Sound Politics: It's in the P-I

September 11, 2006

It's in the P-I

Joel Connelly, the P-I's contumelious liberal columnist, is troubled by Astroturf PACs which "hide the identities of people" paying for political campaigns.

But Connelly's selective outrage, (at conservative groups) ignores the fact that Democrats play this game too. For example, "Working Families Who Have Had Enough", which spent $100,000 to attack moderate Democrat state Sen. Tim Sheldon, is an Astroturf group mostly funded by the Washington, DC-based "Progressive Majority". Where does Progressive Majority get its money? Much comes from wealthy Californians. The rest? Who knows.

Connelly cites the "Brennan Center for Justice" as an "independent watchdog based at New York University". Actually, it's a Soros-funded goon-squad staffed by Democrat political operatives. Brennan is the group that filed the lawsuit to undermine Washington's voter registration system, supporting its case with bogus evidence.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 11, 2006 10:52 AM | Email This

Comments

1. Egad, money in politics? I'm shocked, just shocked!

Why is JC surprised? This is the logical course of events after the lefties on SCOTUS upheld McCain-Feingold and its restrictions on free speech.

Posted by: ewaggin on September 11, 2006 11:14 AM

2. Joel Connelly is trying to be the Michael Moore of Seattle Marxism. Same girth....same tired one-sided arguments.

Bottom-line is Owens and Alexander are going to lose for the following reasons:
1) Consistent votes against Open Government (Sound Transit, Yousefian, Hangartner).
2) Consistent votes AGAINST Individual Property Rights.
3) Horrify votes like the one shown in the ad where Alexander is held ACCOUNTABLE for a 5-4 dicision where HE cast the deciding vote that allowed the MURDERER of a woman's 3 year-old son to be set free after serving less than 1/3 of his term.

ACCOUNTABILITY Connelly. Hard to swallow, isn't it FatBoy!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: dude on September 11, 2006 11:39 AM

3. Gee Joel...if you are so outraged about people legally spending their own money to hold a couple renegade Judges accountable for their decisions, perhaps you should be pushing for lifetime appointed Judges. That would certainly seperate the Judicial and Executive Branches of State Government, huh????
Joel is consistent...consistently goofy!
No one really takes Connelly seriously anymore, do they?

Posted by: ugh on September 11, 2006 11:42 AM

4. Typical of liberal, accuse others of that to which you arte guilty and feign outrage. Lying hypocritical scoundrels.

Posted by: pbj on September 11, 2006 12:22 PM

5. I find it fascinating that Connelly is disturbed by "special interests" being involved in judicial races, but is markedly silent on the issue of the Democrats being in full control of the three branches of government. So what *really* bothers him about the money, obviously, is that it could unfreeze the Democratic glacier!

Posted by: Anonymous on September 11, 2006 12:45 PM

6. I find it fascinating that Connelly is disturbed by "special interests" being involved in judicial races, but is markedly silent on the issue of the Democrats being in full control of the three branches of government. So what *really* bothers him about the money, obviously, is that it could unfreeze the Democratic glacier!

Posted by: Anonymous on September 11, 2006 12:45 PM

7. Why should you be surprised?

The latest is the 9-11 doumentary that ABC did. The Dems didnt like any reference that they might have screwed up. Perhaps, but if it were an R, they would gleefully play like "what's the big dead".

I had a similar situation recently with the "establishment". Taxed to the max with no relief in sight, till us property owners got together and threw the taxaholics into a loop. These arrogant people were shocked that anyone disagreed with them.

Joel Connelly is another.

Posted by: swatter on September 11, 2006 01:39 PM

8. Actually, it's a Soros-funded goon-squad staffed by Democrat political operatives."

Well, at least Soros knows how to get his money's worth:

http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/pov/osi_court_documents.html

Of course, I'm sure this case was handled by the for-profit side of the house, as opposed to the non-profit, non-partisan, taxpayer-supported side of the house.

Oh, whoops, there isn't one.

Posted by: TB on September 11, 2006 02:18 PM

9. I should clarify: Open Society Institute is Soros's I-wanna-change-the-world fund.

Posted by: TB on September 11, 2006 02:19 PM

10. Re: The Brennan Group, Connelly is naive and needs to do his homework - it would be good to email him and inform him about his flawed judgment. George Soros - for more background on this purveyor of evil, a good read is "The Shadow Party", by David Horowitz. He captures what demented, misled, narcissistic, greedy a**hole that Soros really is.

Posted by: KS on September 11, 2006 09:30 PM

11. I wonder how you folks would respond to this little campaign finance proposal:
- Individuals may contribute unlimited amounts of money to political parties and political campaigns. Groups (including corporations, unions, non-profits, think tanks, but not including political parties) may not contribute to political parties or political campaigns. All contributions must be fully disclosed with the Federal Elections Commission.
- Individuals may spend money on behalf of any candidate, party, or ballot initiative, but their expenditures must be declared to the FEC, and advertisements must disclose who paid for them. Groups (including all of the varieties mentioned above) are prohibited from spending money on behalf of a candidate, party, or ballot initiative.

My premise here is that the rights granted in the Bill of Rights, specifically here the right of free (political) speech, is granted to flesh-and-blood individuals, not "legal persons" such as corporate entities.

Is this a proposition you could get behind?

Posted by: Allen McPheeters on September 12, 2006 08:38 AM