Via Instapundit, Ryan Sager writes about what happens when “campaign finance laws” (including state law versions of the McCain-Feingold Anti-Sedition Act) are used to literally shut down the exercise of First Amendment rights in free political speech — typically when the speaker is on the right.
Sager has been on this story for a while. Where are all those self-described civil libertarians who are obsessed with every kind of acid test for the upcoming Supreme Court nominees except whether the new Justice is at least an even bet to restore the First Amendment? Indeed, where are the self-described First Amendment defenders? From the looks of it, their concerns are everything on God’s green earth — Ward Churchill, “academic freedom,” the right to public obscenity, “global resistance to the war in Iraq,” the Patriot Act — everything but what is really happening to the actual First Amendment.
Enjoy this blog while you can.
Originally posted 2013-04-12 12:20:03. Republished by Blog Post Promoter
Look at what Sager says…
“It would see that when we start to blur the line between campaign coverage and campaign contributions, we risk preventing the press from doing its job.”
But he also says “Two talk-radio hosts, Kirby Wilbur and John Carlson of Seattle’s KVI-AM (a Fox News affiliate), embraced the signature-gathering drive to put I-912 on the ballot.”
Is “campaign coverage” the same as “embracing the signature-gathering?”
If Fox News “embraced” GW Bush and ignored his opponent, that would be a far, far cry from news.
You should go to Australia or Italy. 90% of the media in both countries is tied to either Murdoch, in the former, or neo-fascii allied Berlusconi, in the latter.
Do you support Buckley, or do you prefer it when Scoop Jackson gets $200,000 from Ameranda Hess and then, from his position on the Interior Committee, gets investigation into Hess dropped?
Nixon got his $200,000, too.
God bless Bribery, and God Bless Executive Pay Packages.
Josh, I have no idea what you’re talking about.