[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
Civil suits being different than criminal laws, and also being different than government imposed fines.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even private rights of action have Constitutional implications (not just government imposed fines.) Say Congress gives (or a judge creates through his/her common law powers) a private right of action that allows you to sue for hurtful (though true) speech. Are you suggesting that there aren't constitutional implications?

[ QUOTE ]
The simplest meaning (in this matter and most others) is generally the best.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, Mr Ocham, what is the simplest meaning of the phrase "Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech" and how would that simple meaning incorporate financial contributions into the meaning of "speech." How would the simple word "no" be defined so that laws against defamation and fraud, the fcc, and countless other examples could exist.

Sometimes, if you try to oversimplify you just sound like a simpleton.