Reply #34: Your response doesn't address

[skepticscott]

even half of the points I raised, but as for what you did respond to, why did you feel the need to put words in Feingold's mouth and attribute things to him that he may or may not have meant, just to make the point YOU wanted to? Either go by the words he actually used, without presumption, or use your own words and justify them, and leave Feingold out of it.

And please, please tell me how ruling that free speech cannot be restricted by Congress is "lawless".