly worded. It will get nowhere. davidn3600 Feb 2013 #60
Proud to say that Rick Nolan is my Congressman mac56 Feb 2013 #61
This would be incredibly helpful, a huge step towards healing & restoring our democracy. nt 99th_Monkey Feb 2013 #62
K&R! And massive SHAME upon everyone in government not working to overturn it! n/t Fire Walk With Me Feb 2013 #63
I'll click to this! KansDem Feb 2013 #64
This'll get shut down faster than the Pope. I have no hope as long valerief Feb 2013 #65
I SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Agree! EOM Plucketeer Feb 2013 #95
"DFL" = "Democratic-Farmer-Labor" Party KansDem Feb 2013 #75
K&R Auggie Feb 2013 #78
How did we get here in the first place? immoderate Feb 2013 #81
There's a long backstory of how corporations came to be regarded as persons under the law....... LongTomH Feb 2013 #82
Thanks for that reference. immoderate Feb 2013 #86
Overblown conspiracy crap onenote Feb 2013 #97
electronic voting helped valerief Feb 2013 #96
Did anyone see the Press Conference???? ReRe Feb 2013 #87
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Feb 2013 #90
This is great. I participated in a mock trial HomeboyHombre Feb 2013 #91
i don't think this can work without public financing of campaigns arely staircase Feb 2013 #92
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Move to Amend proposed 28...»Reply #89