Transparency is Key
Investors Business Daily explains why George Soros' Open Society Institute constitutes a threat to democracy.
The key is transparency -- OSI manipulates issues and coverage of them behind the scenes, so that the public is led to belief that carefully planned and compensated ideological campaigns are "grassroots" or "spontaneous" when in fact they are not.
No one should be objecting to OSI having a voice in the public debate, so long as it's doing so legally. Rather, the issue is analogous to that of the biased coverage of much of the MSM -- having certain political beliefs and convictions is okay, but at least be honest enough with the public to admit them openly.
The key is transparency -- OSI manipulates issues and coverage of them behind the scenes, so that the public is led to belief that carefully planned and compensated ideological campaigns are "grassroots" or "spontaneous" when in fact they are not.
No one should be objecting to OSI having a voice in the public debate, so long as it's doing so legally. Rather, the issue is analogous to that of the biased coverage of much of the MSM -- having certain political beliefs and convictions is okay, but at least be honest enough with the public to admit them openly.
posted by LadybugUSA at 9:47 AM
2 Comments:
Good lord, the editorial to which you link is a pack of absurdities! The primary complaint is that OSI funds attorneys to pursue legal cases that it finds important. If that complaint had any validity, then any and all legal defense funds organized by any persons for any politically sensitive cases would fall foul of this principle. What towering absurdity!
The same thing applies to media assistance that OSI supplies to various programs. Ms. Liebau suggests that it is manipulation to spend money to bring something to the public's attention. What an absurdity! Political groups of all stripes spend money publishing their ideas -- is that manipulation? Is this blog an insidious attempt at manipulation, or an exercise of our free speech rights?
The underhanded insinuation that OSI's actions are illegal ("No one should be objecting... so long as it's doing so legally") is nasty mudslinging, nothing more.
If OSI were keeping its accounts secret, if it were covering up its spending, then there would be a case here. But as a charitable organization, its accounts are public knowledge and the information is readily available. OSI is not hiding anything. Transparency is already there -- you can readily find a great deal of information at their website. The insinuation that OSI is not transparent is a lie.
The statement that OSI constitutes a threat to democracy is trivially refuted by a quick examination of their website. I encourage all readers to examine their 2006 annual report to see just how heinous Ms. Liebau's accusation is.
It's all a conspiracy! George Soros is just another cheap target to aim at.
Of course any billionaire that supports the Republican Party is to be trusted implicitly.
Post a Comment
<< Home