The court's anti-free speech decision.(The Right Perspetive)

"John McCain is a pinhead liberal senator who is trashing the U.S. Constitution." I can make that statement in a national magazine without fear of retribution from the government because of free speech protections in the First Amendment. I can even say: "Don't reelect John McCain or Russ Feingold," the principal sponsors of the 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law.

But if you try to oppose a candidate by spending more than $ 10,000 advertising your views, you can't--without reporting to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). The reason: FEC regulations apply to citizens who (perhaps by pooling their resources with other citizens) purchase "too much" advertising to try to reach their fellow citizens, but do not apply to writers or editors who can reach the public without advertising.

This anti-citizen, pro-media bias existed prior to McCain-Feingold, but now that the Supreme Court has upheld the new campaign-finance law in its McConnell vs. FEC decision, this media favoritism will make a giant leap forward.

Under McCain-Feingold, you can't even mention the name of a federal election candidate in any radio or television ad broadcast within 60 days of an election without reporting it to the FEC. Tom Brokaw, Dan Rather and Peter Jennings won't have to do this, even though their broadcasts have a heavy liberal bias and cost millions to produce. But you will have to.

Yet despite being one of the "elite" who can still write freely and widely outside of the FEC regulations, I am appalled by the Supreme Court's anti-free speech decision. If Congress may regulate all political speech except the press, then it logically follows that it may close the "press loophole" as well.

Justice Clarence Thomas, in his dissent, warned that the court decision could make freedom of the press "next on the chopping block. Although today's opinion does not expressly strip the press of First Amendment protection, there is no principle of law or logic that would prevent the application of the Court's reasoning in that setting. The press now operates at the whim of Congress."

In summary, people like me make occupy the last "loophole." And if politicians are good at anything, they are good at closing loopholes that may threaten their own reelection.