The attempt to squelch Ron Paul's supporters

Paul Levinson sent an open letter to ABC.com about the allegations that the site removed pro-Paul comments left on their site:

If this is true, the only justification ABC could have for doing that would be if they have proof positive that the comments were bogus — all or most originating from the same IP or same small group of IP addresses, for example.

Otherwise, ABC.com is guilty of an outrageous, heavy-handed administration of its comment section — so much so that, if the charges are true, ABC owes not only Ron Paul's supporters but the American people an explanation.

I hereby call upon ABC to explain exactly what happened with those comments — if they were indeed removed, why?

When that generated no response, he posted another one:

News media — whether tv networks or their message boards, or search engines like Yahoo which perform like news media, or smaller operations like Pajamas Media — have a responsibility to the American people. Unlike someone who sells shoes or pretzels, who can set store hours, open and close online message boards and blogs — pretty much do whatever they please under the law, as is their right — news media have a special, additional responsibility.

Especially in times of elections, news media must err on the side of being open to all candidates and their supporters. Yes, you must tolerate even an abusive e-mail, for the greater good of keeping your system open to all points of view.

That's why Jefferson and Madison in their wisdom insisted on protecting you under our First Amendment.

While I don't concur with Mr. Levinson's belief that the non-commercial media (like Pajamas Media) are in any way bound to the same criteria as the mainstream media, it's disturbing that PJM, of all groups, is indulging in the sort of strong-arm tactics they rightly condemn when done by the mainstream media.

It's my personal view that Ron Paul is one of the best presidential candidates fielded by either of the major parties over the last 40 years, and I would like to see him treated fairly (or at least as fairly as other declared candidates). He may not win — he's the definition of a long-shot candidate — but he does represent a wider swathe of opinion than other candidates who enjoy much better media access and friendlier coverage.