Nah, they used a different approach. An all-news radio station in DC this morning reported on the speech, then added, "She refused to say how much her fee was." What the hell does that have to do with anything? I wanted to spit on the radio.
That's a variation of their "Who funded it?" smear -- as if getting paid invalidates what you have to say (yes, some people who are actually allowed to vote actually believe that)
"It's far easier to support people who agree with you than to bribe people to do your bidding." -- Brian Doherty, ReasonOnline, May 6, 2003. "When you don't want to assess whether an attack is true or false, just say that asking the question is crappy politics." |
"Research shows that while people underestimate the influence of self-interest on their own judgments and decisions, they overestimate its influence on others." -- Daniel Gilbert, PhD
The conspiracy theory is the bastion of shadows and little or no evidence. It explains a famous or known event by appealing to the leftist dictum of 'follow the money' or 'look who benefits' as if actual evidence is irrelevant and personal ethics are just a farcical way for the rich and powerful to pull the wool over the eyes of everyone else. -- Alexander Marriott
"Those who insist on 'following the money' ALWAYS imply that EVERYONE takes a position on something based upon whether he is paid or not. Guess what THAT means about THEM -- they who work so hard to avoid discussing the existence of people who act on principle alone? Go ahead, guess! I DARE YOU!" -- Bert Rand
"In matters of principle, stand like a rock."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Also see:
Kneejerk Objection No. 8b
Responses to charges of "extremism"
and: About Campaign Finance "reform"
"Observe, first of all, that in equating unselfishness with morality, the implication is that self-interested actions are either immoral or nonmoral. ... This doctrine takes for granted as self-evident a clash between self-interest and morality: We can pursue our self-interest or we can be moral, but we can't be both. ... In this doctrine, selfishness is presumed to be narrow, petty, small-minded, materialistic, immature, narcissistic, anti-social, exploitative, mean-spirited, arrogant, ruthless, indifferent, cruel, and potentially murderous. These traits are evidently regarded as being to one's self-interest, since they are labeled as expressions of selfishness. It is interesting to speculate about the psychology of those who believe this." -- Dr. Nathaniel Branden, here |
"Instead of addressing the point at issue -- whether Presidential candidate John Kerry is a serial liar -- the Times devoted its vast investigative resources to digging up dirt on the Swift Boat Vets, and came to this blockbuster conclusion: some of the people supporting the Vets are Republicans! Tomorrow, we'll expect to see a similar investigation of Americans Coming Together and MoveOn.org. What do you want to bet some of their contributors are Democrats? I'll bet some of them have even met people who have served in Democratic administrations. What an exposé!" -- John Hinderaker, here. "I have been mildly amused to watch the Bush-hating left's reaction to the Swift Vet's story. First it was shock. Then it was angry denunciation and ridicule. ... The latest attempt has been by the increasingly laughingstock New York Times, which today finally broke its silence on the story with the shocking, stunning revelation that some of the Swift Boat Vets for Truth have long hated John Kerry (oooh! aaaah!) and that after the Democratic Convention was over, some big-money Republicans gave them money to fund an ad. ... Which anyone who's actually read the Swift Boat Vets for Truth web site already knows." -- Dean Esmay, here. Did YOU know that people who give money to Republican causes tend to be Republicans? |
"'So and so is only saying that because he was paid to say that' is usually NOT the simplest explanation for someone's political advocacy except in reference to a politician advancing a local interest from his own constituency. The simplest explanation for any other political advocacy is that, if someone is paying to support it, it's because he's found an advocate who already passionately agrees with him. The simplest explanation for FOCUSING on whether someone is paid or not is usually a sign of an inability to counter his arguments." -- Rick Gaber |
Now, if any "who paid you?" fallacy is at all valid, consider this: "Too many voters are already bought -- not by corporate campaign donors, but by the government itself." -- Joseph Sobran. "The government is the biggest special-interest group there is." -- Randy Richards |
Click for an 8 1/2 x 11 size to print out. |