Dumber Than a Box of Alaskan Rocks

(Cross-posted at Telling Stories.)

This is what "Talkie Sarah" Palin said today:

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."

Emphasis added.  Lets look at the actual text of 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.

First point:  The First Amendment prevents Congress from abridging freedom of speech or freedom of the press.  Therefore, the First Amendment protects the people's right to speak their mind without unwarranted government intervention, e.g., don't yell "fire" in a crowded theater.  The legal standard any governmental measure must meet if it seeks to curtail speech is pretty high.  Not impossible, but pretty close to it.

Second point: The "freedom of press" clause is pretty much indistiguishable from an individual's freedom of speech.  As noted here,

Despite popular misunderstanding the right to freedom of the press guaranteed by the first amendment is not very different from the right to freedom of speech. It allows an individual to express themselves through publication and dissemination. It is part of the constitutional protection of freedom of expression. It does not afford members of the media any special rights or privileges not afforded to citizens in general.

In other words, if I have the right to call out Palin because I believe she's engaging in negative campaigning, so can the press.  The fact that they have a bigger megaphone than I do only makes them louder.

Like I've always said: freedom of speech does not equal freedom from criticism.  And it's particularly scary that someone who would be so close to being president is not aware of that.