Local blogger, former school board candidate, and contributor to IlliniPundit IlliniPundit.com John Bambenek has been named 'Wanker of the Year' by dailykos.com, a highly-trafficked liberal blog. Apparently Bambenek has filed an FEC complaint against the blog alleging they are a political committee and should be regulated as such.
Not only has this issue already been decided in the courts, but even the conservative blogs find this a troubling, bad idea that threatens the first ammendment of the constitution.
UPDATE: Edited by IP to clarify that Bambenek doesn't contribute to IlliniPundit (me, the blogger) but rather to IlliniPundit.com (the blog site). He "contributes" in the same way that curious and Rex Bradfield and Queen and dozens of others "contribute."
I only make this clarification because I know, at some point, there's going to be a story about "IlliniPundit blogger files FEC complaint against Kos" or some such thing. And nothing could be further from the truth. I don't support this complaint, I think it's invalid under current FEC rules, I think the current FEC rules under which this complaint was filed are unconstitutional, I think the FEC should be abolished and I think political speech should be as free and unregulated as possible.
Thanks for your indulgence.
I agree with Kos, and with most bloggers from everywhere on the political spectrum.
Bambenek's complaint is a bad idea, and if the FEC upholds it, the effects on political speech on the internet would be atrocious.
Wow, Bambenek. Who would have ever thought that Bambenek would deserve such high praise and support by liberals and conservatives alike?
You rock, Bambenek, and we're so very proud!
" ...Bambenek doesn't contribute to IlliniPundit (me, the blogger) but rather to IlliniPundit.com (the blog site)."
"Mini-me, you complete me."
Dr. Evil
I know I sound like a pompus jerk trying to make a distinction between IP/myself and IP.com, but I've got to try...
I know I sound like a pompus jerk trying to make a distinction between IP/myself and IP.com, but I've got to try...
No, you've got an image/brand to protect and maintain. Perfectly reasonable edit.
You have a stranger definition of the word "contributes".
"You have a stranger definition of the word "contributes"."
Why?
To some, in politics, "contributes" means "gives money to." I just wanted to be sure that people didn't think Bambenek was "contributing" to IP.com/IP in that way.
We have donors, but donating isn't a criteria for blogging here. Anyway, clarifying it made sense to me at the time, but sounds stranger now that I try to explain it. [shrugs]
One wonders if this is a ploy for "getting his name out there", so to speak...
The comments are interesting to read...
As one who regularly sticks his foot in his mouth, I'm glad it was John and not me this time.
To be clear, that's just a figure of speech, and John's foot has, to my knowledge, never been anywhere near my mouth.
However, I'm surprised at the amount of righteous bloggy indignation going on. John got dissed by Redstate, DKos, NRO, and probably a dozen others. With vigor. I did it too, but I'm just a fruit fly buzzing a beetle.
See the Academy, where we start at pretension and never look back.
Arvid asked, "One wonders if this is a ploy for "getting his name out there", so to speak..."
A ploy? Yes, and a pretty obvious one at that. The guy is a syndicated-columnist wannabe (though he does say he is syndicated). He's been published by the Daily Illini (circulation ?) and contributes to several different blogs (local and national) including his own.
What price fame? Even the commenters at Hannity.com are calling Mr. Bambanek a clown.
That said, when is he going to file an FEC against Illinois Review (another blog to which he contributes) for doing exactly the same thing Daily Kos does?
(And yes, I've already posted on this myself over at Illinois Reason. Unlike IP and many others, I support Mr. Bambanek's right to make a fool of himself by filing this complaint, even as I disagree with his already-been-answered complaint itself.)
"You have a stranger definition of the word "contributes"."
Why?
I think Xian was referring to quality of content, i.e., does a plug nickel really qualify as a contribution?
"I know I sound like a pompus jerk trying to make a distinction between IP/myself and IP.com, but I've got to try..."
No prob, thanks for the edit. In hindsight, I probably should have used 'Illinipundit.com regular John Bambenek'. I was just trying to get across that it was "our" Bambenek, the one we see commenting here regularly, that filed the suit.
I think he's just trying to get as famous as me.
Definitely an attempt to finally be recognized on wikipedia as someone besides a non-notable. This guy is quite a piece of work. Not only does he drive reasonable bloggers away from this site with his rudeness and venom, now he's attempting to institute censorship on blogs.
Credibility and respect are such fragile things.
He'll certainly never have a client list as lengthy as yours, dear sister.
I wonder how many people who criticized have actually read the complaint...
I suspect not many.
And for clarification the issue has "been dealt with" inside the FEC... not the courts (aside of having to come up with new rules).
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
How would one "read the complaint"? Provide us the link, and I'd be glad to read it.
Without reading the complaint, why would you even file a complaint in the first place? I guess if you don't like what someone says you just try to squelch their voice? How bout' that for being a proponent of democracy and free speech.
I endorsed a candidate on my blog... perhaps I should be regulated in my free speech as well? The complaint is absurd. The only positive thing about the complaint is that it has united liberals and conservatives on at least one issue.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
Yes, John, but the FEC's reasoning was very, very good. The courts will not overrule them, unless it is to throw out McCain-Feingold, a lottery-esque result with, as you are experiencing, a high price to play.
See the Academy, where we start at pretension and never look back.
Funny, the complaint is out there, half the internet is saying they know its BS... and THEN you demand to read it? Isn't that like putting the cart before the horse?
And you assume that I'm in full support of the entire balance of FEC laws... and that is exactly what that is... an assumption.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
I'm not sending anything to the courts too, that reminds me of another clairification... there is no lawsuit here. I only sue state agencies... *ducks*
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
The pdf is linked from his blog-critcs site.
See the Academy, where we start at pretension and never look back.
Glock21, I agree, that is a good thing.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
Mr. Bambenek, where can I meet you? Will you autograph a copy of the DailyKos for me?
Sorry, I didn't take the time to google it. With it being something of such importance, I figured it would have been linked to already.
I'm sorry, but I didn't assume anything. I don't recall stating that "Mr. Bambenek supports the entire balance of FEC laws", but you can put words into my mouth if you so desire. I merely stated that you obviously didn't like what Kos was doing/saying so you attempted to squelch their voice/actions with said complaint. After reading your complaint, I still feel the same way. if Kos were forced to be considered under FEC purview, IP would probably have to follow suit also, along with probably half the blogs on the internet which speak about politics in some fashion.
Anon-
Sure, I'll autograph it... I'm half tempted to YouTube an acceptance speech of it. :) Email me if you're serious.
j-dub-
You ASSUME I don't like what Kos is doing, you ASSUME I'm trying to squelch their voice. Be honest, you're stating your assumptions as fact.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
"I wonder how many people who criticized have actually read the complaint...
I suspect not many."
I don't need to read the complaint to know I don't support it.
As I said above: "I don't support this complaint, I think it's invalid under current FEC rules, I think the current FEC rules under which this complaint was filed are unconstitutional, I think the FEC should be abolished and I think political speech should be as free and unregulated as possible."
I object to the FEC having the power (or potentially have the power) to regulate political speech.
I object to people asking the FEC to regulate political speech on the internet.
I object on principles. I don't care about the specifics of the complaint, even though I'm pretty sure the FEC has tried to go down this road in 2005 and 2006. There is nothing in the complaint that could convince me of it's merits.
Kos could endorse/raise-money-for/tattoo-on-his-forhead-the-name-of every single Democrat in the nation for elecion in 2008, and I still wouldn't want the FEC to consider them as a PAC, because I think the rules under which they'd do so are an abomination.
Sorry, John. I don't care about the legalities. The principles behind the rules suck, and asking the FEC to regulate any blog sucks.
Well, I don't want to re-debate the complaint before the FEC has even gotten it...
If we want to do away with the FEC, the issue is front and center again, lobby for it. I'm certainly no big fan. However, as I understand it, the FEC (or more accurately the federal election laws) do basically 3 things: disclosure, contribution caps, censorship.
Now, I'll be up front, the McCain censorship rules need to go, period. I'm on the fence about contribution caps. I see both sides and I just haven't made up my mind on it. Disclosure I just can't find a big problem with. I think voters have a right to information and the people bankrolling candidates is certainly important information. I don't think it stifles free speech if a candidate or PAC has to disclose that they got paid $10M by George Soros. I don't really see a strong First Amendment case against disclosure rules.
A friend joked that I could be hit with an FEC complaint for this because I have brought up another reason why John McCain should lose. I was amused.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
Personally, I'm just in awe of j-dub being "half the internet."
Since it's topical, how much does this site cost to host and how much does it garner in Paypal contributions?
"If we want to do away with the FEC, the issue is front and center again, lobby for it."
I have and I will continue to do so. Does that make me a PAC? :-)
I tell you what - if I also see onerous FEC rules being used in ways that I find inappropriate, I'll lobby against that as well. Which is what I'm doing to your FEC complaint. I don't like the rules it was filed under, and I don't like the potential consequences of your succeeding. I don't want Kos, or any other blog, regulated as a Federal PAC, regardless of what they say or how they're organized.
So I hope you either withdraw your complaint, or the FEC - as loathsome as that agency is - crushes it.
"Since it's topical, how much does this site cost to host and how much does it garner in Paypal contributions?"
Valid question.
It costs me about $35 per month to host. It varies depending on bandwidth and I know I'm paying too much, but I want reliability over all else, and I'm on my sixth host in two years. I've received $151 in donations since 1/1/2007. At some point this fall, I may try a pledge week or something like that, but I need to make more progress on my promises/to-do list first.
I don't think I'm in any danger of Kos-like revenue, that's for sure.
No it doesn't... unless you want to say this site exists for the primary purpose of influencing federal elections at least.
By all means, lobby for it. Make your views known.... I'm not shutting anyone out of the process.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
"Sure, I'll autograph it... I'm half tempted to YouTube an acceptance speech of it. :) Email me if you're serious."
No, Mr. Bambenek I was not serious. You are a clown, apparently with a big ego.
You sure you don't want an autograph... it'll be worth real money some day. You're missing out and you'll be hating yourself later.
That and you'd get to meet me... I'll even let you buy lunch. I'm so generous.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
Geez!
I have news for you folks. This is the type of skirmish and "harrying raid" that the right should be engaging in on a daily basis.
Anyone ever heard of Roe v. Wade? It was a "hit case" set up.
This is how the Alinski-ite left works, and we are idiots for not adopting the same tactics.
Every Lefty 501(c)3 breaks rules on lobbying for laws and candidates, but Illinois' Heartland Institute wouldn't put up a billboard to save their lives.
One wonders whether we will ever stop printing millions of unread policy studies and start running information ads calling leftist ideas the crap that they are. (Single Payer Health Care would be a good start.)
...speaking of which...
Is there ANY 'conservative' organization even considering producing a documentary on the 10s of 1000s of deaths brought on by "Single Payer" rationing of care. I thought not. Too busy trying to post to blogs about the relative chances of Rudy or Ron Paul. Here in Illinois, we have a silly "Impeach Blago" campaign instead of a full-fledged lobbying effort for a new Constitution.
I'm in 100% support of John. He's inspired me to start my complaint to the IRS regarding NPR, which is taking "non-profit" contributions to promote candidates and policy in such a blatant fashion that they non-profit status should be revoked. It's time NPR started living up to a "Fairness Doctrine," just like I do when I take calls on my radio show.
So is it time for the picture of the girl doing a handstand on the beach, right about now?
Then what are you trying to do if I'm incorrect? If you are out to clean up this whole disclosure issue then why are you singling out ONE liberal blog? Why didn't you list other sources of such a rampant problem in your good faith efforts as a concerned citizen? Maybe the FEC would be more interested if you cited more violations and make it seem like a true problem for them to actually spend time investigating. Instead, you sound more like a whining conservative who really dislikes Kos (or simply someone who just really dislikes Kos), and less like someone who is simply trying to help us feeble minded public citizens.
I couldn't agree more with IP on this particular issue.
I didn't say you were wrong either, again, assumption.
I'm saying you're stating assumptions as facts, that's it. You don't know my motivations, you don't know what I think about Kos, and apparently, you haven't even really read the complaint.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
The only thing you've stated you are after is disclosure. As I stated in my last post. So why not tackle more than Kos if you're truly out to benefit everyone? I continue to ask questions, you continue to dance around them.
I read your complaint. I stated so a few posts ago. Or was I making an assumption that I read something that I really didn't read? Or did I just not read it altogether? I'm really not sure, could you please inform me of what I have or have not done? I'd really appreciate your clarification.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
j-dub
www.jdub217.com
So is it time for the picture of the girl doing a handstand on the beach, right about now?
I was thinking of this one, actually:
Is it time for Mr. Bambenek to go away as being more trouble than his opinions are worth?
I think if we followed his own logic, yes it would be; as that appears to be his tactic of choice. However, we are all open-minded individuals who are glad to indulge his conversation so there is no need for him to stop speaking his opinions. Most folks enjoy free speech, hence the popularity of blogging; especially political blogging. And even more reasons for people to question his actions on this matter.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
j-dub
www.jdub217.com
Realistically, Wentaway was a special case, and Bambenek doesn't even come close.
Wenalway was banned because he was repeatedly posting the same insults in every single thread, so that every discussion degenerated into a flame war with/about him, and nothing stayed on-topic.
Bambenek hasn't done that - even this discussion has remained mostly on-topic, despite the interjected and unnecessary insults that pop up every now and then.
If someone wants to file an FEC complaint against me, feel free. I'm not going to threaten to sue your to oblivion over it.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
Dear John (that has a nice wring to it, doesn't it?),
May I please have a copy of your John Hancock (that's pretty funny too)? I'm hoping I can trade it for a free pickle slice at Legends.
Yours,
the Fen
Wait? Free pickles at Legends???
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
After reading the complaint and considering the comments here, it seems the following arguments can be made:
1. Curtailing websites like the DailyKos because they have a large audience would affect websites of all sizes, including IlliniPundit. That would be a disaster.
2. Filing a complaint through the FEC gives the FEC further credibility to regulate the internet. There are politically motivated organization grasping at any authority they can to curtail free political debate. They will attempt to use the FEC if they find it can be used to effectively shut down political debate.
extrawise, I agree that NPR's funding should be challenged. There is no reason for a publicly funded radio program, and the fact that they are so clearly biased is an abuse of power. If NPR became a for-profit radio station, like all the rest, the liberals who complain about the imbalance of talk radio would have to include the NPR audience into the equation. Taking it one step further, liberals could even claim NPR as a successful model for liberal talk radio that could be copied and expanded. Of course, that assumes that NPR would survive in a competitive market!
Oops! That last comment was mine. I was not logged in. Sorry.
Handymom-
A fine argument... though if the complaint is successful, it isn't because I've created a new power for the FEC (one would certainly hope I don't have that much power) but because they already have that power... if that is the case, sounds like some people should be lobbying our presidential candidates to change some laws.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
I would hope that if you find yourself with more power than you imagined, you will use it wisely!
I don't know about using power wisely... but I'd likely drink more Glenlevit.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit