Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.This is the sort of idiocy you normally only hear from progressives. The First Amendment, which Gov. Palin clearly doesn't understand, says this:
"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.Nowhere does it say that the Constitution protects people from having their political views criticized, or having their "dissent stifled". If you say something stupid, expect to be called on it. It does, however, say that Congress can't abridge freedom of the press. While extremists on both sides of the political circle like to claim that the media is biased against them, the fact remains that each side has enough media sympathetic to their cause to get their ideas out to the American public. If one wants to avoid "attacks" by the mainstream media, one could choose to use actual facts in their statements; they'll still be attacked (that pesky First Amendment in action again!) but they won't sound like a blithering idiot when they're defending themselves.
As I've mentioned before, progressives have made lots of dumb attacks on Gov. Palin that turned me off from supporting their candidate, but this is something ridiculous that's said by the candidate herself. While I still don't plan on casting my vote for President based on who the Vice Presidential candidate is, I'm seriously looking to see if Sen. McCain provides an explanation for this inexplicable statement from his running mate. [Incongruity intentionally included] The John McCain I've supported since 2000 would address the issue head-on. I'll look forward to seeing what the McCain of 2008 will say.
This being said, I recognize that an Obama Administration would have a lot more people that have similar views of the First Amendment that Gov. Palin seems to have expressed, so that's a strike against them. It's just that none of them would be quite so high in the chain of command.
