December 13, 2006

How Many Times Can I Post "What Is Wrong With This Picture?"

Hatched by Dafydd

Is there a record I can break? Does Guiness keep track?

In the AP article (carried on the New York Times) about the Federal Election Commission (FEC) fining several 527 organizations for their political activities during the 2004 presidential election, we read this:

The group listed as Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth will pay $299,500. In the 2004 campaign, the group spent $20.4 million criticizing Kerry's military record in Vietnam. Much of the group's claims about Kerry's service were never substantiated. [I'm not even going to pretend to see if anyone can guess, since it's about as subtle as an Iranian president.]

MoveOn.org Voter Fund will pay $150,000. The liberal organization challenged President Bush on various issues in the campaign. The group spent $14.6 million on television ads attacking Bush's record.

The League of Conservation Voters will pay $180,000. The group ran ads against Bush and other federal candidates, criticizing their stands on environmental issues.

A few days ago, Patterico reminded me of an old Sesame Street song:

One of these things is not like the others,
One of these things just doesn't belong...

There is one and only one group on this list whose veracity is characterized at all... and AP simply asserts, without evidence, that the Swift-Boat Vets' charges were "never substantiated." No such claim is made about MoveOn.org or the League of Conservation Voters (which is a radical environmentalist group).

Yet in reality, the SBVT claims were far more extensively documented, substantiated, and proven -- by eyewitness testimony as well as Navy documents -- than most of the charges hurled at the Bush administration by MoveOn.org or the League. It's useless to argue that out now; start with John O'Neill's book Unfit for Command, and come back when you've read it.

Many of the charges come down to he-said, he-said: eyewitnesses on both sides directly contradicting each other. But contrast that with the virtually indisputable charges leveled against Bush by MoveOn.org:

  • That "Bush lied" when he said nobody expected the levees to break during Hurricane Katrina -- because he received a briefing that warned of levees overtopping;
  • That "President Bush promised that anyone at the White House involved in the leak would be fired.... That's why we're calling on him to fire Karl Rove;" in fact, Bush said he would fire anyone who committed a crime; it is MoveOn.org which is lying;
  • That Bush gave a speech "implying that Iraq attacked us in 2001;" Bush gave no such speech, and this is a fabrication;
  • MoveOn.org brags about heavily supporting and promoting Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9/11, which itself is riddled with lies, fabrications, and distortions of history and of Bush policies.

The question is not whether MoveOn.org is more truthful or less truthful than the Swift-Boat Vets, but rather that AP doesn't even raise the question of veracity with either of the two Democratic groups; only anent the SBVT. This is yet another indication that within the elite, drive-by media, liberal bias is the default mode, requiring no justification.

As such, I suppose this entire post is redundant, since we already knew this. So you don't have to read it (now that you have already read to this point). I did, however, enjoy writing it... so it served some useful function!

Hatched by Dafydd on this day, December 13, 2006, at the time of 6:05 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/1567

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How Many Times Can I Post "What Is Wrong With This Picture?":

» Speech is No Longer Free from Hold The Mayo
I do not understand how the law they "violated" was not struck down by the simple phrase "Congress shall make no law." I do understand that this does not bode well for the future of freedom in this country. I understand this from the pride taken by th... [Read More]

Tracked on December 13, 2006 8:10 PM

» Media bias from Dawnsblood
For those who can not see the liberal bias of the media, we invite you to peruse this:The group listed as Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth will pay $299,500. In the 2004 campaign, the group spent $20.4 million criticizing Kerry's military... [Read More]

Tracked on December 14, 2006 1:39 AM

Comments

The following hissed in response by: snochasr

Please, please explain to me how an arm of the government, regardless of their official title or charter, can penalize average citizens for exercising their right of free speech? Before I go apoplectic?

The above hissed in response by: snochasr [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2006 7:06 PM

The following hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin

The media bias angle on this story, however egregious, pales in comparison to the subject matter of the story. Take out the bias and you get three groups that were fined for running political ads critical of candidates

Swift Boat Veterans and POWs for Truth will pay a $299,500 fine for ads criticizing Kerry's military record in Vietnam.

MoveOn.org Voter Fund will pay a $150,000 fine for television ads attacking Bush's record.

The League of Conservation Voters will pay a $180,000 fine for ads against Bush and other federal candidates, criticizing their stands on environmental issues.

This is the real problem, and the most serious issue in this story.

Take a step back from the trees and look at the forest.

The above hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2006 7:09 PM

The following hissed in response by: nk

Dafydd,

I have been calling the AP the left's lap dog for a while. It's always good to have one's opinions confirmed.

Stephen,

527 is a Section in the Internal Revenue Code. By choosing that tax exempt status they opened themselves up to other administrative regulation. The fines are probably a very small fraction of their tax savings.

The above hissed in response by: nk [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2006 8:52 PM

The following hissed in response by: nk

I'm sorry. The second part of my comment was better addressed to snochaser. (It can't be ADHHD at my age but I forget what else it could be.)

The above hissed in response by: nk [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2006 8:54 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Stephen Macklin:

The media bias angle on this story, however egregious, pales in comparison to the subject matter of the story.

Yes. But we've already dealt extensively with the latter years before Big Lizards was hatched. It goes back to the BCRA and why I don't like John McCain.

It was passed, signed, and upheld. There is nothing anybody can do about it unless we get a Congress that is more pro-free speech than the 109th... alas, the 110th is, if anything, more anti-free speech.

So I confined myself to the bias angle, because the other is played out.

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 13, 2006 9:43 PM

The following hissed in response by: Bill Faith

"Much of the groups claims ..." -- obviously written by an English majors, non?

I hadn't read the AP version of the story earlier. Fellow Namvet and longtime Kerry foe
Bruce Kesler emailed me a link to the FEC site and to his post on the matter. I've added an excerpt from your post to It was a good ol' 1st Amendment. May it rest in peace and bumped it to the top of my site.

The above hissed in response by: Bill Faith [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 12:16 AM

The following hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin

"I confined myself to the bias angle, because the other is played out."

But if we don't register our dissent to the actual application of the law, what hope is there that it will ever be changed? Should we just sit silently and wait for Congress to change its mind?

It's rather sad to think that gutting the First Amendment protection of free speech is a dead story that is "played out,"

The above hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 4:11 AM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Stephen Macklin:

But if we don't register our dissent to the actual application of the law, what hope is there that it will ever be changed? Should we just sit silently and wait for Congress to change its mind?

Um, you depend upon Big Lizards to register your dissent?

All right: Mr. Macklin, the lizardssssss hereby empower you to expressssssssss your disssssatissssfaction with all current and future usssssssses of the Bipartissssan Campaign Reform Act to your absolute sssssssatisfaction.

Go thou and dissssssent!

Dafydd, Lord of All Assemblies and Petitioning of Government for the Redress of Grievancessssss

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 4:54 AM

The following hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin

Um, you depend upon Big Lizards to register your dissent?

All right: Mr. Macklin, the lizardssssss hereby empower you to expressssssssss your disssssatissssfaction with all current and future usssssssses of the Bipartissssan Campaign Reform Act to your absolute sssssssatisfaction.

I actually depend on Big Lizards for nothing, certainly not to be empowered to express my opinions. Which includes the opinion that in the story in question the abuse of the First Amendment is far more serious than media bias.

If you wish to accept the First Amendment as a "played out" issue, that is your choice. Albeit a very sad one.

The above hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 5:17 AM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Stephen Macklin:

How many radical feminists does it take to change a lightbulb?

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 5:25 AM

The following hissed in response by: nk

I believe that FCC licensed media is obligated to run political ads by 527s at the lowest rates chargeable. So there is one more monetary advantage to 527s subjecting themselves to administrative jurisdiction. Had they chosen to proceed as unincorporated associations of free citizens they would have had no regulation but also no discounts for their ads and no tax exempt status. There are still First Amendment implications but not end-of-the-world ones. Render, therefore, unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's ....

The above hissed in response by: nk [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 5:31 AM

The following hissed in response by: snochasr

Here is a suggestion for one way to deal with the BCRA: Pass the FAIR tax. 501's and 503's and 527's, along with the rest of that execrable IRS code, disappear faster'n a campaign promise after the election.

The above hissed in response by: snochasr [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 6:37 AM

The following hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin

Dafydd,

Suggesting that a radical feminist change light bulb, clearly a domestic chore, displays a complete lack of sensitivity and a misogynistic need to oppress women. I recommend an immediate crash course at the Women's Studies Center of the nearest university.

The above hissed in response by: Stephen Macklin [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 7:32 AM

The following hissed in response by: nk

We are teaching our daughter not to be afraid of the dark.

The above hissed in response by: nk [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 9:29 AM

The following hissed in response by: hunter

The ticker is that the Federal Govt. is effectively on the path of censorship.
I will not vote for McCain or anyone else who voted for the so-called CFR piece of trash.
I hope the targets of this censroship protest this in court. It is time and way-past time for the USSC to toss this garbage out.

The above hissed in response by: hunter [TypeKey Profile Page] at December 14, 2006 12:39 PM

Post a comment

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)


Remember me unto the end of days?


© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved