While we’re on the topic of the destruction of 1st Amendment rights as championed by statist do-gooders like John McCain, let’s not forget George Bush is the President who invited this evolving draconianism in the first place.

Did he think, as I suspect he did about the steel tariffs he also didn’t veto, that after awhile someone else would fix it?

He did get help from the WTO on steel, and he did hint he thought McCain/Feingold would likely be declared unconstitutional.

If he believed that, he badly miscalculated. If it was expected that the Supreme Court would actually do its duty in the case of free speech, Karl Rove’s head needs an examination.

SCOTUS was too preoccupied with “International Guidance” on how the US Constitution should be modified by judicial fiat; witness the majority’s exculpatory invocation of European law in their opinion on the “death penalty for minors” decision.

Justices Scalia and Breyer recently debated the question of whether SCOTUS should interpret the Constitution via laws in other countries. It is instructive, but it’s another story.

What Bush does about McCain/Feingold will say as much about his attitude toward freedom as anything else he’s done. If he’s wavering, he needs another read of Sharansky’s The Case for Democracy re: tapping on walls and talking through toilets while imprisoned in the Gulag.

I’m not saying he doesn’t get the “defense” piece. I’m asking if he’s really, really clear why that matters.

An interesting part is that this represents the clearest civil rights violation he has been involved with, but on the left – outside of the leftwing blogosphere – you don’t hear much about it.

I guess, unless it is seen by the MSM to significantly damage Bush, we will not much hear about it. They’ll stick to calling Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a torturer.

This is up to Republicans. Whether Republicans are up to it, remains to be seen.

The Democrats will be useless. They are going to have a hard time; a) bucking their fellow partisans on the FEC, b) criticizing their pet-Republican, John McCain, or c) recognizing the fact that calling for the blogosphere to be regulated threatens both MoveOn and the NYT.

Barbara Boxer and Carl Levin won’t realize this until after it appears in the Washington Post.

Let’s grant that McCain had his collectivist sympathies turned on by the idea that he could “make a difference” regarding the “evil” money from corporations, Unions, non-profits and PACs.

Let’s say we have to ignore McCain’s enabling of individuals like George Soros, acknowledging it merely as a failure in McCain’s imagination. His intent was still good. ;{

The point is, we could have expected this from McCain. So, what’s Bush’s excuse? You should ask him. Send him a letter or an email.

It’s also time to write your editor, your Senator, your Congressman and proselytize your friends and neighbors.

The following were included as an update to my 3-March post, but they’re good enough to justify a few additional electrons. Tip of the hat to Powerline for this great defense of Bradley Smith by Winfield Myers at: Democracy Project and this update.

See also, Chris Muir’s – marvelous cartoon.