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."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.
Ping to a thread which analyzes the "objectivity" of journalism, and what it means for America.Journalism claims objectivity, but its basis for that claim depends on the conceit that what is good for journalism - namely, journalists attracting an audience to advertisers - is the public interest, and all of it. That is of course absurd, but journalism simply declines to discuss the point.