Today the Washington Post, in its lead editorial, praises the Supreme Court's Vermont ruling on campaign finance because appears to preserve "the court's long-standing doctrine that appropriately crafted contribution limits can survive constitutional scrutiny."
In the next editorial, it praises Senator Mitch McConnell for voting against the flag-burning amendment. It approvingly cites McConnell's website which states, "No act of speech is so obnoxious that it merits tampering with our First Amendment. Our Constitution, and our country, is strong than that."
Umm…is the WaPo familiar with McConnell's position on campaign finance regulation?