Guess what I did at lunch? That's right, I petitioned my government for redress of grievances, specifically illegal political advertising practices by the New York Times and MoveOn.org. We are all well aware of the sorry political advertisement calling the General a traitor.
to deliver or expose to an enemy by treachery or disloyalty: Benedict Arnold betrayed his country.
Good old Benedict Petraeus, well MoveOn could hardly be expected to rise from it's wallow in the fever swamps anyhow, right? So in my first act of political crankitude I filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission regarding the discount MoveOn received. Ya' see in order to be fair newspapers and TV aren't allowed to discount political or advocacy ads so they cannot favor one side, well Hmmmmmm. Here is my complaint.
Office of General Counsel
Federal Election Commission
999 E Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20463
Sept. 10, 2007 the political advocacy group MoveOn.org ran an ad in the NY Times with the headline, Gen. Petraeus or Gen. Betray Us.
This ad also says "Cooking the books for the White House" making it political communications and subject to FEC regulations. It has been reported that MoveOn paid $65,000 for the ad by
and the NY Post
The rate card price of such an ad on the NY Times political advocacy rate card is $181,692.
I sold political advertising for Capital Newspapers in Madison, WI during the 2006 elections. We were informed that there could be absolutely no discounts to the rate card prices for political or advocacy advertising based on federal law. The reason was self-evidently to stop the paper from favoring one viewpoint over another. It seems evident that if the reports are true, the NY Times has favored MoveOn by offering a huge discount to them for political advocacy advertising.
I request an investigation to determine if the law has been broken by the NY Times and/or MoveOn.org.
Madison, WI 53703
jimbo AT unclejimbo.com
New York Times
There may be some loophole that MoveON and the NYT slithered through that allows this, but it sure looks dirty to me. We had a sit down with a lawyer prior to the 2006 election specifically telling us that under no circumstances could we ever discount political or advocacy rates, it was illegal and could destroy the rep of the paper. Well for the NYT their rep is not a problem, but I hope they did break the law. It would front them out as the house organ for the American left and the Democratic party. The Dems don't have to do the heavy sliming, a media/Soros/nutroots coalition will act like swine on their behalf.
Pay attention America, these people wish to rule you.
Update: NYTimes excuses. And a response...