Michael Pollak wrote:
>
>
> What the hell does that mean? It's protected but it's important not to
> protect it?
>
(1) If free speech is enjoyed by individuals it should be enjoyed by
unions and corporations.
(A silly position but not incoherent)
2) (Many Americans have never considered it all that important). Free speech (of both individuals and corporations should be limited by the need to control campaign donations.
Sort of confused and wrong-headed, but it is a coherent postion.
Carrol