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

Skip to comments.

Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission? [Hell no!!]
BC Magazine ^ | 7/23/07 | John Bambenek

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 ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: campaignfinance; dailykos; elections; fec; liberals
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-118 next last

1 posted on 07/23/2007 6:30:33 PM PDT by indigo5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: indigo5
One could argue that Kos is a front to allow over the limit contributions by the founder to his candidate de’jour.
2 posted on 07/23/2007 6:35:03 PM PDT by mnehring (Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
Yup, we're not part of that crowd. Our purpose is to put politicians into the federal prison system.

That's about as far from an election as you can get.

3 posted on 07/23/2007 6:36:17 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

One could make the same claim about FR.


4 posted on 07/23/2007 6:37:07 PM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Maceman; jimrob
Except FR doesn’t hold official campaign events for candidates and congressional leaders. Ping JimRob as I think he can shed a lot of light as to how this works for him and his view on KOS- strictly from a business sense.
5 posted on 07/23/2007 6:39:22 PM PDT by mnehring (Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
"One could make the same claim about FR."

Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. This can and will come back to bite F.R. and dozens possible hundreds of other sites.
6 posted on 07/23/2007 6:40:30 PM PDT by ndt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

very bad idea—free republic would be shut down by Hill.


7 posted on 07/23/2007 6:40:33 PM PDT by don'tbedenied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

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.


8 posted on 07/23/2007 6:45:59 PM PDT by dufekin (Name the leader of our enemy: Islamic Republic of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, terrorist dictator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: indigo5
Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Absolutely not. And why should there be an FEC to begin with?

10 posted on 07/23/2007 6:55:05 PM PDT by pnh102
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

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.


11 posted on 07/23/2007 6:56:05 PM PDT by M203M4 (Vote conservatism in 2008 - vote to defend the US Constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: don'tbedenied

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.

we agree.


12 posted on 07/23/2007 6:59:09 PM PDT by padre35 (Conservative in Exile.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
"Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?"

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 7:15:59 PM PDT by Jim Robinson (Our God-given unalienable rights are not open to debate, negotiation or compromise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

Don’t worry. The FEC won’t get around to it until 2010.


14 posted on 07/23/2007 7:31:19 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

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.


15 posted on 07/23/2007 7:34:17 PM PDT by postaldave (republicans need spending rehab before trying to control congress again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

The FEC should stay out of trying to control content over the Internet and the 1st amendment.


16 posted on 07/23/2007 7:37:49 PM PDT by gpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

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.


17 posted on 07/23/2007 7:38:35 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

First they the came for the KOSsacks but I said nothing, because I wasn’t a KOSsack...


18 posted on 07/23/2007 7:38:47 PM PDT by BJClinton (pfft)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

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.


19 posted on 07/23/2007 7:39:12 PM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
Is FreeRepublic sponsoring an event for the Republican candidates? No! We discuss our support for a candidate(s) on the board, but we don’t, at least to my knowledge, hold a symposium for the candidates, sponsored by FreeRepublic or Jet Blue. Please correct me if I’m wrong.
20 posted on 07/23/2007 7:44:58 PM PDT by Bushbacker1 (Soon to be Fredbacker1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

Comment #22 Removed by Moderator

To: indigo5

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.


23 posted on 07/23/2007 7:58:57 PM PDT by theBuckwheat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
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.

Cannot say it better myself.

24 posted on 07/23/2007 8:04:52 PM PDT by steveegg (I am John Doe, and a monthly donor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

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.


25 posted on 07/23/2007 8:04:54 PM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

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.

26 posted on 07/23/2007 8:06:33 PM PDT by BykrBayb (This tagline in memory of FReeper 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub ~ )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I was thinking not so much as if, but what if?


27 posted on 07/23/2007 8:14:11 PM PDT by mnehring (Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

How much coordination is there with the DNC? How much funding from Soros?


28 posted on 07/23/2007 8:14:55 PM PDT by weegee (NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

First Amendment bump!


29 posted on 07/23/2007 8:22:02 PM PDT by Jean S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: postaldave
bump

the kos can kiss my but,I keep an eye on what their trying to do,as I do my elected officials.

30 posted on 07/23/2007 8:26:10 PM PDT by mdittmar (May God watch over those who serve,and have served,to keep us free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
When I see this in breaking news at the kos, I will be surprised.

Should Free Republic be Subject to the Federal Election Commission? (Hell no!!)

31 posted on 07/23/2007 8:40:35 PM PDT by mdittmar (May God watch over those who serve,and have served,to keep us free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
No, no, and no again.

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.

32 posted on 07/23/2007 8:46:57 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

Should Democrats be held to a standard? LMAO !!!


33 posted on 07/23/2007 8:47:19 PM PDT by Hoodat ( ETERNITY - Smoking, or Non-smoking?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

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.


34 posted on 07/23/2007 8:49:05 PM PDT by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
One could make the same claim about FR.

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.

35 posted on 07/23/2007 8:56:42 PM PDT by BearCub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BearCub

...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.


36 posted on 07/23/2007 8:58:37 PM PDT by BearCub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom

Ewwwww - smells of corruption. Are you a member? Lemme guess...


37 posted on 07/23/2007 9:03:21 PM PDT by Libloather (That's just what I need - some two-bit, washed up, loser politician giving me weather forecasts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BearCub

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.


38 posted on 07/23/2007 9:27:37 PM PDT by indigo5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

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.


39 posted on 07/23/2007 11:27:45 PM PDT by MIT-Elephant ("Armed with what? Spitballs?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BearCub
In contrast, FR is certainly very conservative but doesn't (to my knowledge) support any particular party.

FR will very definitely be supporting the Republican candidate against the Democrat candidate in the 2008 general election.

40 posted on 07/23/2007 11:31:25 PM PDT by Maceman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
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.

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.

41 posted on 07/23/2007 11:33:29 PM PDT by 4woodenboats (DefendOurMarines.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; abb; bert; Bob J; conservatism_IS_compassion; Milhous; Fedora

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.

And Congress.


42 posted on 07/23/2007 11:36:24 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
Consider:

It's a bit buried, but in DailyKos' FAQs [http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/DailyKos_FAQ] is the statement, "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 1:24:36 AM PDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast ([Thompson 2008!])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheLeftCoast

Eventually, after saying their primary purpose is to get Democrats elected, you have to take them at their word.


44 posted on 07/24/2007 4:01:54 AM PDT by indigo5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: indigo5

Nope. What’s sauce for a KOmmie will eventually be sauce for a FReeper.


45 posted on 07/24/2007 4:43:29 AM PDT by Slings and Arrows ("You can't strengthen a zero, it will always equal zero." --Avigdor Lieberman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BearCub
“...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.”

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!

46 posted on 07/24/2007 4:48:42 AM PDT by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super Walmart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Beagle8U

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.


47 posted on 07/24/2007 4:51:17 AM PDT by RealTeen (Right- Correct, Right- Conservative. Are You Right on the Right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: indigo5
This was a really bad idea and the right needs to stand soundly against it, especially when its aimed at the left.

When you stick to your principles even when those violating them are targeting your enemies, it only makes said principles stronger.

-Eric

48 posted on 07/24/2007 4:58:48 AM PDT by E Rocc (Resident Smartass and Myspace "Freepers" group moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RealTeen
“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.”

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.

49 posted on 07/24/2007 5:07:47 AM PDT by Beagle8U (FreeRepublic -- One stop shopping ....... Its the Conservative Super Walmart for news .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: RightOnTheLeftCoast; Maceman; Jim Robinson
It's a bit buried, but in DailyKos' FAQs is the statement,
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 don’t 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.

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:

"Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?"
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.

50 posted on 07/24/2007 5:22:58 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which liberalism coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-118 next last

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