I invite the reader's careful parsing of the language in the first paragraph after "Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention."
Arguably, they may well have already tripped a mine when they sent that obviously politically motivated and timed press release on the airport site earlier this week.
Thursday, September 24, 2009
EarthKeepers tiptoed through IRC Section 501(c)(3) minefield.
I invite the reader's careful parsing of the language in the first paragraph after "Issue Advocacy vs. Political Campaign Intervention."
Arguably, they may well have already tripped a mine when they sent that obviously politically motivated and timed press release on the airport site earlier this week.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't see how this is political unless the candidates choose to make it so. No candidate is identified, mentioned, referred to or alluded to. No candidate had publicly stated their position on the the environmental issue prior to the statement. The fact that a candidate chooses to disagree or agree after the fact does not constitute a violation.
I just don't see how this can be misconstrued as a political advertisement. Of course, if I were a candidate or avid supporter of a candidate who is afraid of being hurt by this, I might be willing to cry, Foul!"
Good point: so, tell us, so that we may more accurately guage the accuracy of your parsing of the language, do you favor the status quo or closing the airport and / or building a new one?
Who are you backing for mayor?
Who are you backing in Weaver's race?
Post a Comment