Honestly, this is waaaaayyyy too confusing....explain how phony ballots are First Amendment Rights? But then again, is that the same pretzel logic that caused Doug to receive his love note? Is this First Amendment Rights for Dummies or something?

We couldn't make this stuff up even if we wanted to:

GOP alleges voter deception
Heated contest spills into Montgomery County court
By MARGARET GIBBONS , Times Herald Staff

COURTHOUSE — The Republicans’ hotly contested and increasingly acrimonious contest for the party’s nomination next Tuesday for the 17th District state Senate seat late Friday afternoon spilled into a Montgomery County courtroom.

Charging opponent Lisa Paolino and her campaign committee with attempting to deceive voters, candidate Lance Rogers and the Montgomery County Republican Committee (MCRC) won a temporary restraining order barring Paolino and her committee to immediately cease any further distribution of alleged fraudulent campaign materials until a full hearing can be held on Monday.

The court order, signed by county President Judge Richard J. Hodgson, also directs that all such identified campaign materials be immediately collected and turned over to either the MCRC or the court.

“It’s unfortunate that this candidate has stooped to this level to deceive the voters,” said MCRC Executive Director Athan Koutsiouroumbas.....Montgomery County Republicans in the 17th District on Friday began receiving the Paolino ballot in the mail. While the logo is different, the Paolino ballot is the same color and size of the county’s sample ballot and also contains the words “official,” Kerns pointed out to the judge.

The only difference is that Rogers’ name is left off the ballot and “not endorsed” appears in the slot where his name should be while Paolino’s name does appear on the ballot.....Radnor Township GOP Chairman Mimi Auchincloss, representing Paolino at the hearing, maintained her client had a constitutional right to free speech and to distribute campaign materials in behalf of her candidacy.

The logo on Paolino’s ballot is different and the Paolino ballot also carries a disclaimer stating the ballot was paid by Paolino’s campaign committee.

As for the word “official” on the ballot, “it is her official ballot,” argued Auchincloss.

Hodgson, after comparing both ballots, said, “Mrs. Paolino has a constitutional right to free speech but not a constitutional right to misrepresent her status (as an MCRC endorsed candidate) which is clear to me that she is doing.” ....Auchincloss tried to make the argument that Rogers was not the endorsed candidate by the entire district.

Wah, wah, wah....