From Kim du Toit:

Ryan Sager at RealClearPolitics reminds us of this un-Constitutional atrocity:

When Congress comes back into session, roughly 60 days before the November midterms, it will essentially be immune from criticism. That’s because Congress—acting, of course, only in the interest of “clean” politics—passed a ban on ads that mention federal candidates’ names in the window 60 days before the general election, as part of McCain-Feingold in 2002.

So, say the Senate takes up an immigration bill granting full amnesty to all illegal immigrants this fall—it will be almost impossible for grassroots groups to advertise against it, because they won’t be able to run ads during this period naming the people who are sponsoring or voting on the bills. Criticizing them by name during this window is against the law. You can’t ask voters to “call Congressman [So-and-So].”

Wanna bet?

…

And if Congress or for that matter law enforcement think that I’m going to refrain from criticizing an elected or wannabe-elected official, ever, they’re sadly mistaken.

Kim’s offering free ads on his blog during the 60 day “time out” that Congress has put on the 1st Amendment. I’m not going that far, but I will happily criticize any elected official (or candidate for elected office), regardless of McCain-Feingold or any other un-Constitutional “law” that Congress decides to pass.

There are a good number of people out there who are worried (and rightly so) that, in our zeal for security, we might be too anxious to give up our liberty a little bit at a time. I think we need to also pay attention to the possibility that while we’re keeping a suspicious eye on the Patriot Act and other security measures, we’re ignoring what the government’s other hand is doing. McCain-Feingold is a travesty, and if we allow this encroachment against our free speech to stand, we have betrayed the principles that this country was founded on.