Jonah Goldberg’s excellent column about campaign finance “reform” and “virtual” child pornography (yes, the subjects are related) got me thinking. The campaign finance law prevents most people or groups from running ads which identify a candidate during the 60 days before an election. The recent Supreme Court decision on “virtual” child pornography says that the government cannot ban sexual images involving computer-generated images of minors.
So, here’s my question to the New York Times (and all others who support both CFR and the Supreme Court decision): Would an advertisement less than 60 days before an election showing a clearly identified candidate having sex with a computer-generated minor be permissible?
(Note: This entry is from my second attempt at a blog, called Spundit.com, and has been transferred here for historical purposes.)