The WaPo provides the Repub rebuttal on the legal issue:

Democrats also cited Federal Communications Commission guidelines saying the originators of automated calls must identify themselves at the beginning of each call. Republican Party lawyers, however, said the requirement does not apply to political nonprofit organizations. They rebuffed a "cease and desist" letter sent yesterday by the DCCC.

If true, the reg needs to be changed, obviously. Being an actual lawyer, I could look this up, but I have fond hopes of actually billing someone for my time today ....

My thesis in a previous thread - sanity stands in inverse proportion to a propensity for multiple exclamation points, regardless of political bent - still looks strong, I see.

So right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

One of the largest lefty sites, Counterpunch, yesterday ran a lengthy article on ACORN's officially welcoming an FBI investigation of alleged staff wrongdoings, since ACORN are determined any wrongdoers within their organization should face justice. Does that help?

Regards, C

Regards, C

Democrats have a simple strategy, let Americans review how things have gone under Bush and a GOP congress and then vote. Tomorrow will tell us what they think of the GOP track record.

And by the way, its not Americans that have longstanding hatred of its troops, its you liberals. Thanks for making my points.

Others, like Ms. Hollis, the Villanova professor, say they have filed complaints with the Federal Communications Commission. Its rules on automated calls require that callers state their identity at the beginning of the message. These calls end with a disclaimer that they were paid for by the Republican committee; no identification is made at the start of the message.

If they've misstated the law, I'm sure we'll hear all about it tomorrow.

(For that matter, if they *haven't* misstated the law, we'll still hear tomorrow that they did.)

Of course not! Kerry deliberately decided to draw attention to himself and enhance his 2008 prospects by mocking the intelligence of American soldiers in Iraq, relying on America's longstanding hatred of its troops to win support for himself and the party whose nomination he oh-so-obviously seeks.

The prepared remarks released later by his campaign were hoaxes, plainly produced on a PC rather than on a Mac (as the kerning clearly demonstrates -- hat tip to PowerLine!) -- everyone knows that Dems use only Macs, b/c they hate capitalism in general and Bill Gates in particular!

What other explanation is there?

And I am sure that you believe Kerry's "joke" was meant for the President and not the troops. The fact is, you liberals are a joke.

I dunno, maybe for the same reason you have to type in all-capital letters? Maybe if you pointed out the "lie" I could give you a better answer?

IF THE WHOLE STRATEGY IS THAT VOTERS WON’T LISTEN TO THE WHOLE MESSAGE EVEN ONCE THEN WHAT THE HECK KIND OF STRATEGY IS THAT!!!

I assume that, snark aside, you really *do* have trouble reading. My apologies for slighting your disability. PERHAPS IT WOULD HELP IF I TYPED IN ALL-CAPS? BUT THEN I WOULD LOOK MARGINALLY LITERATE. So I'll pass on that.

Ken: I do not think that you want a vote for the Dems to imply an endorsement of everything the Dems do wrong. JJ is relatively unusual in picking up, acknowledging, & criticizing the tactic in question. Lighten up, my friend. (And vote tomorrow!)

Look, republicans would have to be as brain dead as a liberal's aborted baby to do something so stupid. IF THE CALL ENDS UP INDICATING THAT IT WAS A REPUBLICAN DOING THE CALLING, THEN WHAT GOOD DOES IT DO THEM! IF THE WHOLE STRATEGY IS THAT VOTERS WON'T LISTEN TO THE WHOLE MESSAGE EVEN ONCE THEN WHAT THE HECK KIND OF STRATEGY IS THAT!!! And if the call is to the liberals benefit by repeating the liberal candidates name through repeated calling then...hmmm...maybe it is the DEMOCRAT who is actually making the call! lol

If republicans win tomorrow you libs will blame it on conjured up charges such as this plus of course voter fraud. If you libs win tomorrow, then, well, you can celebrate with the Taliban and all the terrorists who worked hard for the same thing, in a big party. (but some advice, don't let them bring the fireworks).

Um, no. Not "1 more second." The calls are *designed* to be annoyingly lengthy to anyone who doesn't want to hear that Joe Democrat believes in selling babies for medical experiments, kicking dogs, etc.

Cf. this news story quoted by Hilzoy at ObWi:

My God, the phone calls! Just as I'd begin to drift off to sleep, the phone would ring and it would be YET ANOTHER DAMN COMPUTERIZED MESSAGE ABOUT LOIS MURPHY.

One, two, three, four times a day it seemed, the phone rang with "robocalls" about the Democratic challenger to incumbent GOP Rep. Jim Gerlach in one of the nastiest races in the country.

I never listened to one word of it, just slammed the phone down and seethed with resentment. (...)

But if they annoy voters rather than enlighten them, what's the point?

That's what I asked Lois Murphy's campaign yesterday.

The answer was simple:

"It's not us!"

Only three recorded calls have been made on behalf of Murphy's campaign, including one from Gov. Rendell, which were sponsored by the Democratic State Committee.

The rest? A "dirty trick" by the Republicans, said communications director Amy Bonitatibus.

The calls, which begin by offering "important information about Lois Murphy," are designed to mislead voters into thinking the message is from her.

Most recipients slam down the phone before finding out otherwise - and then call to complain.

"We've got a ton of complaints, starting about two weeks ago," Bonitatibus said.

"Some of our biggest supporters have said, 'If you call me again, I'm not voting for Lois.' ""

See? It works.

Another point is, IIRC, that such calls are *required* to begin with the name of the responsible entity. Which these don't. So that mentioning the Dem's name up front is especially misleading to anyone who knows the law, or has grown used to compliant robocalls.

And yes, I'm a Democrat. So you can ignore all of the above. Handy, isn't it?