Bad Donk, No Reelection

I’m looking at the vote totals for a motion to suspend the rules and pass the Online Freedom of Speech Act. For the slow among you, this is a bill designed to exempt internet sites from campaign finance regulations the FEC decided applied to internet sites, like, um, blogs. If you’re reading this, both of us have a vested interest in seeing this bill pass.

What I find funny is the party breakdown on the issue. 179 efenants voted for, 143 donks voted against. Now, neither party is my favorite group. I think both have systemic problems and neither represents my interests very well. However, how do you claim to be the "progressive" party and the party of the "common man" when your members vote against laws that are designed to restore the freedoms they should have under the Constitution? Given that John McCain and Russ Feingold should be horse-whipped out of DC for the abomination that is campaign finance "reform", how do you justify not exempting as many people as possible from the pernicious effects of that crap? It really is the incumbency protection act, and I guess the donks figure they’ve got more to lose.

Of course, I’m also glad to see my representative voted for it. Anything to overturn or weaken what someone (I forget who) referred to as the 21st Century Sedition Acts is a good vote in my world.

Update: Matt Welch has a better headline.