Well, here's my take on it - if a political ad crosses the line into the slanderous or the libelous, why then it's a matter for the civil courts. Much short of that boundary is a clear violation of the FIRST Amendment, and prior restraint on political speech.
In this instance, an individual of means has chosen to spend some of his wealth on an advertisement bringing Obama's close association (some would say, his mentoring by) 1960's terrorist and radical William Ayers of the Weather Underground (aka, "The Weathermen", a group responsible for more than thirty bombings across the United States in the late 1960's and early 1970's) into play as a campaign issue.
Rather than respond to the advertisment, the Obama campaign has attempted to suppress the "bad-thought" via threats of litigation, regulatory harassment, and criminal prosecution. This does not bode well for Freedom of Speech under an Obama administration, at least for anyone not worshiping at the Temple of Obama.
Having been launched into the world, however, the advertisement cannot be called back and is already making its' way across blogspace and the 'net with folks *gasp* discussing it and the issues it brings to the table. The Obama Camp's argument thus far has summed as "it's ILLEGAL and MEAN to say that" - but has not addressed in any substantive way that I've seen as of yet questions regarding truth, and what hanging out with a terrorist says about a man.
The ad in question is embedded below for your own consideration (rather than basing your opinion on my blowhard-ism, that of the Obama camp, or that of the GOP camp - allowing you to view the original source).
McCain-Feingold is an abomination and a blemish upon the Constitution, a pustulent legal boil in vast need of the lancet of the Supreme Court.
Strangely enough, I just saw this on ABC a few minutes ago. I guess Obama's camp hasn't stopped it that effectively yet.
ReplyDelete