avatar
Paul "9mm Sandwich" Tiseo @paulxtiseo.bsky.social

I read it and told you my interpretation which is the majority. Your opinion is the minority one. But, ok, block me if that truth bruises you.

jan 17, 2025, 4:33 am • 0 0

Replies

avatar
Eric Owens @ericowens.bsky.social

You did not read Citizens United. You read blurbs about Citizens United. You're dumb. Stop. Citizens United says people can spend their own money to distribute speech about politics. You disagree with this obviously good position.

jan 17, 2025, 4:37 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
Paul "9mm Sandwich" Tiseo @paulxtiseo.bsky.social

From the case itself

image
jan 17, 2025, 4:39 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
Eric Owens @ericowens.bsky.social

Corporations are owned by people, and the people who are owners have the right to use their corporate resources to disseminate their speech.

jan 17, 2025, 4:50 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
Paul "9mm Sandwich" Tiseo @paulxtiseo.bsky.social

So, let them use their shares of their profits and dividends to speak as individual people. Do not allow the company to speak as an expendable line item.

jan 17, 2025, 1:47 pm • 0 0 • view
avatar
Paul "9mm Sandwich" Tiseo @paulxtiseo.bsky.social

Did *you* read the case... for, you know, actual comprehension?

jan 17, 2025, 4:40 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
Paul "9mm Sandwich" Tiseo @paulxtiseo.bsky.social

I'll leave you unblocked because I'm not closed-minded and would love to hear your unpopular interpretation.

jan 17, 2025, 4:34 am • 0 0 • view