John Bambenek Gets The Wanker Of The Year Award From Daily Kos

John Bambenek, Kos Wanker of the Year!

As predicted yesterday the Kos Krazies are drooling all over themselves and have declared John Bambenek, Wanker of the Year!

One of the funniest things about this story is how many on the right are having a meltdown about John filing the complaint. The toss another conservative under the bus brigade is at it again. Here they go:

RedState, FEC complaint against Kos?

This complaint is a sorry attempt to use government institutions to silence opponents. I’m almost grateful Bambanek apparently slept from March 2005 through the Summer of 2006, because the stunt has zero chance of success. (link)
NRO, Dangerous Attack on Free Speech

The proprietor of this blog claims that he has filed an FEC complaint against Daily Kos. Supposedly, this won’t fly, based on earlier FEC rulings, but this is nonetheless an outrage against the First Amendment that every conservative should fight vigorously. Freedom of speech — especially political speech — is our God-given right, as the founding documents of our nation attest. (link)
knownews.com, I’m filing an FEC complaint
I guess Michael Silence sees no ignorance in his own filing of an FEC complaint while bitching about John Bambenek filing one. Yep we have crazy right wingers also.

5 Comments

Reagan Fan

1

Bambenek is, he’s simply looking for attention and publicity Rather than doing something positive to undermine the stuff they put on Kos, he’s trying to change the rules of the game. Political blogs have, rightfully, never been under the control of the FEC. Kos can encourage his readers to vote for/donate to Democrats all he wants, but as long as donations to Kos and not funneled directly to them the FEC shouldn’t get involved. And I’m sure Bambenek understands this he’s just trying to make trouble.
July 24th, 2007 at 8:26 pm
Gary McGath

2

Since you claim to need an explanation of why regulated speech is not free speech:

Let’s start with a definition. Freedom means absence of any interference, control, and requirements for permission from government. Got that much? Good.

Here’s a slightly harder point. Listen carefully. Requiring someone to register, to report financial activity, to limit one’s activities, is interference, control, and a requirement for permission from the government. Go away for an hour and think about it. It might sink in.

OK, now the final conclusion.

The two are mutually exclusive.

Figured it out yet?
July 25th, 2007 at 6:24 am
Wild Bill

3

Wow Gary McGath, I bet I can use your reasoning to argue that filing my taxes is an affront to my free speech. I’m sure the IRS will go for that.

and blah blah blah, “Bambenek is simply looking for attention and publicity”. First prove that statement, next even if he is, WHAT IS WRONG WITH THAT? If what he did is not news or post worthy then why in the hell are you talking about it. Also you post about this on your site and make false claims about Bambenek’s motives and don’t offer your readers a link to his explanation of his actions. And you want to lecture me on the meaning of free speech?

I hear people say “it’s just a publicity stunt” crap all the time. They said it about me when I was on the news. It is a straw man. Steve Jobs was just looking for publicity for the iPhone, so that must make it wrong? Al Gore wants publicity for his global warming BS, so that proves he is wrong (we don’t need to use the fact that he is trying to get publicity to prove he is wrong, there are enough facts to prove he is wrong.) I could go on an on.

So are you saying political action committees should not be regulated? Bambenek is simply asking for the FEC to investigate whether Daily Kos should be classified as a political action committee. If they are not then they have nothing to worry about. If they are then they should be following the law. Simple as that.

If Daily Kos is found to be a PAC then it will be the FEC and the government regulating their freedom not Bambenek. Because we all know PACs have no freedom.
July 25th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Hammer

4

No, you’re missing the point. There are strict rules about PAC’s that don’t apply to normal speech. These rules are necessary to help preserve the integrity of democratic elections. Again, these rules should not be extended to blogs because it would limit free speech. And how can you deny this is a publicity stunt? Do you really think the FEC pays attention to requests from random bloggers? And no the iPhone was not a publicity stunt, it is a real thing with real uses and value. And no “An Inconvenient Truth” is no more of a publicity stunt than “The Passion of the Christ”, they both espouse a view about a belief held by the majority of the population to the chagrin of a minority. That has value. Bambenek’s “request”, however, does not.
July 25th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Wild Bill

5

Hammer you are right FEC rules should not be extended to blogs. Daily Kos (in my opinion) is not merely a blog, but a blog for a PAC. I can deny it is a publicity stunt just like you can deny Daily Kos is a PAC. I hope the FEC pays attention to legaly filed complaints, its their job. The iPhone itself was not a publicity stunt but the majority of advertising for it was. An Inconvenient Truth was made to get attention for the non-existence of man-made global warming. I’ll agree with you about The Passion of the Christ as I am an atheist. If Bambenek’s request has no legitimacy or value then it will be dismissed. Thanks for your comments.
July 25th, 2007 at 5:53 pm