Bush has flip-flopped on 527s - my letter to WH correspondents.

[girl gone mad]

This is a letter I emailed to several news outlets a short time ago:

When Bush signed McCain-Feingold into law, he declared:

"I believe individual freedom to participate in elections should be
expanded, not diminished; and when individual freedoms are restricted, questions arise under the First Amendment.

I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising, which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import in the months closest to an election."

Bush's current call to deny any "outside group" the right to make political ads is in sharp contrast to the strong stance he took while campaign finance reform was being debated in congress and in the public arena. Early in his Presidency, Bush promised to veto either of the competing campaign finance reform bills if the language "..restricted individuals and/or groups from being able to express their opinion." (http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry022102.shtml). After the signing, Bush strongly suggested that he was counting on the Supreme Court to overturn many of the restrictions.

The issue now should not be whether 527 groups are bad for the political process and should be banned. Bush chose to argue against such a ban while the McCain-Feingold debate was raging.

The real issue is why Mr. Bush will not condemn a slanderous advertising campaign with a demonstrable connection to his campaign for re-election. None of the Swiftboat Veterans who have appeared in these commercials can substantiate their claims through documentation, most are proven liars, most never even served with Kerry, and some were never even on a Swiftboat. There simply is no comparison between a smear campaign full of proven factual inaccuracies promulgated by partisan conservatives with direct links to the Bush family and the comparatively meek issue ads run by a political PAC (MoveOn), which is subject to full disclosure laws.

Please ask the President why he would rather flip-flop on the issue of campaign finance laws than simply denounce a despicable smear campaign which is undermining his own credibility. Ask him why he would rather threaten to infringe on our First Amendment rights than distance himself from a sleazy attack ad that damages the credibility of our military and demeans all men who have been awarded medals for honorable service in combat.

[Feanorcurufinwe]

1. Good job!

[girl gone mad]

2. Thanks.

I guess we'll see if they ask the administration the tough questions.

I wonder if McCain-Feingold is still a sore point with conservatives..

[bagnana]

3. great letter!

The WH press corps' questioning on this has been maddening:

Do you condemn the ad?

SM: we condemn all shadowy ads and call on Kerry to do the same.

Do you condemn this particular ad?

SM: yes we condemn all shadowy ads and call on Kerry to do the same.

But do you condemn this ad, this smear boat ad?

SM: as I said, we condemn all shadowy ads and call on Kerry to do the same.

It's like some bizarre dance.