PhotoDude.com

Fri. Oct 31, 2008

Has Palin Read The Constitution?

On one ticket, we have a professor of Constitutional law, and on the other ticket, we have someone who appears not to understand the document at all:

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.”

Palin Fears Media Threaten Her First Amendment Rights

Goodness, is the woman even familiar with the document? Here’s the First Amendment:

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.

It proclaims citizens shall be protected from their government abridging their freedom of speech.

It says nothing about anyone else.

In fact, when you exercise your right to free speech, as Palin has freely done throughout this campaign, it almost insures that others will exercise their rights to freedom of speech to counter your claims and criticisms.

If it’s too hot, get out of the kitchen. Don’t twist the Bill of Rights in an attempt to shut down the free speech of those who counter your criticisms.

We all have that right, Sarah. And some may use it to critique your every utterance, with the end effect being that folks become convinced you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Like now.