Saturday, November 01, 2008

I just don't know what to reply to this

I studied the First Amendment. I've read several books about it; it was included on the Bar. All this is to say that I am familiar with the First Amendment, but nowhere near an expert. Those who have read my blog have a feel for my familiarity with the Amendment itself.

The point of that is to say that I have absolutely no idea where Sarah Palin was coming from when she said this:
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.

“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.”

(I came across this originally on Balloon Juice)

This is misrepresenting what she's done, and a not-so-subtle attack on the Press for calling her on her attacks. More pressing, however, is her apparent misunderstanding as to what the 1st Amendment is.

The Apple weighs in on this topic himself here: vgdrgfdgjyhygfbghjyjhfgjyjyjyfhgtghyjyktjhftgjfhtjhjuuuuyhytfggjughyjyhjuuuuuhgghhyujjuju


Nelson M. said...

I have heard others make similar, er, 'statements.' The Orwellian rantings of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh are responsible for this. A whole swath of this country now shares these upside down views. What they really believe in is freedom when it comes to them, but not for others. This mentality extends to a wide variety of other areas, like teaching creationism in public schools. These authoritarian impulses are incompatible with our democracy.

Jamie said...

Apple is smart for being able to pick up on what's going on inside the Palin mind.

In Palin's defense, maybe she didn't mean the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Or maybe she referred to a revised First Amendment that she plans to create as leader of the Senate.

nuje said...

I'm tired of seeing pics like this in the press.

Spread the wealth around.

photog said...

nelson m. is spot on. I reckon Palin would actually endorse the more invidious "content based" discrimination ... as long as it's the liberal media's speech and not her own.