Slashdot Log In
Republican Robocall Pretexting Campaign
Posted by
kdawson
on Mon Nov 06, 2006 04:45 PM
from the dirty-tricks-and-phonespam dept.
from the dirty-tricks-and-phonespam dept.
WCityMike writes, "In 53 Congressional campaigns across the country, including the Pennsylvania 6th, the Connecticut 4th, the North Carolina 11th, the New Hampshire 2nd, and the Illinois 6th and 8th (and possibly all races), the National Republican Congressional Committee is conducting a $2.1 million campaign to make it appear as if Democrats are spamming callers with telemarketing calls. The NRCC hired Conquest Communications Group to conduct a massive nationwide robocalling campaign with calls specifically scripted to appear as if they're coming from the Democratic candidate — in violation of FCC regulations on such 'robocalls,' which requires the identity of the caller to be stated at the beginning of the message [47 CFR 64.1200(b)(1)]. The call begins with 'Hello. I'm calling with information about,' and then says the name of the Democratic candidate. There is then a pause; if the recipient hangs up here, they will receive repeated calls back with the same message, potentially up to 18 times or more (according to one callee). If the callee doesn't hang up, they hear a smear message from the machine about the Democratic candidate. The NRCC thinks the legality of the calls is, conveniently, a 'complicated legal question that's not going to get adjudicated this weekend.'" Update 20:47 GMT by SM: Thankfully we all learned how to deal with these folks last week.
Related Stories
[+]
News: How To Sue the Auto Dialers 402 comments
Bennett Haselton writes "
Every year just before election day, I usually get a few phone calls from
machines that dial numbers and play a pre-recorded message telling people
to vote a certain way. I find these annoying even if I support the side
I'm being asked to vote for, and most people don't realize that in most
cases you can sue the organizations for making these calls, even if they
are non-profits. So, you can make some money while advancing a good
cause (i.e. stopping the bozos from doing it again). Here's how to file
your case in Small Claims court, how to possibly negotiate an out-of-court
settlement in advance, how to argue the case in court, and how to collect
afterwards." His essay follows...
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
"smear message"? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:"smear message"? (Score:5, Insightful)
You would not believe how difficult it is to effectively judge a candidate unless you hear them speak live. I spent quite a bit of time perusing newspapers, candidate websites, and Google trying to find information to base my determinations for voting this election.
I am getting so much negative campaigning but not enough real facts from the candidates themselves. I really wish that someone would stop the fucking smear campaigns and instead clearly list what they intend to do. If they ran before, I want someone (obviously the campaigns website won't) to list exactly what they said they were going to do and exactly what they did do so I can compare.
If this information is easily accessible in the State of Minnesota, please let me know where it is. My current vote is based on what I have gleamed from the newspapers and the campaign websites. Bleh.
I suppose my methodology is better than my co-workers who are "voting Union line" or someone who is "voting Party line."
Parent
Re:"smear message"? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not in their interest to do that, because they'll lose the votes of everyone who hates that. They want to be as ambiguous as possible so that nobody can find a reason to vote against them.
Parent
Re:"smear message"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Your taxes are not lower. The Bush administration has failed to cut spending to pay their tax cuts and in fact has dramatically increased spending. Thus the present value of taxes you will pay over your lifetime has risen under the Bush administration since the 100s of billions of dollars of debt the Bush administration has run up will have to be paid from future taxes. You are not paying these taxes this year but you will have to pay them in the future. Ask any economist and they will tell that lowering taxes without cutting spending is an increase and not a reduction in your lifetime tax payments.
Bush has essentially given you a loan which will have to be paid back (with interest) by higher taxes in the future.
Parent
Re:"smear message"? (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with your logic is that Bush is spending much more than you're saving. Even if he hadn't pushed through the tax cuts, we would be running a deficit right now. The tax cuts just add insult to injury.
Furthermore, this isn't just a issue for us, it's an issue for our children and grandchildren. THEY will be paying for the excesses of this decade, and they'll have to pay our debts at the same time they're funding Social Security for the baby boomers.
Seriously, this is bad.
Parent
Re:"smear message"? (Score:5, Informative)
Sure, you can keep paying off one credit card with another. But the issue of whether deficit spending actually boosts economic growth is up in the air. On one hand you do have the Keyensian economic effect.(which is interesting considering Republicans supposedly reject Keynes), but on the other hand you have the drain caused by interest payments. Interest ads no value. You're not creating any economic growth by spending $400 billion on interest, and you also have the issue of the $9 trillion which is tied up in federal bonds instead of being available for economic investment into the private sector.
The interesting thing is, we're at a point today where the interest payments on the Federal Debt(about $400 billion) is larger than the amount of the annual deficit(about $250 billion). So we're at a point now where if not for the debt, we'd have a balanced budget. So our debt is actually draining on our budget and making the debt larger. Why is that an issue? Because being in a situation where your debt keeps rising in order to pay off your existing debt is a recipe for bankruptcy.
Whoa... Your beyond drinking the kool-aid. Your flat off in la la land. Paying off the debt would not drain the economy, rather quite the opposite. It would free up the $9 trillion plus interest payments for private economic development.
debt-to-GDP is increasing, and has been for several years. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html [zfacts.com]
It would only be decreasing if the deficit was held to zero, allowing for inflation to decrease the present and future value of the debt. That hasn't happened since the Clinton era.
Your understanding of economics and deficit spending is disturbing. I've encountered it before, and it appears to be a result of a propaganda campaign by some Republicans to prop up their existing power structure. That is, ignore the problems and look at the furry rabbit slight of hand.
I don't know if it's worth responding to you, because I don't think you care about actually educating yourself and understanding the issues.
Parent
Re:"smear message"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
I don't think that's quite the motivation.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Somewhere along the line, they decided that the best motivator was to get you pissed off enough at the other guy that you would make the time to get into the polls.
Unfortunately, this has caused campaigns to go from "vote for me because" to "don't vote for the other guy because".
It just seems to get worse with time.
Parent
I was wondering when this would happen... (Score:4, Interesting)
The phrase "out of touch" comes to mind....BTW - I'm a registered independant, and thinking of going Libertarian.
Suuuuuure it's complicated (Score:5, Interesting)
They're right. It won't get adjudicated this weekend.
However, just like their phone-jamming shenanigans in New Hampshire, it will get adjudicated against their corrupt asses [washingtonpost.com].
So let them have their fun. This kind of crap is exactly why this Republican will be voting against every Republican on tomorrow's ballot.
Funn how my party continues to call the Democratic party one of traitors when it's my party which is undermining democratic principles.
Re:Suuuuuure it's complicated (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Suuuuuure it's complicated (Score:5, Funny)
You forgot to mention that every time someone votes against a Republican, God kills a kitten AND a puppy.
Parent
To quote Matt Groening: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:To quote Matt Groening: (Score:5, Insightful)
That is a very valid reason to vote Democrat.
This election is more of an intervention than an election. In order to begin repairing the damage, you have to first stop the abuse. Saying "NO!" to the current administration... or more accurately, "NO MORE!", is a VERY GOOD reason to vote for the opposition.
As Tom Friedman wrote recently.... If America elects to keep the GOP in control of every branch of government tommorow, then we are no more than a banana republic.
Karl Rove and George Bush are betting that we Americans, in general, are stupid. Tomorrow will tell if they are right or not.
Parent
We've had these in NY-25 for about a week! Grr! (Score:5, Informative)
Does anyone have an idea what we can do about this, one day before the election?
Why does this seem to be republican-only? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's so morally corrupt that I find it hard to believe that half the country is in the same party as these people. I know that half the country isn't morally corrupt, yet they allow (and often support) this sort of thing.
Re:Why does this seem to be republican-only? (Score:5, Insightful)
You are correct, this typically is something done by the Republicans and not the Democrats. Sure, if you dig deep enough, you can find the story about a couple of Democratic supporters slashing the tires on the Republican parties "get out the vote" mobiles the night before the election, but such incidents are extremely few and far between, and I have yet to see one that was orchestrated on the party rather than individual level.
On the other hand, the Republican party thinks systematically, and when they find something that works they try to milk it in all of their campaigns. Hence the multiple sightings of lether-clad men in lingerie, the robo-calls, the fliers, the push polls, the recent NAMBLA-related smears showing up in close races all across the country (always raised, of course, by the Republicans). In the 2004 election is was church ministers talking about how Kerry (a Catholic) wanted to ban the bible, or mysterious robo-calls claiming to be from the Kerry campaign reminding people that "A vote for John Kerry is a vote for gay marriage," (even though Kerry had never taken a pro-gay marriage stance in his career).
I think, what it comes down to (I'm about to open myself for being flamed senseless), is that the party leadership in the Republican and Democratic parties have very different philosophies of what it means to run an election. Now, I'm speaking in generalities here, as there are some Republicans who I am rather fond of, and some Democrats that I intensely dislike. But in general, it seems that the Democrats have a philosophy more true to what has been enshrined in the constitution, and an overall sense of fairness. They seem to believe that all citizens have the right to vote, and have their vote counted, and have their voice heard no matter what their opinion is. They seem to want (generally) to allow the truth to speak for itself, and to get elected on the issues.
No doubt that there are many Republicans who feel the same way, but the party leadership (the Ken Mehlman and the Karl Rove types) either don't see or don't care about the importance of voting. They don't see it as a sacred right or responsibility. They see it as a means to an end, and that end is the Republicans getting and holding onto power. They (and again I'm referring to the party leadership and those that enable them, not necessarily the rank and file) believe that they are at war with the Democrats, and that any action that they can take that will result in their accruing more power is justified. They don't care how immoral or unethical it is, or even how illegal it is. They simply do whatever they can to win and then (if they get caught) pay the fines/do the time, though the punishment hardly matters if they had already achieved their goal. What's $5 million dollars in fines to the richest political party in the country, if it means that they can keep control of Congress or the White House? They can make that money back in a heartbeat by awarding no-bid contracts to the companies that are their staunchest supporters. The Republican leadership has come to terms with the notion of "acceptable losses" and "collateral damage" during the campaign, and unfortunately those losses include ethics and morals.
Now, I live in Ohio, and I'm sure that you've heard a lot about what sort of t
Parent
Re:Why does this seem to be republican-only? (Score:5, Informative)
He's referring to the fraudulent letters [latimes.com] distributed by Republican congressional candidate Tan Nguyen.
The letters were sent to 14,000 registered voters, and claimed (completely falsely) that naturalized citizens are not only ineligible to vote, but would be jailed or deported if they showed up at the polls. They were printed in letterhead that looked deceptively like that of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform, and were signed by the completely fictional "Sergio Ramirez".
So I'm afraid that you're mistaken; these were naturalized citizens, registered voters, and the tactic was specifically designed to deceive them into forgoing their right to vote.
Parent
What the hell is wrong with you Americans? (Score:4, Insightful)
The RNCC must have lost it's freaking mind.
Between this, electronic voting, the whole WMD/invade Iraq decision and the Mexican border issue, half of you still vote Republican?
Not that the Dems are much better, but when are people going to start pushing back on the government?
America used to be admired. Now, I just pity you.
Other resources (Score:5, Interesting)
The Dems are On this [dailykos.com], filing one of the only C&D letters I've actually supported. Kinda brilliant of the NeoCons, really -- they hire an impersonator to make a fake 5 minute message, robocall it at 11 PM till 4 AM, make it long enough that most people hang up long before they hear the "paid for by the Republicans" message at the end, and, well, it's just brilliant. Too bad the Democrats are too ethical to try something like this themselves.
Jim Webb's campaign is also being specifically targeted by this, in what is probably a "test run" by Karl Rove. Robo calls are reporting that people will get arrested if they vote, that their locations have changed, pamphlets are being handed out telling black people not to bother voting, and the Voting Machines are set up to "accidently" mess Mr. Webb's name up. [dailykos.com] Even the Board of Elections are saying these efforts are Widespread and Deliberate [americanchronicle.com] (and, oh yeah, ILLEGAL).
Kinda a pity that the Republicans are so afraid of the United States Citizens voices being heard that they have to resort to such disgusting efforts to repress the vote. Of course, having seen this the last 3 elections in a row, this isn't a real surprise.
Re:Should do things the DNC way ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Should do things the DNC way ... (Score:5, Funny)
When I embarked upon this political campaign, I hoped that it could be conducted on a high level and that my opponent would be willing to stick to the issues. Unfortunately, he has decided to be tractable instead--to indulge in unequivocal language, to eschew the use of outright lies in his speeches, and even to make repeated veracious statements about me.
At first I tried to ignore these scrupulous, unvarnished fidelities. Now I will do so no longer. If my opponent wants a fight, he's going to get one!
It might be instructive to start with his background. My friends, have you ever accidentally dislodged a rock on the ground and seen what was underneath? Well, exploring my opponent's background is dissimilar. All the slime and filth and corruption you can possibly imagine, even in your wildest dreams, are glaringly nonexistent in this man's life. And even in his childhood!
Let us take a very quick look at that childhood: It is a known fact that, on a number of occasions, he emulated older boys at a certain playground. It is also known that his parents not only permitted him to masticate in their presence, but even urged him to do so. Most explicable of all, this man who poses as a paragon of virtue exacerbated his own sister when they were both teenagers!
I ask you, my fellow Americans: is this the kind of person we want in public office to set an example for our youth?
Of course, it's not surprising that he should have such a typically pristine background--no, not when you consider the other members of his family:
His female relatives put on a constant pose of purity and innocence, and claim they are inscrutable, yet every one of them has taken part in hortatory activities.
The men in the family are likewise completely amenable to moral suasion.
My opponent's uncle was a flagrant heterosexual.
His sister, who has always been obsessed by sects, once worked as a proselyte outside a church.
His father was secretly chagrined at least a dozen times by matters of a pecuniary nature.
His youngest brother wrote an essay extolling the virtues of being a homo sapien.
His great-aunt expired from a degenerative disease.
His nephew subscribes to a phonographic magazine.
His wife was a thespian before their marriage and even performed the act in front of paying customers.
And his own mother had to resign from a women's organization in her later years because she was an admitted sexagenarian.
Now what shall we say about the man himself?
I can tell you in solemn truth that he is the very antithesis of political radicalism, economic irresponsibility and personal depravity. His own record proves that he has frequently discountenanced treasonable, un-American philosophies and has perpetrated many overt acts as well.
He perambulated his infant on the street.
He practiced nepotism with his uncle and first cousin.
He attempted to interest a 13-year-old girl in philately.
He participated in a seance at a private residence where, among other odd goings-on, there was incense.
He has declared himself in favor of more homogeneity on college campuses.
He has advocated social intercourse in mixed company - and has taken part in such gatherings himself.
He has been deliberately averse to crime in our city streets.
He has urged our Protestant and Jewish citizens to develop more catholic tastes.
Last summer he committed a piscatorial act on a boat that was flying the U.S. flag.
Finally, at a time when we must be on our guard against all foreign isms, he has cooly announced his belief in altruism - and his fervent hope that some day this entire nation will be altruistic!
I beg you,
Parent
Re:Should do things the DNC way ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
If that isn't spin, I don't know what is. (Score:5, Insightful)
The actions of a few Democratic campaign workers who affected a few Republican voters in no way compares to a coordinated, tens or hundreds of thousand dollar strategy by a national Republican organization, affecting over 300,000 Democratic voters.
Parent
Re:Conquest Communication Group Link (Score:5, Informative)
Parent