[slowhandluke]

Agreed. that's why this doesn't apply to Rush Limbaugh or CNN. It's only advertising being limited. If they try to apply it to the press including blogs or boards or pundits and say they can't speak - well then that would seriously wrong and unconstitutional. At least I hope the Supreme Court would feel that way.

Sorry, but that doesn't compute. If I am prevented from printing and distributing my opinion via a printing press & the US Mail (that which the founders would regard as 'the press'), why should the same opinion be allowed on a blog?

I don't see where the Constitution has any requirement that I have to own the press, and not merely rent it for a few days in an election year.

And why is commercial advertising considered protected speech, and political advertising not protected? To believe that requires a strange reading of history.

[gondramB]

Sorry, but that doesn't compute. If I am prevented from printing and distributing my opinion via a printing press & the US Mail (that which the founders would regard as 'the press'), why should the same opinion be allowed on a blog? I don't see where the Constitution has any requirement that I have to own the press, and not merely rent it for a few days in an election year. And why is commercial advertising considered protected speech, and political advertising not protected? To believe that requires a strange reading of history.

I don't think you are restricted from starting your own press - it does not say you have to own the press. That's basically what bloggers have done. Is commercial advertising protected speech? I am not aware of that - there certainly are a lot of government restrctions on commercial advertising.