|
October 12, 2004
Free speech is not a "campaign contribution!"
The effort to censor Sinclair seems to me to be a bigger -- and more significant -- assault on free speech than fines against Howard Stern for using dirty words. I wonder if the free-speech defenders will turn out for Sinclair like they did for Stern? So asks Glenn Reynolds about the airing of an anti-Kerry program called Stolen Valor. I defended Howard Stern repeatedly, and I defend Sinclair Broadcasting even more vehemently, because this involves an actual invocation of government censorship, whereas the Howard Stern flap was quasi-governmental in nature. This is the real, unadulterated thing: WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- The Kerry campaign filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission Friday asking that ads being broadcast by the 527 group "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" be taken off the air. The Democrats allege that the Bush campaign is behind the political spots that question the version of events for which John Kerry received his medals during the four months he served in Vietnam. Coordination between independent "soft money" groups and political campaigns is illegal.The DNC's legal position is that Stolen Valor is an illegal "campaign contribution": Meanwhile, the Democratic National Committee plans to file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that the documentary is an illegal contribution of airtime to President Bush's campaign, a committee spokeswoman told CNN/Money.Censorship occurs when the state uses its power to prevent speech or control the content thereof. I can't think of a more classic example than censoring opinions about a particular candidate's fitness or unfitness for office. As far as I'm concerned, when the Supreme Court upheld McCain-Feingold, they violated the Constitution they were sworn to uphold -- every bit as much as if a president or Congress had committed an unconstitutional act. Of course the Democrats don't want the program to air. But that's as irrelevant to constitutional considerations as is the question of whether or not the Stolen Valor program is a smear. The Democrats can (and probably should) try to get their own program on the air, and the Republicans would have no more right to stop it than the Democrats do theirs. Free speech ought to be a no-brainer. It's a shame there's no remedy when unconstitutional laws like McCain-Feingold are upheld. Imagine the uproar if Republicans argued that Howard Stern is an illegal "campaign contribution" and demanded he be taken off the air for that reason! If they can get away with this stuff, will blogs be next? UPDATE: I was not engaging in hyperbole when I asked whether blogs will be next. The FTC has now declared that they intend to regulate "political activity" on the Internet! A recent federal court ruling says the FEC must extend some of the nation's new campaign finance and spending limits to political activity on the Internet.Sorry, Ms. Weintraub, but the founders of this country drew a line long ago. It's called the First Amendment. Is this still a free country? posted by Eric on 10.12.04 at 11:58 PM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/1583 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Free speech is not a "campaign contribution!":
» Let The Voiceless Be Heard, And Let Them Speak Truth To Power. from Dean's World
Some of John Kerry's worst and most embarassing supporters are outraged that TV stations around the country will soon be playing a documentary by, and about, Viet Nam veterans. It's called Some of John Kerry's worst and most embarassing supporters are outraged that TV stations around the country will soon be playing a documentary by, and about, Viet Nam veterans. It's called [Read More] Tracked on October 15, 2004 04:04 AM
Comments
You want to talk about broadcast as campaign contributions, take a look at PBS's Frontline, which last night aired a fiercely partisan program in which John Kerry--the active, engaged, patriotic intellectual--was thrown into sharp contrast with George W. Bush--the goofy, charismatic slacker whom the party elite would tag as an easy puppet. Dennis · October 13, 2004 09:20 AM |
|
March 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
War For Profit
How trying to prevent genocide becomes genocide I Have Not Yet Begun To Fight Wind Boom Isaiah Washington, victim Hippie Shirts A cunning exercise in liberation linguistics? Sometimes unprincipled demagogues are better than principled activists PETA agrees -- with me! The high pitched squeal of small carbon footprints
Links
Site Credits
|
|
They may take our blogs, but they'll never take... our freedom!