Skip to comments.Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission? [Hell no!!]
Posted on 07/23/2007 6:30:32 PM PDT by indigo5
A complaint was filed against the Daily Kos for violating federal election rules. The filer writers on the story over at BC Magazine.:
Federal Election Commission rules apply for organizations that spend or contribute an equivalent of $1,000 per year in trying to influence elections for federal office. DailyKos is owned by Kos Media, a company, which makes it fit the definition of an organization. It surely spends at least $1,000 per year in hosting and based on what they charge (and get) for advertising, their support of candidates is certainly worth over $1,000 per year. Lastly, their self-identified purpose is to influence elections in the Democrats favor. They fit the criteria.
Some will argue that this is a slippery slope that will snare all bloggers. First, most bloggers aren't organizations. Second, most bloggers are read by like 3 people and their posts are certainly not worth $1,000. Third, most bloggers don't exist for the primary purpose of electing certain people to federal office.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogcritics.org ...
That's about as far from an election as you can get.
One could make the same claim about FR.
very bad idea—free republic would be shut down by Hill.
The Daily Kos does nothing more substantial than any other press or media organization. Perhaps The New York Times doesn’t officially proclaim its dedication toward the election of Democrats, but even most liberals willingly acknowledge their crucial role. Any activities of the Daily Kos clearly fall under the protections of the freedom of speech and of the press clauses of the First Amendment, which explicitly prohibits legislative restriction of those rights. If the Kos Media company bought advertising clearly geared toward the benefit of its favored candidates rather than to enhance its readership, then perhaps it might enter the world of commerce subject to regulatory purview.
Absolutely not. And why should there be an FEC to begin with?
The FEC should be limited in power only to provide oversight for the use of public funds. All other powers should be eliminated.
Yet more BS to thank Peanut Brain Jimmuh Carter for.
The Kos boyz are more directly involved in getting candidates elected and raising boat loads of cash for those cnadidates then FR is.
That being said, Kos is already beginning to fail (IMO) at their alleged purpose (Changing the Dhimicrat Party).
The Kos Boyz are getting co-opted, but for all of that, “NO” Kos should not be FEC fodder, that goes against Constitutional Principles that Conservatives uphold.
Not only no, but hell no! The first amendment protects our God-given unalienable rights to free speech, free press, freedom to dissent and freedom of association. All of the campaign laws enacted by congress in violation of the first amendment should be repealed as unconstitutional and the FEC disbanded.
Don’t worry. The FEC won’t get around to it until 2010.
i was thinking the very same thing.
when people here start thinking about using
THE POWER OF GOVERNMENT it just makes me sick.
i do not care if it sounds far, it still is talk of treason to our constitution.
The FEC should stay out of trying to control content over the Internet and the 1st amendment.
Not sure. FR does not accept advertising, nor do we host the diaries of political candidates, although freepers can put what they want on their homepage. Slippery slope, though.
First they the came for the KOSsacks but I said nothing, because I wasn’t a KOSsack...
No. Agree with them or not, they have the right to donate money their money as they wish. Going after Kos is just begging for the same to be done to FR. Campaign “reform” laws are wrong, no matter who they’re used against.
That is like asking, should we allow an insult and misreading of the First Amendment become the law of the land? Certainly not, for if we allow it, then the next forum they come for will be us, with the NutRoots blessing and cheering.
Cannot say it better myself.
You wanna try to win that argument against Democrats in Congress?
FR is pretty damn active in supporting candidates, publicizing campaign activities, mustering shows of activist support. Once the general election starts, FR will certainly be aggressive enough in supporting the Republican candidate.
Jim Robinson owns this site, sets the rules, moderates (or his “agents” do) the discussions. So it is not just a non-partisan bulleting board.
If you don’t think the Democrats can make an argument out of that, then you underestimate them.
I learned the answer to that one in elementary school. Public school, at that! We were introduced to an old document, known affectionately as The Bill of Rights. I didn't understand all of it at the time, but that freedom of speech part was pretty clear.
I was thinking not so much as if, but what if?
How much coordination is there with the DNC? How much funding from Soros?
First Amendment bump!
the kos can kiss my but,I keep an eye on what their trying to do,as I do my elected officials.
Should Free Republic be Subject to the Federal Election Commission? (Hell no!!)
Second, most bloggers are read by like 3 people and their posts are certainly not worth $1,000.
That isn't the point at all. It isn't the money. The point is shutting them down.
No. Negative. Uh-uh. Absolutely not. Nyet. That isn't a slippery slope, it's a crevasse.
Should Democrats be held to a standard? LMAO !!!
More than likely the “complaint” was filed by one of their own dingbats to get free PR and make them feel important and all that stuff.
I doubt it. Kos has as a posted purpose "electing democrats to office". Not liberals, not progressives, but members of the Democratic Party.
In contrast, FR is certainly very conservative but doesn't (to my knowledge) support any particular party.
...my post above isn’t to say I support government intrusion on anyone’s first amendment rights. I’m just saying that as long as the FEC does, Kos is a different type of organization.
Ewwwww - smells of corruption. Are you a member? Lemme guess...
And that’s exactly why they are subject to the FEC. They self-identify their purpose as to elect Democrats. That makes them a political committee like any other. We can argue the merits of election law and there is plenty of debate to have there. However, right now the laws are what they are and they should apply to everyone equally.
Has everyone gone mad? This complaint is ridiculous. You have a right to speak freely and a right to assemble, and a right to do both at the same time.
I didn’t read anything in the Constitution regarding how long you could assemble or how many dollars your speech could be worth before the First Amendment expired.
FR will very definitely be supporting the Republican candidate against the Democrat candidate in the 2008 general election.
If you consider yourself an expert in election law and can prove they - or we - are pacs, then please define your argument more concisely than "the laws are what they are".
No offense, but that statement, to me at least, has the exact same impact as "sure as the sun will shine", or "and that's the way it is".
I'm not an attorney, so if someone's going to interpert the law for my benefit, I'd like to see exactly how he arrives at his conclusions, where he gets his data, who has opined in a similar manner, and if that person were a judge.
Again, no offence, just qualify your statement, please.
Megadittos to that, Jim.
Meanwhile, sedition and treason are not protected as free speech.
That’s the ‘controlling legal authority’ that should apply to political speech.
Eventually, after saying their primary purpose is to get Democrats elected, you have to take them at their word.
Nope. What’s sauce for a KOmmie will eventually be sauce for a FReeper.
Sure, they’re different, take paid ads, a collection of morons,...
BUT, it has nothing to do with rules, right/wrong, paid ads, etc.
It has to do with controlling speech that someone doesn’t like and when that is the goal, there are plenty of liberals that would like FR shut down.
Its exactly the same as gun control, its not about guns its about control!
If they can regulate the KOS kool-aid kids they can regulate FReeRepublic and if you can regulate something you can ban it!
No tax, No regulation, No way!
I think we ALL agree that the FEC should STEP OFF of internet sites. The question posed here is whether the leftist idiots who cry about campaign reform will be held to their own standards. Kos is not a site, it’s a cancer.
When you stick to your principles even when those violating them are targeting your enemies, it only makes said principles stronger.
You miss my point. I don’t want liberal idiots held to any freaking standard for speech, even if its their standards.
If you accept those rules for KOS and the DUcks you have to accept them for FreeRepublic.
The object of regulation is to control with the final goal of banning it.
This is a Democratic blog, a partisan blog. One that recognizes that Democrats run from left to right on the ideological spectrum, and yet we're all still in this fight together. We happily embrace centrists like NDN's Simon Rosenberg and Howard Dean, conservatives like Martin Frost and Brad Carson, and liberals like John Kerry and Barack Obama. Liberal? Yeah, we're around here and we're proud. But it's not a liberal blog. It's a Democratic blog with one goal in mind: electoral victory.Summary: DailyKos is explicitly an arm of the DemocRat Party. Compare to FR, where RINOs are blasted with as much venom as Pelosi, Reid or Teddy K. That admission might change a few minds on this thread.
43 posted on 07/24/2007 4:24:36 AM EDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast
IMHO you make the case that DailyKos is explicitly in violation of the law as written, in a way that FreeRepublic is not. Nice work. But . . .FR is pretty damn active in supporting candidates, publicizing campaign activities, mustering shows of activist support. Once the general election starts, FR will certainly be aggressive enough in supporting the Republican candidate.
Jim Robinson owns this site, sets the rules, moderates (or his agents do) the discussions. So it is not just a non-partisan bulletin board.
If you dont think the Democrats can make an argument out of that, then you underestimate them.
25 posted on 07/23/2007 11:04:54 PM EDT by Maceman
The reality is that, from the perspective of the First Amendment, there's not a dime's worth of difference between FR and The New York Times, or between The New York Times and the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. They are all organizations run by people, and they are all entitled to freedom of speech and of the press - meaning that they can spend all the money they can get their hands on running printing presses, paying reporters and so forth, or even going on speaking tours - whether or not they are able to make a profit by selling newspapers or selling advertising space in newspapers."Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?"
That is, whether or not they are supported by voluntary donations, in whatever amount. From whatever source, so be that it is not tax money. The government has no business telling Americans how to vote.
And that is why Jim Robinson is correct:
Not only no, but hell no! The first amendment protects our God-given unalienable rights to free speech, free press, freedom to dissent and freedom of association. All of the campaign laws enacted by congress in violation of the first amendment should be repealed as unconstitutional and the FEC disbanded.13 posted on 07/23/2007 10:15:59 PM EDT by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
You make the case that going after DailyKos under McCain-Feingold would not justify going after FR under McCain-Feingold . . . but since McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional it would be lawless to go after anyone under McCain-Feingold.