Political speech: Less protected than porn

That's the view of Glenn Reynolds:

Some years ago, people became worried that secret payments of money might distort the political process on behalf of shadowy, unacknowledged interests. The result was campaign finance "reform," which was supposed to ensure fairness and transparency.

Instead, it has caused confusion -- and an environment in which pornography actually enjoys more First Amendment protection than political speech. I've got nothing against porn, but that seems just wrong, somehow.

Meanwhile, Ryan Sager answers detractors of his story in the Post.

My argument relates to the hypocrisy of a movement for “open government” doing the best it can within the law to remain opaque. And my argument is about a docile press that doesn’t give a damn about anyone else’s free-speech rights so long as it enjoys a “media exemption.”