I Can Honestly Say
ArchPundit
I’ve never heard of anyone trying to convince another that the other was born to be gay, but apparently it was a common occurence to A.D. Stonecipher.
July 2005
$10 Million in Funds for Stem Cell Research
And the scientific ignorance begins:
The money will be given in grants to medical research facilities for research on adult, cord blood and embryonic stem cells and is not to be used for reproductive cloning.
Not to be deterred by that, opponents say
Sen. Steve Rauschenberger, R-Elgin, said the governor’s order “opens the door to human cloning in the state of Illinois, and that’s wrong.”
Why does it do that? Because it’s the only way to get the approval numbers for embryonic stem cell research below ~60%. Research dollars is a winning issue and while those opposing this kind of research may be well meaning in their objections, throwing garbage like this around and hoping it sticks isn’t going to work.
Where the attempt at confusion comes in is in what one calls human cloning. Opponents of stem cell research have attempted to define the cloning of a human cell as ‘human cloning’ while most people think of human cloning as the creation of a new human. SCNT is a form of cloning, but cloning is between an unfertilized egg and another cell to stem cells–not a fully developed human being.
And remember, support StemPac over at the right.
One of the More Telling Quotes
I’m a huge supporter of embryonic stem cell research, but the Governor’s quote is one of the most telling of his administration and how he views being a public official
“Anytime you do what is morally right … however you get there is immaterial,” he said.
Democracy is an end and a means and how you get there is pretty much everything in the long run.
(And I have no problem with the move–it’s just the quote stuck out like a giant sore thumb begging for a hammer).
On the Bright Side, He’s not Losing Ground
SurveyUSA has The Blagorgeous in at 38% approval.
For the Blagojevich critics (this author included), don’t get too cocky. For a comparison using slightly different questions, look at Jennifer Granholm’s numbers in Michigan versus Rich DeVos (R-wingnut Amway)—she is rated in the Survey USA poll at 37% approval, but holds an 18 point lead. I believe DeVos is Michigan for Uberweis.
Oh NO! I could Jib Jab!
“Bloggers want it both ways,” said Carol Darr, head of the Institute for Politics, Democracy and the Internet at George Washington University. “They want to preserve their rights as political activists, donors and even fundraisers — activities regulated by campaign finance laws — yet, at the same time, enjoy the broad exemptions from the campaign finance laws afforded to traditional journalists.”
She and others said they fear that giving bloggers those protections would create a legal loophole that corporations, unions and wealthy individuals could use to pour big money into politics. A company or union, for example, would be able to create or subsidize elaborate blogs attacking political candidates. Or it could create hard-hitting Web videos that, as the popular “Jib Jab” video ridiculing both President Bush and Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) indicated last year, can attract large audiences
Bunkum. Pure bunkum.
First, the term traditional media is horribly abused by this woman and I sentence her to a Political Science 101 class where at least one week will discuss the role of the press in politics and Yellow Journalism. It was protected by the First Amendment as was the partisan press at the time of the founders. Originally, journalists were essentially activists and there is a long history of activist and advocacy journalism.
It’s friggen’ shocking that someone at Georgetown is this ignorant of history and the development of the press. There is not an astrisk in the First Amendment that exempts partisan press outlets largely because the press when it was passed, was partisan.
Second, Buckley v. Valeo guarantees that wealthy individuals can pour money into political campaigns. This is a point that virtually nobody understands. A single individual can spend as much money as they want as an individual to promote causes or candidates as they so wish. The one thing they cannot do is coordinate those expenditures with others. Wealthy individuals can spend as much as they like so that’s a really friggen’ stupid objection.
Third, unions are able to create blogs now. There are two examples to your right. Corporations can too.
The issue she seems to be getting at, but doesn’t really know how to get to is that theoretically a campaign or a campaign committee could pay an individual to blog and do so about specific races such as the Thune bloggers in South Dakota. The thing is–that has to be disclosed by the campaign if it’s over $100. Just like a TV Commentator or “analyst” on Fox News or MSNBC or CNN, someone receiving money from the campaign has that relationship disclosed by campaign finance reports (unfortunately not by the cable news channels).
If I’m fundraising for candidates, I’m not doing anything, but sending individual donors to a page. If you want to claim that a hypertext link has value then I guess one could claim I’m making an inkind donation, but then so would the Nation when it publishes a candidate’s web site address or says a candidate is worth supporting. The money is still disclosed by the campaign and there is then transparency.
The one issue that could creep up is if a blogger is paid by a media consultant second hand. My reading is that such a relationship is currently a violation of the law, but I could certainly be wrong. Even if I am wrong, one doesn’t have to eliminate the media exemption for all blogs, one can simply require that such a relationship be explicitly disclosed in campaign finance filings.
So activists are often journalists and so covered by a media exemption if it’s in print. What’s different about electrons?
Nothing.
So fundraisers often suggest you donate to campaigns–what’s different if that is on-line instead of in person at barbeque?
Nothing.
So I can donate to a campaign as a blogger. A member of the media can donate (depending on employer rules) to a campaign. What’s the difference?
Nothing.
Now, how would I spend money if I’m a corporation if I want to get my message across? A cool web site or a subsidize a talking head at a think tank? Ohhhhhhh…wait, corporations already do the second, but it doesn’t concern Ms. Darr.
I hate to tell you this, but Exxon Mobile can create a news magazine tomorrow and it’ll be covered by the media exemption. It’s just that it’ll be ineffective because no one will take it seriously and there are more effective means of advocacy for them.
Finally, she’s worried about Jib Jab? The horrors of political satire. Can you imagine a political writer who uses satire to skewer politicians–the horrors.
Advertising Rates Increased
Okay, I was convinced to raise my rates a bit. When looking at common rates on other blogs and traffic ratings, my rates were about half of what similar sites were getting so I’ve increased the rates. We’ll see how it affects ad sales, but I expect it won’t change much.
David Gill Filing (Illinois 15)
David Gill filed his 2nd Quarter numbers with just under $14,000 raised and $20,000 on hand. Gill has said he wants to raise at least $300,000 for the cycle, but has just started raising money in earnest.
Most of it is mid-level donations from the district with Robert McChesney being the biggest name on the list that I recognize.
New Advertiser
StemPac comes in and gives me an ad for which I have something to ad.
Washington, DC ? In an effort to wage a national campaign against extremist elected officials who have been holding up stem cell research, a bipartisan team of industry leading grassroots mobilizers, political consultants, and private sector stem cell research supporters today officially launched ?StemPAC.? StemPac, anchored by its namesake web site StemPac.com , is a 527 organization that will unite and mobilize pro-stem cell research activists and millions of Americans who are clamoring for the United States to take a leadership role in stem cell research.
?StemPac will hold accountable any elected or appointed official who holds up the promise of stem cell research based on their own personal ideology or outright ignorance,? explained John Hlinko, a leader of the effort, and VP at the political consulting firm Grassroots Enterprise. ?The will of the majority has been ignored, hope for millions with debilitating illnesses has been needlessly delayed, and this promising industry of the future is being gradually outsourced to other nations with each passing day. It?s time to fight back.?
In coming weeks, StemPAC plans to aggressively work on behalf of pro-stem cell legislation being considered right now in the U.S. Senate (H.R. 810 specifically, without amendment ? see www.StemPAC.com for details). Thereafter, it plans to go on the offense, fighting for stem cell funding on the federal level, and for more sensible regulations and legislation in the states as well.
Although StemPac officially launches today, its website has been live since late May. In the mere six weeks since StemPac.com went live it has already become one of the highest trafficked websites in support of stem cell research, has spurred thousands of letters to President Bush and members of Congress, and collected hundreds of stories from real life Americans with Cancer, Alzheimer?s, Parkinson?s, spinal cord injuries, and other conditions for which stem cell research holds promise (see www.StemPAC.com for stories, sortable by state and city).
The StemPaC Team
The StemPAC team is headed by John Hlinko, who helped lead MoveOn.org in its early days, and who founded and led DraftWesleyClark.com, a shoestring effort that engaged tens of thousands of supporters, gained national media attention, and raised nearly $2 million in pledges for a Wesley Clark candidacy.
National Democratic strategist and award-winning media consultant Bud Jackson (www.jacksongroupmedia.com ) has also been retained as a Stem Pac team member. Jackson will produce paid media on behalf of StemPac, including television advertising targeting stem cell research opponents.
The rest of the core team includes:
Kevin McCann: Founder of the Fair Deal for Newfoundland campaign
Allyson Kapin: Online marketing specialist, who has worked with a range of national activist organizations
Sabrina Cohen: Associate Director of the Genetics Policy Institute
The core team is being assisted by a range of advisors, including:
Scientists, such as Evan Snyder of the Burnhan Institute;
Grassroots visionaries, including Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, the founder of DailyKos.com;
Longtime political professionals, such as Bill Romjue;
Patient advocates, including Frank L. Cocozzelli;
For more information on the StemPAC team and advisors, please see www.StemPAC.com.
Rauschenberger’s DUI Lost Interest about 10 years ago
Steve Rauschenberger did a dumb thing in 1994 and got behind the wheel of a car drunk. He was arrested, pled guilty, paid the fine and went through the required counseling. It’s time to put the whole thing to bed.
One stupid act deserves what Steve got–the legal remedy. One stupid career as a hack and political opportunist as Bob Kjellander has had is unforgivable.
Kjellander tried to differentiate between Rauschenberger and Bush by claiming that Bush was young when he got his—Bush was 30, Rauschenberger was 37. Both were old enough to know better. They both screwed up and they both took responsibility.
Rich isn’t sure if it was a good move. I see the point, but I tend to think it was–it got him into a high profile fight with Kjellander which is red meat to Republican social conservatives. The DUI is now pretty much off limits for the campaign as a bonus.
And double points for using Kjellander against Kjellander.