There's a couple of good reads on free speech -- or lack thereof -- online. The first comes from George Will and who notices the so-called heckler's veto at work in Oakland.

Some African American Christian women working for Oakland's government organized the Good News Employee Association (GNEA), which they announced with a flier describing their group as "a forum for people of Faith to express their views on the contemporary issues of the day. With respect for the Natural Family, Marriage and Family Values."

The flier was distributed after other employees' groups, including those advocating gay rights, had advertised their political views and activities on the city's e-mail system and bulletin board. When the GNEA asked for equal opportunity to communicate by that system and that board, it was denied. Furthermore, the flier they posted was taken down and destroyed by city officials, who declared it "homophobic" and disruptive.

The city government said the flier was "determined" to promote harassment based on sexual orientation. The city warned that the flier and communications like it could result in disciplinary action "up to and including termination."

Effectively, the city has proscribed any speech that even one person might say questioned the gay rights agenda and therefore created what that person felt was a "hostile" environment.

I'm impressed at the awesome power of government to create a welcoming work environment for everyone ... except African American Christian women.

On a related subject, former FEC Commissioner Bradley Smith outlines the ridiculousness that is federal campaign finance laws. [Link for Wall Street Journal subscribers only.]

In February 2006, Norm Feck learned that the city of Parker, Colo., was considering annexing his unincorporated neighborhood, Parker North. Realizing that it would mean more bureaucracy, Mr. Feck and five other locals wrote letters to the editor, handed out information sheets, formed an Internet discussion group, and printed up anti-annexation yard signs that sprouted throughout the neighborhood.

Annexation supporters responded with a legal complaint against Mr. Feck and his friends for violating Colorado's campaign-finance laws. The suit also threatened anyone who had contacted Mr. Feck's group about the annexation, or put up one of their yard signs, with "investigation, scrutinization, and sanctions for Campaign Finance violations." Apparently the anti-annexation activists hadn't registered with the state, or filled out the required paperwork disclosing their expenditures on time. In February of this year voters defeated the annexation proposal -- but Mr. Feck and others still face steep fines. The case remains in litigation.

There's case after case of people who are moved to get involved in politics, yet unwittingly run afoul of often draconian campaign-finance laws.

It just goes to show you how flimsy that First Amendment thing is.