Posted on 01/05/2008 2:27:45 PM PST by publiusF27
What do you think of the Ron Paul Blimp and the campaign finance laws?
For those who don't know, I'll briefly summarize the history:
A bunch of RP cultists decided to start an effort separate from the campaign to support RP, and came up with the idea of a blimp. They decided to start a website and accept pledges. People pledged wildly, and they quickly met their goal and started trying to collect the pledges.
At that point, it occurred to someone that this is America, and you can't just do something like this without a platoon of lawyers, who were summoned (volunteers at first, and top rate ones). A PAC was formed. With that, people could donate $5,000, less whatever amount they had already contributed to the campaign.
Then the PAC went away, and a "commercial advertising company" was formed, called Liberty Political Advertising. It is NOT, repeat NOT in any way affiliated with the campaign. It's a private company, selling political advertising of Ron Paul via the blimp project. You can click a couple of buttons and buy ten weeks of blimp time for a million bucks. No campaign contribution limits apply. I mean, this is America, and if I have a million bucks laying around, I can hire a guy to go fly a blimp, can't I? The Ron Paul campaign never asked me to do it. They have nothing to do with this private transaction. It's no campaign contribution. Right?
I know lots of you don't care for Ron Paul. Forget about that for the moment, and if it helps, try to imagine that it's the Fred Blimp or the Duncan Blimp. Maybe you think a blimp is a stupid idea. OK, try to imagine it's some other independent expenditure which looks an awful lot like a campaign contribution.
I don't care what you think of Paul or the blimp, I'm wondering more about the law and this creative route around it. Who, if anyone, is asking for legal trouble here?
ping?
ping
“It’s the blimp Frank!”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4vjgxBLMs4
What do I think about that blimp? I can sum it up as:
???
It was supposed to reach a non-internet group by saying “Who is Ron Paul? Google Ron Paul.”
How about:
The Thompson Rocket
Circumventing the law with trickery is so RATish. The mobster supported candidates like Hitlery and Hussein love this kind of flaunting the law stuff.
Anyway this non-story has been discussed back in November.
But standing up for free speech rights against an unconstitutional infringement on a person’s right to communicate a political message is certainly conservative.
What do you think 527s are? Are the Swift Boaters akin to Democrats and mobsters too?
Agreed. Ron Paul is a nut, and the blimp is silly, but the IDEA is sound. Campaign finance limits are unconstitutional and immoral and this is a legitimate end-run.
I’ve no problems with volunteers buying blimp ad space. I’ve big problems the the CFR. I don’t understand half of what I have read in there. I’m sure I’ve violated much of it myself.
We can’t post Wired articles here, but this is a good summary.
http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2007/12/paul_blimp
If they're going to get into trouble, I imagine it will be of "in kind" variety. This is an advertising company that is donating its services to one candidate. There are limits to that.
Aren't there?
If you truly believe that a law is wrong don’t shilly-sham around it, forthrightly break it in a straight forward manner and cause a ruckus over it. Nothing exposes a bad law like its’ enforcement. Sure someone may have to pony up all they’ve ever earned and then some to a gang of lawyers. Heck they might even have to do some time but if in the end the people are freed from a bad law something good has been done.
I know they have good advisers. I’ve been following the blimp project since the beginning. My brother actually gave me some blimp time for Christmas, which really made me smile. :D
I just wonder if anyone is going to get in trouble. In a way, I hope the feds do come after the blimp project. Contributions would soar. ;-)
That is a good summary.
The blimp project, especially in their blog, look an awful lot to me like they are forthrightly breaking some (wrong headed) restrictions on political speech in a straight forward manner and causing a ruckus over it.
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.