Senator John McCain and other politicians advocate violating your right to contribute as much as you want to the political candidates you support. They also advocate violating your right to speak as much as you want, either positively or negatively, about a candidate.
Do they support these repressive doctrines out of misguided idealism, or misguided pragmatic politics? Doubtless the answer depends on the individual. But McCain certainly acts as if today’s confusing welter of campaign finance regulation best serves as a very convenient club to beat an upstart challenger over the head and shoulders.
McCain faces a tough primary. His conservative challenger, J.D. Hayworth, a former congressman, is also a radio talk show host. Or at least he was until buddies of the senator began yelping to the Federal Election Commission. See, Hayworth attacked McCain on his show, which supposedly makes his show a form of “political advertising.” As a result of this pressure, Hayworth and the station agreed to take the show off the air.
Jason Rose, who works with Hayworth, calls what happened a “political mugging.” Sounds right to me.
McCain is on record endorsing what his friends did here. So . . . Hayworth can say anything he wants to — à la the First Amendment — unless it’s a criticism of McCain.
Funny how the framers failed to stipulate this when they were putting together the Constitution and that First Amendment.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.