Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FEC Eyes 'Shadow' Democratic Party
THE WASHINGTON POST ^ | February 1, 2004

Posted on 02/01/2004 4:16:04 AM PST by sopwith

Edited on 02/01/2004 5:25:18 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Major liberal donors are demonstrating their willingness to fund a new shadow Democratic Party, according to reports filed Friday by a network of nominally independent organizations committed to defeating President George W. Bush in November. Meanwhile, a drive to bar their activities has gained strength. On Thursday, the legal staff of the Federal Election Commission proposed regulations that could stifle the groups' plans, with backing from Republican Party leaders and campaign watchdog groups.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; 527groups; americavotes; campaignfinance; campaignfraud; cfr; democrats; dems; fec; irs; liberals; lyingliars; mcainfeingold; rattricks; shellgame; taxfraud

1 posted on 02/01/2004 4:16:05 AM PST by sopwith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sopwith
We are going to hear a lot more about "America Votes".

Click here to see the slime that supports this "Non-partisan", "not-for-profit", "bring Americans to third world status" organization.





In thirty years will all debates be decided by who is wearing the biggest suicide bomb vest, or shall we kill them off now?

2 posted on 02/01/2004 4:32:53 AM PST by G.Mason ("The secret to success is knowing who to blame for your failures" - Old Democrat saying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
The campaign finance reform was and is a joke, There isnt enough putty in the world to close off every loophole. Money will find a way to buy into politics and the Dems claim to be for the poor man are crap, they are into it for the money like everyone else.
3 posted on 02/01/2004 4:39:54 AM PST by sgtbono2002 (I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; GailA; DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Soros,etc,in trouble with the FEC?
4 posted on 02/01/2004 4:59:22 AM PST by MEG33 (God bless our armed forces)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
This article explains why Bush signed McCain-Feingold. He traded the heart of the First Amendment for short-term political advantage. Bush is doing a good job on the war. But the rest of his agenda sucks. We probably ought to see that he gets re-elected. But as citizens of the Republic we should take this as a lesson. No politician deserves our trust. Few are even worthy of respect. It was said long ago and it is still true today.

"Eternal vigilance is the watchdog of democracy"

5 posted on 02/01/2004 5:10:56 AM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trek
No politician deserves our trust. Few are even worthy of respect.

That bears repeating.

They are worthy of suspicion and scrutiny. Power does weird things to people, I don't care what party they represent.

6 posted on 02/01/2004 5:14:46 AM PST by ovrtaxt (we are the pawns of partisanship, when we ought to be the soldiers of principle. - Alan Keyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
This is the great paradox of politics. Those who are drawn to power are precisely those who cannot be trusted to wield it.
7 posted on 02/01/2004 5:20:54 AM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: trek
Bush is doing a good job on the war. But the rest of his agenda sucks.

That's a pretty broad statement. I would guess, if you thought about it, you could come up with one or two things he has done that didn't "suck". Tax cuts. PBA ban. Kyoto. Basically telling the U.N. to kiss off. I mean...there must be something.

8 posted on 02/01/2004 5:50:22 AM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
Follow the money....
9 posted on 02/01/2004 5:51:20 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
If the goal was truely to regulate campaign money the CFR was not even close. What should have been done was make it so you can only contribute to campaign in which you can vote. All other donations should be considered bribes. In other words, you must collect all campaign money from the area you are running. That bars businesses and unions since they can't vote. You'll end campaigns like Hillary where she collected about 80% of her money out of state. After all, this is a representitive republic. If you can't get funding from the area you are running in are you actually representing them?
10 posted on 02/01/2004 6:02:07 AM PST by Dutch Boy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
McCain Fiegold was a Cluster Fornication of Unlawful Carnal Knowledge, and the Supeme's made it the (final) law of the land.

Get Congress in there infinite wisdom creates the "527's" to skirt the issue.

McCain go got all wrong, we didn't need campaign finance reform. What we needed either a Flat Tax or National Sales tax because all the special interest on "K" Street go after what they want via legislation and that usually means getting Congress to write into law some benefit to them and that means in the Tax Code.

Take away these millions of lines of Code and retrain these Lobbyist and Attorneys to do something productive, like garbage collection....

And while I am are at it, Give Congress the same 5 year vesting period under ERISA and the same Defined Benefit Plans as those in the private sector (if you are lucky enough to have one at your workplace), also make them pay Social Security taxes, Talk about instant term-limits, he he.....

11 posted on 02/01/2004 6:26:17 AM PST by taildragger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
Also were is the "Beck" decision in all this?

Damn it, cut the dollars off they can play with politically!

It is the law of the land and GWB and Company are not enforcing it!

12 posted on 02/01/2004 6:28:38 AM PST by taildragger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Immigration policy, coddling communist China, non-support for judicial nonimees, flight of American's jobs off shore, prescription drug program.
I'll once again vote for him but he is a great disappointment. He is completely detached from daily American society and its people.
The president is the epitomy of a country club Republican.He has stumbled his way into a close election that he should have won hands down.
13 posted on 02/01/2004 6:33:05 AM PST by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sgtbono2002
It is sort of like international treaties where the U.S. is the only nation ethical enough to actually stick to their agreements. In campaign finance, the Republicans will try to follow the letter of the law, and the DemonRats will have a field day.
14 posted on 02/01/2004 7:28:48 AM PST by FreeAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Ok. I will give you the tax cuts and PBA. But in giving you PBA you will have to concede Bush's total capitulation on improving the Federal Judiciary. He has almost completely rolled over for the Senate Democrats (The Pickering recess appointment being the rare exception).

Kyoto was already dead (not even the dems in the Senate would vote for it) and telling the UN to kiss off was part of the war effort.

And must I remind you of his proposal to open the borders? I live in Texas. The INS is reporting illegal immigration up 18% since Bush's speech. When caught, illegals are saying "But Bush said it is alright to come here!"

There can be no denial. Bush is screwing us royally. The only concilation is that he is screwing Al Qaeda worse. I am keeping score. After the war we are going to have a big score to settle with the Republicans.

15 posted on 02/01/2004 7:30:58 AM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Even a blind squirrel finds a nut, occasionally.

Bush is a Republican Liberal. His only difference with Liberals in the Democrat wing of the Liberal establishment is that his priorities for Big Government are slightly different from theirs - but with the same goal, complete subservience of Americans to, and dependence on, their government and its associated political class.
16 posted on 02/01/2004 7:49:21 AM PST by jimkress (Save America from the tyranny of Republican/Democrat hegemony. Support the Constitution Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
The vital thing about this article is that it shows what's probably the only way to defeat CFR--make it really hurt the DemonRats and RINOs who supported it. If the FEC prohibits the DemonRats' 527 organizations from doing what they're trying to do, the DemonRats will really howl. When the Special Counsel was inteptly attacking the Sink Emperor the DemonRats suddenly discovered the extreme disadvantages of the Special Counsel Law. Poof, no more Special Counsel Law. The same thing will happen to CFR if we really push envorcement against the DemonRats.
17 posted on 02/01/2004 12:05:00 PM PST by libstripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimkress
No, he is not a "liberal". He is pro-life, strong on national defense, pro business and anti-tax. Does that sound like a liberal to you?

The hyperbole around here is so thick lately, you could choke on it.
18 posted on 02/01/2004 12:37:03 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: trek
I was simply demonstrating to you that he does hold conservative positions and has accomplished some good things aside from the war - that his agenda beyond that doesn't "suck", as you declared.

I don't feel the need to qualify his accomplishments. Maybe I'm just an unusually positive person or something. He has done a few things that have disappointed me, but I don't feel like I'm getting "screwed royally".

John Kerry might make me feel that way though.
19 posted on 02/01/2004 1:06:46 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
Write AGAINST George Soros Sunday!!! (PLEASE click here!)
20 posted on 02/01/2004 1:08:28 PM PST by jmstein7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sopwith; All
Write AGAINST George Soros Sunday!!! (PLEASE click here!)
21 posted on 02/01/2004 1:08:35 PM PST by jmstein7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason
Is there some sort of new conservative web site/group that is specifically to counter MoveOn.org?

I heard it was fire-something.
22 posted on 02/01/2004 1:10:31 PM PST by Howlin (If we don't post, will they exist?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Howlin:

The site you are looking for is called http://www.grassfire.org/ . That's the anti-MoveOn.Org site.

JS
23 posted on 02/01/2004 1:12:08 PM PST by jmstein7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: em2vn
He is completely detached from daily American society and its people.

I think you really mean that he is detached from you, and people like you. If you can't even bring yourself to give him credit for the positive things he has done, it says more about you than it does about him.

24 posted on 02/01/2004 1:13:03 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sopwith
All the same Democrat scumbags who were all for "campaign finance reform" are now doing everything they can to circumvent the law. Surprise, surprise. No way would there be any kind of "investigation" if the scumbags had the White House. Now, if some of these scumbags have to pay big fines and/or go to jail, I'll be convinced that the GOP is serious.
25 posted on 02/01/2004 1:13:08 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: em2vn
Bush has cut my taxes and wants to cut some more.
I don't care about the rest of the stuff. I trust him.
26 posted on 02/01/2004 1:22:00 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
No, he is not a "liberal". He is pro-life, strong on national defense, pro business and anti-tax. Does that sound like a liberal to you?

Bush is conservative on most of the big issues but he is not -- and never claimed to be -- a fiscal hard-liner. That was what "compassionate conservatism" was all about.

In this connection, it is possibly important that Bush is not a career politician. If he were, he would probably have spent the 20 pre-White House years taking Republican blood oaths on balancing the budget and falling on his sword on tough votes. Instead, he broke into politics late and high, by running for governor during the boom/bubble years when projected surpluses dominated the debate. We are paying for that now, but Bush has not changed his spots.

Given the craven performance of the current Congress on spending issues, it is now clear who we must thank for balancing the budget in the mid-90's: Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey. The fiscal conservative wing of the party needs to regroup and get back into the saddle. We are going to have an interesting primary in four years.

27 posted on 02/01/2004 1:23:37 PM PST by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Is there some sort of new conservative web site/group that is specifically to counter MoveOn.org?"

I haven't read about it, but I will check. If I find anything I'll get back.

28 posted on 02/01/2004 1:58:42 PM PST by G.Mason ("The secret to success is knowing who to blame for your failures" - Old Democrat saying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; jmstein7
Seek and you shall find.

Thanks jmstein7.

29 posted on 02/01/2004 2:01:30 PM PST by G.Mason ("The secret to success is knowing who to blame for your failures" - Old Democrat saying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason; jmstein7; Peach
Well, jm found it, and Peach showed it to me! I'm just glad we found it.
30 posted on 02/01/2004 2:05:06 PM PST by Howlin (If we don't post, will they exist?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
"Well, jm found it, and Peach showed it to me! I'm just glad we found it."

Same here. Thanks

31 posted on 02/01/2004 2:10:56 PM PST by G.Mason ("The secret to success is knowing who to blame for your failures" - Old Democrat saying)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
What good is it if he "holds conservative positions" if he governs like a liberal? If we cannot make progress with a Republican House, a Republican Senate and a supposedly conservative Republican President, then when will we make progress?

The argument that John Kerry would be worse is not sufficient.

In fact, one can make the argument that we are better off with divided government. If we are not going to make progress with Republicans in control, if the only thing we can hope for is to slow the decline, then give me divided government! Less will get done.

I believe we can do better. But we will not do better if G. W. Bush feels he can take his conservative base for granted. He is first and foremost a politician. If he is not under constant pressure from the base he will move to accomodate the Libs. You are not doing Bush or anyone else a favor by letting him get away with squandering the best chance to restore some of our liberty in decades.

Don't get me wrong. I will vote for Bush. But I am very disappointed that he and his Republican colleagues have not made any real progress. In fact, in many important ways they are implementing policies ( e.g. campaign finance reform, medicare, immigration) that we would all vociferously oppose if they were put in place by Democrats. This to me is definitely "getting screwed."

32 posted on 02/01/2004 2:16:34 PM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: trek
Don't get me wrong. I will vote for Bush.

Glad to hear it, but why on earth would you do that, if you think he "governs like a liberal" and you say the argument that Kerry would be worse "is not sufficient"?

I think you generalize too much. In some ways, yes, he has governed to the left - but in other very important, very significant ways, he has governed to the right. Give him credit for that, okay?

33 posted on 02/01/2004 5:12:26 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: sphinx
Yes, we are. (Good points in your post.)
34 posted on 02/01/2004 5:15:26 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
As I said. I am supporting the President because of his conduct of the war. I made that point in my first post.

But please indicate the "very important, very significant ways" you see President Bush governing to the right. (We are agreed on tax cuts, PBA and the war so please don't rehash these). I don't see it. I see occasional rhetoric to the right and significant policy moves to the left.

We are likely to see the high water mark of Republican control of the Federal Government in the next year or two. As it stands now, domestically the country will end up worse for it in absolute terms.

Please don't throw me the canard "that it would have been worse under the Democrats." By that logic the Republicans can never fail. Not even if they gut the First Amendment, enact massive expansions of the welfare state, open the borders, put milk-toast judges on the bench (or worse), institutionalize 1/2 trillion dollar annual deficits, etc.

35 posted on 02/01/2004 5:50:55 PM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: trek
But please indicate the "very important, very significant ways" you see President Bush governing to the right. (We are agreed on tax cuts, PBA and the war so please don't rehash these).

If you agree that he sometimes governs to the right - and you indicate here that you do - all I ask is that you stop making declaritive statements like "He governs like a liberal." Or saying that aside from the war, the rest of his agenda "sucks".

I don't want to nitpick about every little thing. I am just asking you not to make general, sweeping, and completely inaccurate statements. Of course, if you are determined to, I can't stop you.

36 posted on 02/01/2004 6:21:22 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
I'm not sure what "people like you" refers to but I have given him credit for the war on terror and the tax cut. Having said that I don't intend to endorse extremely liberal stances such as his ideas on immigration and a national prescription plan. Nor will I support the massive increase in national spending that has taken place under his administration.
As I said before I will vote for him again though I wish there was a conservative to support. Comparing the President to Clinton certainly casts him in a very favorable light. If he is compared to past conservative presidents he doesn't fare as well. Then again that is only "people like you" speaking.
Do tip your nose down in a rain so that you don't drown. That would look so un-tidy at the country club.
37 posted on 02/01/2004 6:24:09 PM PST by em2vn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

Perhaps a compromise is in order. I will generalize a bit less if you will provide a few specifics. I have provided several examples of very significant policy items that should greatly alarm small government conservatives. Can you provide similar examples of policy items that Bush and the Republicans have enacted that small government conservatives should be pleased with?

38 posted on 02/01/2004 7:39:34 PM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: trek
Look here.
39 posted on 02/01/2004 7:54:13 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: em2vn
Do tip your nose down in a rain so that you don't drown. That would look so un-tidy at the country club.

I didn't intend to sound like an elitist. I grew up poor but conservative (my dad was very conservative). When I said "people like you", I meant those for whom nothing is ever satisfactory.

40 posted on 02/01/2004 8:01:51 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Wow. If that list passes as a compendium of great victories for limited government the Republic is finished.

But you strike me as a very well meaning and nice person. Let us end this as friends.

41 posted on 02/01/2004 8:15:33 PM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: trek
That's not how I characterized the list, but okay - let's end this as friends. And yeah, I'm a nice person - and maybe more importantly in a political context, I'm reasonable and not impossible to satisfy. I wish the same for my perpetually disgruntled friends online. ; )
42 posted on 02/01/2004 8:58:02 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (Four hours is too long for a Democrat to sit in the Oval Office, let alone four years. Vote W '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Big Steve; deport; blackie; nickcarraway
Great news bump!
43 posted on 02/01/2004 9:10:29 PM PST by Lady In Blue (Bush,Cheney,Rumsfeld,Rice-The A Team in '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trek
McCain-Feingold was always about the end run, and was designed to squeeze out alternative parties and candidacies.

The only real campaign finance reform is to eliminate all gov't funding of campaigns.

If the coverage is there, these business as usual partisan shill organizations will be ridiculed out of existence, and will undermine their own goal.

Of course, the media is filled with partisan shills...
44 posted on 02/01/2004 9:37:02 PM PST by SunkenCiv (my constant line -- "Politics is always and only about power.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taildragger
Take away these millions of lines of Code and retrain these Lobbyist and Attorneys to do something productive, like garbage collection....

Maybe they'll do the jobs that "Americans don't want to do." ;)
45 posted on 02/01/2004 11:19:22 PM PST by adam_az (Be vewy vewy qwiet, I'm hunting weftists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Ping!
46 posted on 02/01/2004 11:23:59 PM PST by NRA2BFree (DemonRATS who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue
The Rats are disarray ~ eradicate the rodents!
Fire democrats ~ hire Republicans!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

47 posted on 02/02/2004 9:13:11 AM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: blackie
The dems. sure are in disarray! You know something? If the situation were reverse,the dems wouldn't hesitate to do the same thing to the Republicans. Did you notice the tone of the Post? - like it's unfair or something!
48 posted on 02/02/2004 8:27:31 PM PST by Lady In Blue (Bush,Cheney,Rumsfeld,Rice-The A Team in '04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue
The Post supports democrats and anything that they are up to.
49 posted on 02/03/2004 8:45:01 AM PST by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson