Palin on the First Amendment

ABC news reports that:

Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said.

"If [the media] convince enough voters that that is negative campaigning, for me to call Barack Obama out on his associations," Palin told host Chris Plante, "then I don't know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media."

So does the same standard apply to ads that compare McCain to the incumbent president from his own party? Wouldn't labeling those as "negative" have a similar chilling effect?

Either way, this argument is ridiculous. Formulated in plain language it reads: "We should limit speech rights to protect speech rights."