Media Fund, one of the top 527 for liberals, is headed by Harold M. Ickes. jr.

Media Fund rasied 28.1 million

Ickes was Deputy White House COS for Clinton. Ickes was also Hillery's chief carpetbagger for Her Senate campaign. Bill Knapp is in Charge of Media Fund's Ads. Knapp was Al Gore's advertisment guy.

According to www.openscrets.org , 527s have tallied the following numbers for the US presidentail race.

Dems: $469.727.076
Repubs: $243,656,202

Total spent

Dems: $346,347,201
Repubs: $207,994,857

I would be curious to see a study of ad spending by region and date by MoveOn.org, the Media Fund and other anti-Bush groups. It seems to be a pattern that when the Kerry campaign cuts back ads to save money, the leftist and liberal 527s fill the gap. Then they cut back when Kerry's campaign gears up to target a market.

I suppose the Kerry campaign may sincerely believe that the Swifties are working for the Bush campaign, since they no doubt believe that MoveOn and the others are working for them.

With the attention being paid to 527 spending, I haven't seen much on the old-style issue ads. So-called 527s actually favor a candidate; they are just not supposed to coordinate with the official campaign. But in previous election cycles we have seen the influence of issue-oriented groups who do not advocate for a candidate, but for an issue (which often just happens to help a particular candidate). This was always a Democratic edge over the GOP. Although the issue groups run the political spectrum, (the NRA is a particularly big one), the big winners are the Democrats, through spending by groups like the AFL/CIO and NAACP. Remember the notorious NAACP anti-Bush ad from 2000: "It was like they lynched my father again"?

527 orgs fined by FEC
 

Rather than start a new thread: link

Found these numbers elsewhere:
"
The Swift Boat group was fined $299,500,
the MoveOn group $150,000 and the
League of Conservation Voters group $180,000.

The Swift Boat group said that it had ended its 527 group"

"LAST WEEK, the Federal Election Commission fined MoveOn.org, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and two other groups a total of $629,500 for violating campaign finance laws during the 2004 election. According to the FEC, these "527" organizations (so named for the tax code provision governing their activities) ought to have registered as political action committees, which would have limited their ability to receive large donations and, in the case of MoveOn and the Swifties, would probably have shut both groups out of the 2004 election altogether..........


What did the groups really do wrong? Did they bribe or corrupt politicians? Well, no. You won't find "Duke" Cunningham, William Jefferson or Bob Ney connected to MoveOn or the Swift Boat Veterans. Did they make illegal contributions to campaigns? Well, no again. Did they seek out special favors or illegally coordinate their efforts with candidates? No. The FEC admitted that, after a "thorough" investigation, it found no evidence that any of the groups operated in concert with candidates or sought legislative favors"

Thank Mc-Lame
 

Thank Mc-Lame for this abortion.

And he wants to be pres.

Dang, NC is so far down in the primary schedule.

I don't keep up with political stuff because I don't feel like monitoring a bunch of theives but, evidently, they broke the rules.

If you don't like the rules you change them, not break them. Simple as that.

Were they a PAC
 

Were the Swifties as PAC? That was the question. In Fayeteville during the run-up to the election you could see moveon.org people/stickers/propaganda at the Democrat table during 4th Fridays and other events downtown. That is a clear violation of the 527 rule.

Does speaking out against a candidate make you and your fellows a PAC? I would think not but politicians and judges will now make that call. If I get my neighbors together to oppose a city council candidate are we a PAC? Are the people with the "No Dump Here" signs a PAC? Is political speach now required to be under PAC rules?

Free Speach took a hit with Campaign Finance "Reform" and will take more in the near future. Grass Roots organizations will be slammed. Talk radio is next on the hit list. Internet after that.

Pete

I don't know, but I think it's got something to do with the way money is collected.

I'm not for or against any group, I really don't care. I'm just pointing out the obvious. There's rules and people got to follow them.

Kyo,
I could be wrong, but I don't believe the SBVFT actually broke any laws - or at least not anything major. I believe they are being punished in the interest of fairness to the other side and because they exerted influence. Fairness? I believe that moveon did violate the rules and the FEC is doing this to have one on each side and they picked SBVFT because they were influential.

This has nothing to do with rules or right and wrong - it has to do with politics.

Kerry could have ended the SBVFT by releasing his records. He still hasn't.

You have to remember the mindset of these people. They still believe in foco and propaganda of the deed. They believe that everyone really wants to vote for their socialist assclown and when they don't, there is a root cause - deceit, treachery, etc. And they believe that they are chosen to lead the masses to enlightenment, whether the masses want it or not - by any means necessary.

It is just campaign contribution rules. If it was politics I doubt that it would have fined pubs and dems together. My opinion is, I don't really give a shit about any group that has an agenda. I'd rather look into the facts myself without all the extra noise.

I really don't know. Like I've said in the past, I don't pay attention to ads and PACs; if I paid attention to all these groups I'd never be able to make a decision. :)

Still going......
 

Yes, this is a serious necro-post, but why start another thread when the vintage of this one is just superior...:D

John who? :confused:


Kerry Vows to Disprove Swift Boat Claims
Friday, November 16, 2007
BOSTON - Sen. John Kerry, whose 2004 presidential campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record, said Friday he has personally accepted a Texas oilman's offer to pay $1 million to anyone who can disprove even a single charge of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

In a letter to T. Boone Pickens, the Massachusetts Democrat wrote: "While I am prepared to show they lied on allegation after allegation, you have generously offered to pay one million dollars for just one thing that can be proven false. I am prepared to prove the lie beyond any reasonable doubt."

Kerry, a Navy veteran and former prosecutor, said he was willing to present his case directly to Pickens, who provided $3 million to bankroll the group during Kerry's race against President Bush.

Kerry said he would donate any proceeds to the Paralyzed Veterans of America.

The senator said Pickens issued the challenge Nov. 6 in Washington, while serving as chairman of a 40th anniversary gala for American Spectator magazine.

In the letter, Kerry offered to travel to Dallas to meet with Pickens in a public forum or to invite him to come to Massachusetts. He suggested the two could visit the Paralyzed Veterans of America in Norwood to see firsthand how Pickens' money could be used to help veterans. A copy of the letter was provided to The Associated Press.

Pickens spokesman Jay Rosser asked to review the letter before commenting.

First in the book "Unfit for Command," and then in a series of television commercials, Kerry's critics challenged the circumstances for his military awards, accused him of doctoring reports and argued he never traveled into Cambodia as claimed.

While fellow veterans and reporters disproved many of the group's claims at the time, Kerry refused to air ads responding to the criticism. His own response was muted for fear of legitimizing his critics' attacks. The senator conceded after losing to Bush that his lackluster response likely cost him the election.

Ever since, Kerry has worked to lay the criticisms to rest.

In May 2005, he began allowing reporters access to his full Navy personnel and medical records - something he refused to do during the campaign.

Those records mostly duplicated documents Kerry released during the 2004 campaign. In addition, they included numerous commendations from commanders who criticized Kerry's service during the presidential race.

That disclosure renewed questions about why Kerry did not respond more forcefully with control over the White House at stake.

Kerry decided against launching a second bid for president, but vowed to defend his record and prevent other candidates from being "Swift-boated."

In his letter to Pickens, the senator challenged the billionaire's honor.

"I trust that you are a man of your word, having made a very public challenge at a major Washington dinner, and look forward to taking you up on this challenge," Kerry wrote.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I saw this too and it would be a mistake to take him up on this if Mr. Pickens is the only one kerry will present to....

I don't know if Mr. Pickens was ever in the military and if not kerry needs to convince a jury of Vietnam Navy Peers and not just Mr. Pickens.

From what I understand kerry has still not allowed full disclosure of his military records....... I'd sure like to talk to the Green Beret he "rescued".....:rolleyes:

TS

I find it interesting that this issue about 527s vs. PACs sounds very much like the efforts by the Federalists to control the various "Democratic Committees" of the 1780s.