Dean's World

Chill Out? I Don't Think So

Dean

FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub says FEC doesn't intend to regulate blogger speech, although she's clearly talking out of both sides of her mouth--because it appears that if I raise money for a candidate, or give a candidate free advertising, she may want to regulate me anyway.

Meanwhile, Russ Feingold, one of the evil bastards who designed these new ~~first amendment assault~~campaign finance "reform" laws, claims that there is no evidence that the FEC intends to regulate blogs.

"No evidence," Senator? "Intends," Senator? Yeah and I have no evidence that you and Ellen Weintraub aren't lying, first amendment trashing, power-hungry weasels.

That goes for John McCain and George Bush and every member of the House or Senate who voted for these obscene "reform" laws, by the way. And anyone who claims that these laws are "imperfect" when what they are, in fact, is obscene.

(If the cartoon looks cut off, click on it to see the full image.)

(C-Net link via Punditguy.)

Posted by Dean | Permalink | Technorati Trackbacks

(link)

Drew Vogel (mail) (www):

Feingold "evil"? Isn't that a little over the top, Dean?

3.9.2005 9:40am

(link)

Drew Vogel (mail) (www):

And I still think that this issue is bogus, and the links you provided bolster that view. This whole thing was started by a Republican FEC member who was trying to whip up an outcry against BCRA (aka McCain-Feingold) by making these vague and unsupported assertions that they'd be coming for blogs.

Now, this fits in with your own anti-BCRA agenda quite nicely, Dean, so feel free to continue flogging it if you wish, but you're being set up as a patsy on this one. The story was never credible to start with, and if there's anyone talking out of both sides of their mouth, it was the guy who started this whole bogus controversy to begin with by making unsupported statements that somehow, BCRA would be used against blogs. Seriously, chill out.

3.9.2005 10:26am

(link)

Fred (mail) (www):

It's fairly clear that the FEC won't "regulate speech." But that hasn't really ever been the claim. The judge who threw out the FEC's regulations exempting the internet from the Act's coordinated political advertising provisions left it to the FEC to determine what "political advertising" on the internet means. The FEC will have a NOPR for regulations dealing with the issue. It is perfectly legitimate to ask whether a link to official campaign literature is advertising subject to regulation or whether advertising placed on a blog by the blog author is advertising.

3.9.2005 2:30pm

(link)

John Anderson (mail):

This FEC may not intend to come down on blogs, but they must by law look at the possibilties. Which are scary - the whole of Rathergate happened well within 60 days of the election: could CBS have "muzzled" blogs by saying they were providing valuable services to a candidate and should not link to CBS or any other site with information about the problem? Or could MoveOn be shut off for taking money from Mr. Soros?

We need hard rules and exceptions, if not a re-write (or repeal) of the law.

3.9.2005 3:13pm

(link)

Steven Malcolm Anderson (www):

I rotally agree with Dean. This is a corrupt, obscene assault on our inalienable God-given right to free speech and free press protected by the First Amendment. I'm against it. I admired Senator McCain before, primarily for his heroic conduct as a P.O.W. in Viet Nam, and I voted for him in 2000, but this respect is greatly reduced because of this, and I will not vote for him again. That's too bad, but that's the way it has to be. I also condemn the judicial passivism of the Supreme Court in upholding such a blatantly un-Constitutional piece of legislation.

Good for you, Dean. Thank you. As for the fashionable youth punk cliche, "chill out", I reply only:

"The only man never to be redeemed is the man without passion."
-Francisco D'Anconia
-Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

I admire Dean
For marrying the Queen.

I admire the Queen
For marrying Dean.

3.9.2005 3:14pm

(link)

Dean Esmay (www):

These laws are and always have been the most greivous assault on the first amendment of my lifetime. They are pernicious and anti-American, and the evil control freak bastards like John McCain and Russ Feingold deserve all the kicking around they get and more.

3.9.2005 11:20pm

(link)

Scott Harris (mail) (www):

From Daniel Webster:

"Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority. It is hardly too strong to say that the Constitution was made to guard the people against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."

So, are McCain and Feingold evil. Youbetcha! Good intentions don't matter. They need to get their grubby hands off of our right to speak and be heard!

3.10.2005 12:38am