Blogcritics Comments on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Comment by InsultComicDog on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:44:35 EST

So how is that appeal going?

Comment by handyguy on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 4 Sep 2007 22:00:02 EDT

This is Blogcritics. Of course we're going to argue.

Comment by Lumpy on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 4 Sep 2007 21:44:33 EDT

Ray. It was his time and money. If he thinks it well spent then who are we to argue?

Comment by John Bambenek on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 4 Sep 2007 21:38:09 EDT

Are you trying to goad me into appealing? And disclosure is not censorship.

Comment by Some Girl on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 4 Sep 2007 20:10:50 EDT

So John, looks like it was a quick decision after all, doesn't it?

Comment by Ray Ellis on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:28:35 EDT

Thanks for the waste of time and money, John.

Comment by Fred X. Quinby on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 4 Sep 2007 18:02:24 EDT

"With respect to MUR 5928, the FEC found that Kos Media meets the definition of a media entity and that the activity described in the complaint falls within the media exemption. Thus, activity on the DailyKos website does not constitute a contribution or expenditure that would trigger political committee status. The Commission therefore found no reason to believe Kos Media, DailyKos.com, or Markos Moulitsas Zuniga violated federal campaign finance law." Thank you Mr. Bambenek for helping to further protect grassroots organizations from censorship!

Comment by Ray Ellis on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:47:19 EDT

I'm guessing that hasn't worked out too well for you, eh, John?

Comment by Dave Nalle on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Mon, 6 Aug 2007 16:47:57 EDT

Neil, this site is non-partisan, so although JB's article may seem right-leaning, don't take that as characteristic of the site, which presents a diversity of opinion. And I think that he's been arguing that the difference between DailyKos and the other sites you mention is that Redstate indicates a specific party allegiance and endorses candidates, essentially making itself free advertising for those candidates. Dave

Comment by Neil B. on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Mon, 6 Aug 2007 15:50:00 EDT

So you think Kos deserves regulation due to their political activity? Remember that blogs are not technically on public airwaves. But if you still want to entangle Kos, why not many other political blogs as well? How about Instapundit, Powerline, Redstate (which kicks you off if you criticize them), and most importantly how about this blog (since even though you seem not to explicitly say which party you prefer, it is clear which faction you prefer.) tyrannogenius

Comment by gonzo marx on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:40:20 EDT

falls under the same heading as a "frivolous lawsuit" , Leslie... dumb, but folks have a right to their obstinance Excelsior?

Comment by Leslie Bohn on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:28:24 EDT

Have they filed with the de facto FEC for de facto PAC status? How thick in the head does one have to be to keep repeating this incorrect bullshit? The FEC specifically ruled on this question last year. Your EXACT arguments were used by one side. THAT SIDE LOST. UNANIMOUSLY.

Comment by gonzo marx on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:11:00 EDT

it is? how so...do you have evidence of a direct link of cash to or from a campaign? if so, please cite your proof it will be interesting indeed, there is the distinct possibility that Fox News could be caught under the same reasoning you appear to be utilizing here just a single example - Newt Gingrich is the Senior Political Editor for Fox..yet according to his own calendar, he spends at least one third of every month raising money for the GOP does this make Fox a de facto PAC as well? as far as i understand it, advocacy isn't the thing...but money is, and i have yet to see any proof of Kos giving or receiving money from campaigns or the Dem party but your filing should bring all this to light and get a solid ruling on the matter... Excelsior?

Comment by John Bambenek on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Tue, 31 Jul 2007 11:05:30 EDT

The difference here is that Kos Media is a de facto PAC.

Comment by Adam B. on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Mon, 30 Jul 2007 23:08:59 EDT

Franco, the reform groups lost that argument; FiredUp received the protection, as would anyone else doing news/commentary/editorial on federal candidates so long as they're not owned/controlled by a candidate, party or PAC.

Comment by Franco on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Fri, 27 Jul 2007 01:53:57 EDT

#17 — Adam B. "John, the "reform" groups explicitly argued before the FEC in the FiredUp case that "an organization whose stated purpose is to be the functional equivalent of a partisan campaign organization -- to elect Democratic candidates and to solicit contributions for such candidates -- does not qualify for the press exemption." Dose this apply if the organization is owned my a major international media center? If it does please show me the law that says this. Thank you.

Comment by Immolate on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:37:25 EDT

FCC and FEC regulation of blogs is undesirable and counterproductive. It is also pointless. Any blog so regulated could quickly move itself off-shore and proceed with business as usual. Happily, the FEC seems disinclined to move in that direction. Most of the time, when there is an obviously correct alternative, the government will choose it. Most of the time. Likewise, the Fairness Doctrine is undesirable. Has conservative commentary on the air drowned out liberal commentary by some artificial means? Why did Air America fail? It had access to some good markets, but failed to accumulate significant market share. Was some conservative cabal actively infiltrating and sabotaging their staff? Did Clear Channel buy nearby frequencies and build massive transmitters to bleed into the liberal frequencies? Or, is it just possible that not that many people were interested in listening to liberal talk radio? Is it possible that liberals are far less likely to choose a talk format over their favorite music station? Is it possible that the talent on the liberal shows was not terribly entertaining or interesting? Are there any top-notch liberal radio personalities? How are they doing? To presume that the point of the fairness doctrine is not to silence conservative talk radio; to say that conservative talk radio will not be silenced by its implementation--this is a load of hooey. Radio stations are businesses. If a conservative host can net them 12% for three hours, but a liberal host for equal time gets them 1% for the matching three hours, the average of 6.5% had better be competitive financially, or the station will pitch the conservative and liberal both in favor of something that does better than 6.5% and is less controversial. Maybe Limbaugh and Hannity will survive that, but how many others? So many treat politics as a focus for a larger struggle between conseratism and liberalism--preservation of the status quo versus change--in which one side or the other will emerge victorius and the loser will die a well-deserved death and be heard from no more. The obvious, undeniable, in-your-face truth is that these two forced, conservatism and liberalism, must both be present within a range of balance for any society to be healthy. We need to recognize and preserve that which is good. We need to recognize and embrace that which is better. To avoid the former would render us incapable of consolidating our gains. To avoid the latter would result in stagnation and collapse. The vast majority of people will seek a healthy balance between the two. In that quest, they will find entertainment and information from whatever source most appeals to them. There are very few captive audiences in the 21st century. In a perfect world, everyone would have access to every legitimate viewpoint explained and explored in a truthful, factual and dispassionate way. But this is not a perfect world. The next best thing is to have every viewpoint available in some way, shape or form in as many venues as possible so that a curious person can find the truth through diligent effort. That is what we have courtesy of the free market. Yes, liberals gravitate toward big market television, papers and blogs because those media are the most rewarding to them. Conservatives gravitate toward syndicated radio and blogs because that works best for them. I disagree with John Bambenek, I disagree with those who claim that John is representative of the conservative blogosphere or conservatives in general, and I disagree with those who thing that government interference is a good thing in radio and/or television. I do have a bit of advise for the liberal radio people out there: find someone who is good at it and can succeed at a local level before you promote them to national syndication. Might work better. You might even want to try a center-left personality every once in a while and see how that works. No charge if it works.

Comment by Clarence Butterworth on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:13:10 EDT

O'Reilly's railing about Kos last night was an embarrassing display. First of all, the "plants from kos" writing naughty things on his(O'Reilly's) board must have had access to a time machine. Second of all, O'Reilly came off as a card carrying memebr of the thought police.

Comment by Clavos on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:53:34 EDT

Well, it's certainly not as entertaining as all those people figuratively fellating each other on the Daily Krotch...

Comment by Rafe Stanley on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:47:59 EDT

"Second, most bloggers are read by like 3 people and their posts are certainly not worth $1,000" Does this guy sum up his own articles or what? I wonder how long after O'reilly started railing against Kos that the author got the idea to do the same. Fair, balanced and now 100% less originality than ever.

Comment by Clarence Butterworth on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:19:14 EDT

Better file a complaint against Freerepublic.com and Little Green Footballs while you're at it. Unles you're filing merely because you don't like Kos, which what I believe is the case.

Comment by lonesomerobot on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:35:54 EDT

well, good lt., thanks for the response to my post. now i have to chuckle back because you miss the point entirely. it's not democrats who run on the conservative principles of less government regulation and interference in our lives, it's republicans. you see, although i wasn't talking about the fairness doctrine, for the democrats to enact it wouldn't be hypocritical with respect to liberal ideology. as a former libertarian, i don't necessarily agree with the more regulatory aspects of liberalism, but i can cope with that much more than i can cope with the sheer hypocrisy of deficit running, ludicrously spending, we hate the gov't but we'll still make it work for us republicans. if you can't see how a supposed conservative running to the government to fix their problems is hypocritical, then you are a true republican. you see, i don't actually like the democratic party that much, but i basically despise republicans because they don't even come close to delivering on what they say they advocate. moreover, they've wrapped themselves in the dogma of social conservatism which has shown a propensity for legislating morality. so for the time being i'm voting for democrats instead of libertarians just because the republican party has become an exercise in utter hypocrisy. incidentally, i actually listen to quite a bit of talk radio and find it very entertaining. to listen to an adult engage in a childish rant on our free and public airwaves on a practically daily basis is almost as humorous as reading a comment wherein the writer employs a juvenile tactic like repeatedly calling someone a name that annoys them...like say, for instance, "the democrat party". sounds like something my older brother would have done when he was 12.

Comment by Leslie Bohn on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:16:20 EDT

Dave: Oh, now I get it, Dave, sorry. "more precise" "democrat party" "whether you're willing to admit it or not." I now understand your incorrect grammar, and Megadittos! Leslie

Comment by RSS on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:43:29 EDT

"JB certainly knows how to attract lots of comments to his articles, anyway. Something to be said for that. Dave" It's called RSS feeds.

Comment by Daily BS on Should the DailyKos be Subject to the Federal Election Commission?

Wed, 25 Jul 2007 08:38:48 EDT

"First, most bloggers aren't organizations." Uh, what? You make it sound like there are only a few bloggers that aren't organizations. Certainly the individual's made blogging popular, but then organizations caught on and are now blogging, and some, like Daily Kos became organizations. "They've made themselves subject to the FEC when they decided to be an arm of the Democratic Party." Existing to elect politicians who are in line with your views, donating to those politicians or groups who are in line with your views, does not make you an arm of the Democratic Party, any more then Anne Coultur is an arm of the Republican Party.