Bunker Mulligan "Let us endeavor so to live that when we come to die even the undertaker will be sorry." ~Mark Twain

I once admired John McCain as the maverick he often plays on TV. I then read his autobiography, and it was unsettling. I can’t quite say what really bothered me about it. Some things just seemed disjointed, and not in a literary or grammatical sense.

The Keating Five scandal was far greater than anything done by Enron executives, but McCain walked away almost unscathed. He operates in Arizona in the same way Robert Byrd does in West Virginia–untouchable due to his Vietnam record and his wife’s family’s influence.

His conflict with Bradley Smith goes back a long way. I wonder if there isn’t something McCain is worried about coming to light, and Smith has the flashlight.

And I’m for just about anyone who is against John McCain. I agree with Winfield Myers:

From my perspective, these amount to many reasons to like Bradley Smith, to believe he’s a man of integrity and courage, and to take heed to what he says. There is a segment of the Establishment that is annoyed by the need to hear criticism of their ideas and policy positions. In the past, they could count on the MSM to beat the drum for their causes and, in most cases, simply ignore their critics. That was certainly true in history of campaign finance “reform,” which was and remains a mandatory article of faith to John McCain and virtually the entire political left.

This issue has pretty much pissed me off. Perhaps I’m overreacting. But I’ve followed Ed’s lead, and sent the following to my Congressman and Senators:

The time has come for our politicians (I hesitate to say “representatives” in situations such as this) to strike down what has become the most relentless attack on the First Amendment to Our Constitution.

I operate my own web site, a blog entitled Bunker Mulligan. The URL for this site is www.bunkermulligan.net and I have written there for more than 18 months. I write about a variety of things, including politics. And I have approximately 600 visitors each day interested in what I have to say. I endorsed Dubya, but also took him to task on several issues. I still do. I also receive emails from various advocacy groups, and sometimes post text from those emails. I also link to political candidates’ sites, including those I don’t support. All of these things are my right as an American citizen. And especially as a Texan.

The latest ruling from a Federal judge on the extent of the McCain-Feingold Act has left those of us who comment on matters political in a dark place. My freedom of speech is being taken away from me. I cannot write about politicians and advocate their election or defeat without placing myself in jeopardy of rulings by an unelected bureaucrat at the FEC. Therefore, I expect my elected Senators and Congressman to make sure nobody in the Federal government attempts to restrict my freedoms–those guaranteed by the First Amendment. Apparently, the only way to do this is by rescinding that law. By FEC ruling, it has become unconstitutional.

We in the blogosphere will be watching this issue closely. Personally, I am willing to take this as far as I need to. And be sure that bloggers–some four million of us–will support that action.

As we watch the events in the Middle East, we often react with joy and support for those who are getting their first taste of the rights we are supposed to enjoy in this country. As they move forward toward more open societies and governments, will my Senators and Congressman stand by as those very rights are being stripped from me?

At least my Congressman now has email–a step in the right direction.

Whether you are Daily Kos (liberal), Glenn Reynolds (libertarian), PowerLine (conservative), or little old Bunker Mulligan (call me what you will), this should concern you.

There have been constant attacks on Americans in general and media in particular by the Federal Government almost from day one of this nation. Politicians do not like unfettered opinion. The Federal bureaucracy likes it even less. And every one of us in the blogosphere is in danger of the Federal Government acting in violation of its own mandate. It has done so many times in the past, and will continue to do so as long as it feels it can.

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.

In the last few years, the UN and other internationalists have attempted to take control of the internet. Now, our own Federal Election Commission wants to do the same. None of these people want folks like us to voice our opinions. Neither do those in traditional media, and right now that group are probably huddling to see how they can press this issue to limit blogs while leaving themselves free of those limitations. The first attempt is to lay claim to the “free press” phrase of the Amendment and ignore the “free speech” portion.

Consider for a moment the influence of the blogosphere. The three blogs I mentioned at the outset receive more than a million hits each day–each. There are very few newspapers in this country that have that kind of circulation. And there are even fewer television news organizations with that kind of viewership. Those three sites and the longer tail of our smaller ones have had a significant impact on the national discourse in the last few years. Trent Lott felt it. John Kerry felt it. Dan Rather felt it. None liked it. John McCain lives in fear that some of his skeletons will be dragged out of the closet when he decides to run in 2008. So do many others.

The folks at the FEC have no fear of that. They simply want control–as do all bureaucrats. It matters not whether they are Democrats or Republicans. Control. Cloakroom deals. Standard fare.

When bloggers write about any politician or governmental act, they are offering up their opinion and trying to make sense of what it all means. Some try to influence things, others simply blow off steam. Still more want to point out something that has been left out by MSM. Such was the case with the three instances I mentioned above. We in the blogosphere do not replace traditional media; We augment it by providing background information and delivering a story MSM didn’t feel it had time to or didn’t want. Some in government and media don’t like that. We have no “journalistic credentials”.

The FEC is currently looking at coordinated activity on the internet between campaigns and blogs or forums. That sounds innocent enough, but who can say where it will lead? What do they mean by coordination? Can I retain a link on my site to the campaign web site for a candidate? If I receive emails from Kinky Friedman’s campaign and post that information on my site, have I violated the FEC regulations? If so, who gave them the authority to overrule my Constitutional rights?

This bears watching. Politicians and bureaucrats, whether American or international, see the internet as a threat to their personal survival. One place you can check on a regular basis is The First Amendment Center

I will.

****UPDATE****

Ed Morrissey has already tried to contact both senators on this issue, but his emails bounced back. Let’s all join Ed and notify your own senators.

We need to consider the 5-4 decision by the US Supreme court in slightly different tones than does Deacon. His concern in this post is about numbers and words. I look at it in what some would say are simpler terms.

Our nation was formed, and our Constitution written, in direct opposition to the way things were done in Europe. Now it appears we have Supreme Court justices who want to impose the will of European elites on the American people.

Does that make any sense at all?

Wimps.

A frustrated Arizona lawmaker says he will push a proposal next year to give American workers the right to sue companies that fire them while keeping illegal immigrants on the payroll. Violators would have their state business licenses suspended.

Legislators don’t have the guts to do what needs to be done. So, they decide to write laws that allow the citizenry to clog up the court system with suits to do what law enforcement should be allowed to do in the first place.

Trial lawyers will be pleased. As will immigration lawyers.