Is Political Speech Protected?

The North Dakota Attorney General is looking in allegations that Gen. Welsey Clark's campaign may have violated the state's do-not-call list by conducting an automated phone poll of 50,000 registered Democrats without first having a live operator ask for permission.

Now I am certainly no friend of telemarketers, and I certainly do not think that they should be allowed to use such tactics, but this is different. This was done in the furtherance of a political campaign - a Presidential campaign no less.

Political speech is on a much different level than telemarketing. It may be just as offensive, but it is part of the national discourse - something that telemarketing is not.

Yes Clark was simply conducting a poll, but it was designed so that he would know how to better focus his message in North Dakota (must be easier than staying consistent in his beliefs). As such, it should be unconditionally protected - even to the point of seemingly violating laws that would slam telemarketers with huge fines.

In this case I have to side with the General. The calls shoud be legal. He might, however, want to get his people a little more on the ball. "I'm sure it's been checked out," just isn't good enough. A political campaign should know beyond any doubt. Shouldn't the man who wants to be President at least make sure that he follows the law in getting elected?