WASHINGTON, D.C. — As speakers and writers, especially those with more liberal or moderate viewpoints, increasingly encounter speech chilling roadblocks in their efforts to distribute their opinions, the Federal Election Commission has given online pundits a reason to take at least a momentary deep breath.On Tuesday of this week, the FEC announced that, in spite of pressure from conservatives, it would not begin regulating political bloggers or subject them to campaign finance laws.

According to the Associated Press, right leaning politicos including blogger John C.A. Bambenek complained to the FEC about alleged perks being gained by Democratic candidates, thanks to bloggers discussing or promoting their races online. As Bambenek and his supporters, who apparently can’t generate the same kind of buzz for their favorites, see it, the sharing of personal opinions in an online blog format is equal to “a gift of free advertising and candidate media services.”

The FEC was unconvinced by the partisan attack, however, stating that the complaint, which specifically targeted DailyKos.com, claims that the site “advocates for the election of Democrats for federal office,” and that “the commission has repeatedly stated that an entity that would otherwise qualify for the media exemption does not lose its eligibility because it features news or commentary lacking objectivity or expressly advocates in its editorial the election or defeat of a federal candidate.”

Conservatives had hopes to see DailyKos regulated like a political committee, with restrictions on its finances, among other limitations. They had also hoped to see Rep. Mary Bono (R-CA) win against David Roth, her failed Democratic opponent in 2006. Roth was accused of working with a blogger to write in support of Bono’s defeat. Again, the FEC disappointed, explaining that Michael L. Grace had simply acted as a volunteer when he blogged on the issue, and that his efforts did not represent an “in-kind service” that would require financial disclosure.