TPMDC

Angle Sends Cease-And-Desist To Reid -- For Reposting Her Own Website


NV Senate candidate Sharron Angle (R)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Sharron Angle has resorted to an unusual maneuver to counter Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's attacks on her past quotes and positions, the Reid campaign has announced: A cease-and-desist letter, demanding that Reid no longer republish Angle's previous campaign website.

The short version of the story is as follows: After the former state Rep won Nevada's Republican Senate primary, Angle's campaign took down most of its website, and later replaced it with a relaunched version that in some ways toned down her right-wing rhetoric. But Internet pages are rarely ever forgotten -- the Reid campaign saved the old version, and put up a website called "The Real Sharron Angle," reproducing the old content.

Then, they say, the Angle campaign sent them a cease-and-desist letter, claiming misuse of copyrighted materials in the reposting of the old website -- which was, of course, being posted for the purposes of ridiculing Angle. The Reid campaign has in fact taken down the site, rerouting visitors to another website that goes after Angle's positions, "Sharron's Underground Bunker."

The Reid campaign said in a press release:

Despite her threat of a frivolous lawsuit, Nevada voters can still learn about her long-held policy positions at www.sharronsundergroundbunker.com.

"These are Sharron Angle's positions in Sharron's own words from Sharron's own website. What was good enough for Nevada voters to read during the primary should be good enough for them now," said Reid campaign spokesman Jon Summers. "Sharron has long believed in killing Social Security, eliminating the Departments of Education and Energy and shipping nuclear waste to Nevada. We've always heard that Sharron Angle is an unapologetic conservative. It has to be embarrassing for her to have her handlers trying to hide who she really is."

We asked Reid campaign deputy communications director Zac Petkanas whether, by taking down the "Real Sharron Angle" site, they were admitting the legitimacy of the complaint. "While we do not necessarily agree with the Angle campaign's assertions, a point is made," said Petkanas. "Sharron Angle is hiding her views from Nevada voters."

The Angle campaign has not returned our request for comment.

Late Update: Click here to read the cease-and-desist letter.

Comments (180) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (4)

July 5, 2010 2:54 PM   

Hahahahahahaha

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 2:59 PM   

How dare you say I said what I said!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:16 AM    in reply to libdevil

Look, funny or frivolous or not... Reid campaign should have allowed themselves to get sued by Angle.

Because that would have gotten on the 6 o'clock news. "Sued for what?" asks Joe and Jane. And that's where they learn all that you just learned, from reading this article on TPM.

Which Joe and Jane don't read.

What, the Reid campaign couldn't have afforded a little legal tap dancing, for the duration of exactly the publicity about Angle that they needed? Once again, Dems look weak, and they additionally blow a MAJOR opportunity.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:34 AM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Absolutely. One more example of Reid being tone deaf when it comes to modern politics. His response should have been, BRING IT ON. Then spend like a million or so defending it, you can't buy that kind of publicity for any amount of money.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:51 AM    in reply to Hank

A million, my butt! They have lawyers on staff, and all they had to do was appear in court to show cause why they didn't comply (if the Angle campaign decided to take it to court... I'm wagering a 99% chance they'd back down, at that juncture, knowing the publicity it would rip open like a wound!).

After that, when they still didn't pull the site down, worst case scenario: judge cites them for contempt. You dance with the court a bit (s-t-r-e-t-c-h it out as long as you can, to milk the local evening news!) and end up paying... what? No judge is going to charge a million dollars for refusing to take down a website, over which there's some controversy as to the legitimacy of the C&D anyway!


The Reid campaign can think of their contempt fine, the same way corporate polluters think of theirs: "the price of doing business".

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Tim

Facebook

July 6, 2010 11:43 AM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Agreed. Putting out controversial ads that you know will be taken down and played for free all over the networks for weeks swings both ways in this case. Every issue on Angles site would be talked about from here until the election in the context of the lawsuit.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 2:46 PM    in reply to Barry Champlain

This is exactly right. They blew it through timidity.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:12 PM   

It sure would make being a politician easier if your opponent could never use your previous statements. Would voting records be out of bounds too? What about citizenship??? Should politicians be blank slates Sharon Angle? Good luck with that case.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:13 PM   

How dare you have a record of something I created on the Internet? Preposterous! Balderdash!!! Harrumph!!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:58 PM    in reply to Joekuh

I said 'Good day' to you, sir!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:55 PM    in reply to Joekuh

Are the rest of us that captured her website before it was "Washed Clean" going to get a letter too?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:33 PM    in reply to lapdogs

Yes and I'm sure a very stern one at that!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:20 PM   

LOL!!!!! Go Harry. And thanks Sharron for bringing the website to the public's attention.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:27 PM    in reply to Viva!America!

LOL squared!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:49 PM    in reply to Viva!America!

Seriously. Her campaign is giving Reid free publicity.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:21 PM   

This clearly indicates that internet is controlled by Liberals and they are spying on everyone's web site. All the more reasons to vote for Angle...

I think it will work for tea-baggers as another liberal conspiracy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:45 PM    in reply to Ajay

Yeah all those teatards are desperate to get that socialism security cut off so they can go live with their kids

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 8:46 AM    in reply to fla_kracker

And eat cat food. I hear Whiskas is pretty good stuff; our cats seem to think so.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

July 5, 2010 4:29 PM    in reply to Ajay

"Spying on everyone's web site"? Web sites are created in the first place for the public to see. If you don't want anyone to see it except the people you approve of, then you need to hide the site behind a password-protected wall. I don't think most politicians would find that a very effective way to reach the public, but whatever.

Nevertheless, her old campaign website was available to the general public. And the general public includes Harry Reid.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:54 PM    in reply to slb

I thought it was apparent from my comment that I was being sarcastic :-(

That aside, you cant publish someone's website if its copyrighted, even if its not password protected. Password protection only gives right to those who have access to it. If not copyrighted, it can still be published; just my opinion.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:34 PM    in reply to Ajay

it was apparent and humorous

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:39 PM    in reply to Ajay

So the question is ... how many words would you have to change to make the material "new" instead of "copyrighted".
If Angle said, "We should kill all the old people so we don't have to pay them social security." could you just change it to "We should just exterminate all the elderly as a way to phase out social security."

Would paraphrasing legal?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 9:18 AM    in reply to justaJ0e

But then it's not credible. She can just say, "I never said that," which is the whole idea.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:13 PM    in reply to Ajay

You can publish something that's copyrighted if it complies with the Fair Use Doctrine. Here's a legal precedent related to republishing something from a website.

Church of Scientology Case

The Religious Technology Center ("RTC") is a formal entity of the Church of Scientology founded by Ron L. Hubbard. RTC claims to hold an exclusive license to certain unpublished works of Hubbard which have restricted access to only certain members of the Church.

F.A.C.T. Net is a nonprofit educational and charitable company run by former Church members. F.A.C.T. Net maintains a library and archive information on the Church dealing with the Church's controversial status as a religious tax exempt organization; much of this information is available on F.A.C.T. Net's bulletin board on the Internet.

RTC sued F.A.C.T. Net for copyright infringement for placing unauthorized copies of unpublished Church materials on the Internet.

This case was brought in the federal District Court of Colorado where the court refused to grant a preliminary injunction that would have removed the F.A.C.T. Net materials from the Internet. In refusing to grant the injunction the court concluded that F.A.C.T. Net's use of the Church materials was fair use.

The court's analysis of the four factors included:

Purpose of Use - The court noted that the purpose and character of F.A.C.T. Net's use of the Church materials was not commercial in nature. F.A.C.T. Net's use was to advance an understanding of issues involving the Church that were subject to continuing public controversy. The court concluded that this factor weighed in favor of fair use since the purposes of criticism, comment and research all fall within the fair use doctrine.

Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used - The court stated that even if a work was copied in its entirety that such copying could still constitute fair use.

Market Effect - The court decided that even though the Church materials were unpublished that F.A.C.T. Net's use of the materials would not effect any future publication of the materials. The RTC also failed to demonstrate any potential financial loss to the Church. The court concluded that this factor weighed in favor of fair use.

In summary, the District Court of Colorado concluded that F.A.C.T. Net had made fair use of the Church materials; the use was non-commercial and the evidence presented by RTC suggested no financial harm, other than that possibly resulting from criticism, to the copyright owner.


Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:41 PM    in reply to semoto

"...not commercial in nature...the purposes of criticism, comment and research all fall within the fair use doctrine."

This is the point: Reid was not trying to profit from Angle's intellectual* property, but to criticize Angle's positions.

IMO the Reid campaign should have kept the old Angle web page up. Angle's C&D letter is totally without foundation.

*(if you can even put "Angle" and "intellectual" in the same sentence)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:04 PM    in reply to Nancy Irving

To that end ... if there were some question about Reid's use of that web site (to prove Angle is an idiot and defeat her) equaling profit ... simply get someone not affiliated with the campaign (like say a news organization) to repost the site themselves.
I'd volunteer to do it and not only wouldn't I get any gain from it ... it would cost me money.
Of course, as these types like to point out ... freedom isn't free. ;)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 11:19 PM    in reply to justaJ0e

Once the bell has been rung, it can't be un-rung.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 10:48 AM    in reply to jeffgee

Yes, that is why Sharron Angle is a ding-a-ling and will always be a ding-a-ling.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 9:21 AM    in reply to Nancy Irving

The thing is, in order to claim this as your intellectual property, you have to own up to having said it, which is not what Sharon Angle wants to do. She put it in the memory hole and she wants it to stay there.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:25 AM    in reply to Steaming Pile

THANK YOU, STEAMING!! Ding ding ding. You win!

And again, that's why their bluff should have been called, and the Reid campaign should have allowed themselves to get sued. Because it would have gotten on the 6 o'clock news, and Nevada's low-info voters would have asked, "Sued for what?"

And then, the nice blow-dried anchor babe would have told them "what for". And in the process, loudly outlining all the extremist positions that they don't want any sunlight on, anymore.

Because the voters Harry's trying to reach watch TV. You see.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:19 PM    in reply to Ajay

It was apparent to me too

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 9:50 PM    in reply to Ajay


Very clear that you were being sarcastic. I think slb usually has a better sense of humor than that.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

July 6, 2010 3:19 PM    in reply to zoester

Thanks!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

July 6, 2010 3:17 PM    in reply to Ajay

Sorry -- it's not always easy to tell the snark from the genuinely kooky these days. Usually I tend to misread it the other way around -- I'll think, "OK, this is obviously a joke," and then I find out it really isn't.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:29 PM    in reply to Ajay

DFTT

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:36 PM   

The actual c&d letter is worth reading -- I particularly like the reference to "nefarious" activities. It appears the Angle position is linked to an argument that the way the site was posted could be confusing, i.e., a person hitting the website could think it is really S.A.'s, and thus be "tricked" into signing up.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:45 PM    in reply to Alexander Hamilton

Short version of the C&D: our supporters are so stupid they'll type their name and address into anything that looks remotely like the site Caribou Barbie told them to go to. They also really enjoy corresponding with Nigerian princes and are still waiting for the check (for forwarding an email) from Bill Gates they were promised. :)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:51 PM    in reply to Matt Jones

It was the e-mail from Director Mueller of the FBI that really set the teabaggers off...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 8:11 AM    in reply to Alexander Hamilton

I think that's a legitimate beef, to be honest -- it looks like they replicated the contact link... whether it just dead-ended (in which case, no problem) or they truly were harvesting contact info (in which, I think that is a problem) I don't know.

I suspect this is why the Reid campaign took down the original and reposted just the old positions -- The C&D really seems to hinge mostly on the contact link remaining in place.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:36 PM   

I guess that "teh crazy™" really can be patented.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:39 PM   

Clearly not all that happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas . . .

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:43 PM   

What? That would be a frivolous law suit, which I'm sure she opposes. Also, too, let the FREE MARKET of ideas play out. You don't like what you said, should have thought first, dumb-ass.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:51 PM   

Apparently when it comes to Republicans, truth and accountability are subject to unusual Laws of Physics, including a Theory of Very Special Relativity (things are true when Republicans say so and truth is subject to change at any moment) and what we might call the Hindenberg Uncertainty Principle (when things blow up, it's not permitted to reveal why because it might be embarrassing to Republicans, see. Steele, Michael, RNC Chairman).

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 9:07 PM    in reply to voreason

Funny!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:52 PM   

What's she going to do, sue waybackmachine.org? There you can see snapshots of all her pages dating back to 2004. No C&D letter can erase her archived electronic past.

Harry Reid should just put a link to http://waybackmachine.org/20040101000000*/http://www.sharonangle.com and let the readers do the investigating.

What is really scary is that this woman and her staff don't seem to know that the Internet Archives even exist. She wants to be a U.S. Senator? What, even the willfully and proudly ignorant need representation too?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:16 PM    in reply to Louise

Apparently, she should be suing herself for her own ridiculousness.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:03 PM    in reply to HusseinTenaX

Now there's a money maker!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:14 PM    in reply to Angry McAngus

Shake it!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:27 PM    in reply to Louise

Obviously a graduate of the Ted Steven's Skool of Intertubez Nolledge. When you hit that delete button some sort of digital black hole swallows everything up or compresses it into the wingularity- a region of ignorance so dense that not even particles the most highly charged wingnut BS can escape.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:39 AM    in reply to donquijoterocket

No, no, no. "Digital black hole?" That's not how it works. Sheesh.

Pressing the delete button flushes out the tubes into digital sewers connected to the digital reprocessing plant where all the bits and pixels are filtered through charcoal, and then the little people scrub each one until it's white as snow.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:53 PM   

You couldn't make this stuff up. A ultrawinger who insists on tort reform threatens to sue because her opponent uses her own radical positions against her. Hey Tea Baggers - she's just another politician and a dumb on at that!!!!!!!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

eve

user-pic

July 5, 2010 5:47 PM    in reply to Ugot2bkidnme

yes, those repubs consider all lawsuits frivolous --- until they want to file one

what morons


I'd also like to know why a Tea Party candidate doesn't support Freedom of Speech!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:48 PM    in reply to Ugot2bkidnme

Great points.

Seems the teabaggers don't know what the hell they are for/against unless Fox or Dick Armey tells them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 3:56 PM   

Is it November yet? I gotta cast the hell outta this vote!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:10 PM   

Old positions, new positions; any position with Sweet Sharron is devoutly to be wished.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:52 PM    in reply to Ahmedsaid

tsk tsk...sailorfelchqueen...youre just a shadow of your former self...even tho your style is as obvious as a dog's balls.
Now your shit is just half baked and weaker than Folger's Instant.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:06 PM    in reply to Marinus van der Lubbe

Marinus, you do have to give the guy some credit. His dedication to trolling is as frightful as it is admirable. I really think that this guy is a liberal and is just doing this shit to fuck with people.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:38 PM    in reply to Hobbes83

I cant agree with that one having watched him the last 7 months I have been here. The felching sailor is no left of center fellow...
How goes school, Brother Hobbes? Im on the road tomorrow..back to Virginny...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:29 PM    in reply to Marinus van der Lubbe

It's very clear that Sailorman is a joke. A very sick, twisted joke.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 7:58 AM    in reply to Davran

how did his pretty candidate do, the chicken lady???

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 11:47 PM    in reply to Marinus van der Lubbe

Hey brother, I"m still studying right now getting ready for my first year. I just finished Civil Procedure, and now I'm working on Contracts and Criminal Law. I still don't understand a lot of things that they are talking about, but I feel like I can fall back on this stuff when I start class. I hope you didn't get too mad about what I said, I just think that this sailorfelch should be given an ounce of respect for his dedication to take all this criticism for being a perennial TPM troll. To be honest with you, I think this guy is the Colbert of TPM.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 8:55 AM    in reply to Hobbes83

The Colbert of TPM? For that, my vote for that goes to "The Decider". Always in character. Always funny.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 9:51 AM    in reply to new10

Ugg the Repug has my vote for that award.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 1:53 PM    in reply to Joekuh

I like The Decider best.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:17 PM    in reply to new10

Yeah, you're right about that.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

July 6, 2010 3:26 PM    in reply to Hobbes83

You must not be familiar with his earliest messages. Some of those were pretty foul.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 3:27 PM    in reply to slb

I never knew that. No wonder his accounts are always being closed. Thanks for the info.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:28 PM    in reply to Ahmedsaid

Nicest teeth I ever came across.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:25 PM    in reply to Ahmedsaid

This, of course, is Sailor the Banned Troll, lusting as ever after the Republicans' most idiotic females.

Banned is banned, eh, TPM? Reported for abuse.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 9:58 PM    in reply to Overreach THIS!

I agree with you. So obvious.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:12 PM   

Well this is interesting. I'm kind of surprised that Sarah Palin didn't think of this first.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:12 PM   

Guess who caved again by complying with a frivolous Republican threat? Yup, Harry Reid. Make her sue you, Harry!

This story is why I can't stand Harry Reid even though I pray to God that his opponent loses.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:26 PM    in reply to magster

This post is why you're a moron.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:35 AM    in reply to FreeRider

Fuck you, Freeper. He's RIGHT.

Ask yourself: shoe on other foot? Would Sharron Angle's Republican handlers have pulled the embarassing site down, or dared them to sue, and thus mass-expose that which they didn't want aired?

Clueless. Amateur. Moron. As fucking usual.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:37 PM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Fuck me? You've been begging to do that for years. Not. Gonna. Happen. I prefer folks with opposable thumbs.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:43 PM    in reply to FreeRider

(Okay, slightly better response than anticpated, but you're still a horse's ass..!)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:52 PM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Since you're so into fucking horses' asses, call this number:

800-stud-luv. They'll set you up with all the horse booty you want for reasonable fee. See, I ain't so bad. I'm willing to help you get your freak on, just not with me!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 1:04 PM    in reply to FreeRider

Ya know, at least I have never let the words "horse booty" pass from my lips, in my entire life!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 2:05 PM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Really? Yet the words flow from your keyboard so effortlessly. You're a pro at prowling the Internets for a little horsie hook-up, I see!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 11:52 PM    in reply to magster

Who the fuck said that Harry complied with the C&D? Do you have a reading comprehension problem? From your post I'm going to assume that you do.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:42 AM    in reply to Hobbes83

If they pulled the site down off theirs, then they complied (..?????)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 2:07 PM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Sorry, I'm mistaken.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:18 PM   

I'm not a lawyer but it seems that the Reid campaign could defend the reposting of her Web pages under fair use.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:00 PM    in reply to CTHankster

I would say VERY fair use.

People like Angle believe they are entitled to say any sort of inflammatory nonsense they like in front of their core audience and then to turn around and claim mainstream positions on the public stage. That is not the way it is supposed to work.

If Angle wins, it is will represent a failure of journalism, plain and simple.

At best, what she has done represents the most radical form of flip-floppery.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:22 PM    in reply to CTHankster

"Fair use" has it's limits. Comment and criticism do not allow one to republish an entire work. Based on what the posting says, no court would call her suit, had she filed one, frivolous, any more than a suit based on a candidate using a song without permission would be frivolous. Reid's folks should have known better and made the point with excerpts rather than letting her "have the day" on this issue, then if she threatened a suit let her bring it and she'd look like an extra helping of stupid.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:37 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

Can a candidate for public office copyright her campaign materials?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:17 PM    in reply to Early Out

Well you cannot copyright news and when you run for office, what you say ought to be classified as news. We're not talking a campaign logo or slogan - it's her own damn words that she put out there to the public herself.

What the hell are her damages? You can't have a lawsuit without damages...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:44 PM    in reply to HusseinTenaX

In copyright, as in many areas, yes you can have a lawsuit without damages. That's called an injunction. And if the web site had a copyright notice, that would entitle her to punitive damages. Once the U.S. joined an international convention on copyright law in 1986, any materials that are original enough (and that's a low threshold) for copyright protection gain copyright on their creation, but the key here is the copyright to the web site that collects and presents those materials, including the site's "look and feel." Finally, a slogan cannot be copyrighted, that's more suitable to a trade mark or service mark. Quiz Thursday.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:24 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

Even if the website were copyrighted, she was giving the material away and had no expectations of privacy. Also, it is well-known that anything on the web that is not specifically protected from copying and storage will be copied and stored. This has been true since before the WWW existed.

Did her webmaster restrict the material so that spiders were not permitted to record or index her site? If they did, then there might be some expectation of privacy. But if they took any actions at all to get covered by search engines, then there is no chance such a lawsuit could succeed. In fact, considering the long traditions of the WWW, if they did not specifically act to prevent the indexing, copying and storage of their site then I wouldn't give them a Walrus' chance in the Gulf at at the BP rig of winning.

Since Google stores so much, do you think they are likely to sit on the sidelines of such a lawsuit? For her to win and establish a precedent would cost them a real fortune.

Now I can see that if the material was copyrighted and protected from the normal actions of the Internet and then used without attribution to the Angle campaign she might have a complaint, but as long as Harry Reid clearly attributes the material to the Angle campaign, I don't see that this is anything beyond a nuisance suit.

I am not an attorney, but perhaps some attorney could suggest the likelihood that the courts, without any legislative backing, are going to radically change the very nature of the Internet. Someone might get Kos' opinion. He's both an attorney and a web expert.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 6:44 AM    in reply to Richardxx

I am not trying to be disrespectful but your first sentence shows you have no idea what you are talking about. Copyright and privacy are unrelated legal concepts. In many ways they are polar opposites. Read my comments for an accurate statement of the law. If you have any more questions post them and I'll try to answer, no extra charge.

And Kos admits to being punked by his own pollster - I wouldn't trust him to hold my coat.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:15 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

But Doc... do you now see how long this complicated legal controversy could be kept alive in court?

TIME is the terminal enemy of such a lawsuit. The longer the Angle campaign kept going after Reid for posting that stuff, the longer the media would be talking about That Stuff.

Which is why the entire concept of their actually suing the Reid campaign was total bullshit from the word Go. Reid and co. simply should have called their bluff.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 3:10 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

OK. So you don't see the connection in law.

Where does that leave the existing websites like the wayback machine that collect stuff from the world wide web, store and republish it? Is this illegal, or perhaps just outside the law?

Is there any vestige of community law left in our so-called common law system? Or is everything now driven by legislative law assembled in law codes?

I just dug this reference up from Webcitation.org:

A U.S. court has recently (Jan 19th, 2006) ruled that caching does not constitute a copyright violation, because of fair use and an implied license (Field vs Google, US District Court, District of Nevada, CV-S-04-0413-RCJ-LRL, see also news article on Government Technology). Implied license refers to the industry standards mentioned above: If the copyright holder does not use any no-archive tags and robot exclusion standards to prevent caching, WebCite® can (as Google does) assume that a license to archive has been granted. Fair use is even more obvious in the case of WebCite® than for Google, as Google uses a “shotgun” approach, whereas WebCite® archives selectively only material that is relevant for scholarly work. Fair use is therefore justifiable based on the fair-use principles of purpose (caching constitutes transformative and socially valuable use for the purposes of archiving, in the case of WebCite® also specifically for academic research), the nature of the cached material (previously made available for free on the Internet, in the case of WebCite® also mainly scholarly material), amount and substantiality (in the case of WebCite® only cited webpages, rarely entire websites), and effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work (in the case of Google it was ruled that there is no economic effect, the same is true for WebCite®).
This suggests to me that the law is not settled on what is and is not fair use. I don't see how anyone who posts material for the public and has no protection from web crawlers built in can later cry foul if someone uses it. Especially not a politician who uses it to make promises to potential voters in exchange for their votes.

If the law does not take these things into consideration "...then the law is an ass." [Quote from somewhere, I think.]

But I suspect that consideration of stuff like this might be why Reid's campaign quit posting Angle's material themselves. The issue for Reid is what did she promise to get nominated, not what his own website has the right to publish. He doesn't need to be spending money legislating the legal structure of the world wide web. He needs to spend it getting reelected.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 4:47 PM    in reply to Richardxx

"He doesn't need to be spending money legislating [think you mean "litigating"] the legal structure of the world wide web. He needs to spend it getting reelected."

BINGO! Fair use is in the eye of the beholder but what you said here is the A++ answer. Don't let her make it about a law suit, keep the bright light on Ms. Angle.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:49 PM    in reply to HusseinTenaX

And while news can't be copyrighted in the abstract, how it is expressed -- a newspaper story, a blog entry, a scripted TV or radio broadcast, etc. -- can certainly be copyrighted material. You hear it within every baseball telecast at one point or another.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:06 PM    in reply to HusseinTenaX

Be careful, Tena. Bush v. Gore taught us, if nothing else, that a court determined to decide a certain way will take any port in a storm.

In the case of Bush v. Gore, they said that a recount was harming George Bush. As appalling as that whole concept is, they used it. In the Angle case, I wouldn't be surprised if a "friendly" judge could decide that publicizing the news Angle already made would "harm" her... and this time, maybe he wouldn't have included that vomit-inducing caveat that SCOTUS gave about not using the case as any kind of "precedent". Jerk could create law that would benefit Republicans from here to eternity.

Having said all that, I stick by my original premise that Harry should have allowed himself to be thrown into the briar patch, totally. Angle may be a blithering idiot, but her lawyers cannot possibly be stupid enough not to know that if the content of her website ever saw the inside of a courtroom, they just shot their own nuts off.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:46 PM    in reply to Early Out

See my explanation below.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:50 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

Oops. Above.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 7, 2010 3:05 AM    in reply to Early Out

Harry Reid claims copyright over his own site. ""

If you look at the internet archive of the things he was promising on his site in 2006 if a Democrat majority was elected, it is not surprising that Reid has revamped his own site to scrub all those unfulfilled promises.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:26 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

In this context, the limit for 'fair use' was not reached.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:48 PM    in reply to cinesimon

I'll take your word for it without reviewing the materials. Her letter was just a device to get the embarrassing materials to come down, knowing the Reid campaign would not want to be tied up in a lawsuit, so it served it's purpose.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:16 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

With all due respect, if you had ever worked in politics, you'd realize that the sound of an opponent complaining about having been given a public reality check is one of the sweetest parts of the competition.

If I'm running the Reid campaign, I'm thinking right now: Please, God, let her sue.

Because even if Ms. Angle somehow has a legal case, her arguments will be lost to average Nevada voters, expecially when she's calling attention to her previous controversial public statements by claiming an exclusive copyright to some really batshit-crazy material.

Harry Reid's camp obviously struck a nerve. Good for them. Here's hoping that they emulate Lawrence Olivier in The Marathon Man.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:56 PM    in reply to Donald from Hawaii

Arrows up for Reid today, definitely, but they've made their point and the threat of the suit was great publicity for it, at no charge. They can keep making their point without having to deal with the distraction of a law suit simply by adjusting their approach and not letting her put on the "wronged party" costume. The bell cannot be un-rung. The important thing, now, is to keep her positions in the spotlight and not let her turn the campaign into something else, as she would by filing a lawsuit. I'm fine with how Reid handled.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:32 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

Here's where I disagree, Doc: I absolutely don't think Reid made his point, not with the masses. With bloggers and campaign insiders ("Gotcha!"), maybe. But not with the low-information voter.

A lawsuit, on the other hand, would have had legs, in terms of publicity. "CANDIDATE SUES OTHER CANDIDATE" gets on local TV, and makes a better lede than "Oh, uh, er, one candidate sent another a cease-and-desist order, because she claimed her intellectual property [or whatever] shouldn't be publicized by anyone other than its rightful originator... [zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..!]"

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

July 6, 2010 3:39 PM    in reply to Barry Champlain

Yeah, but do you really trust the low-information voters and the "news" they likely watch to be clear on just what the lawsuit is about? I think they'd be just as likely to come away with only the vague impression that Reid had done something underhanded and wrong to poor little Sharron Angle.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:09 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

But the judgment voreason cited above says explicitly that under certain conditions (which are fulfilled by the present case), republishing even an *entire* work may qualify as fair use.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

July 6, 2010 4:05 PM    in reply to Doc Magnus

Reid's folks should have known better and made the point with excerpts rather than letting her "have the day" on this issue...

I didn't see the site, but I'm inclined to agree with you that duplicating the entire web site probably goes beyond the boundary of what would constitute fair use. But the problem with posting just exerpts would be that it would allow Angle to claim she was being "taken out of context."

I'm also inclined to think that Reid's campaign has played this rather well. They've made the point that what Angle is currently claiming as her positions are not consistent with what she was saying just a few months ago. They have forced Angle to show that she doesn't want those earlier positions exposed. And they've done all that with minimum mud getting splattered back on Reid.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 4:51 PM    in reply to slb

Agree. As Richardx said in reply to me above, about Reid, "He doesn't need to be spending money [litigating] the legal structure of the world wide web. He needs to spend it getting reelected."

Don't let her make it about a law suit, keep the bright light on Ms. Angle.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:20 PM    in reply to CTHankster

Yes, I posted a legal precedent about that above.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 8:52 PM    in reply to semoto

Thanks.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:23 PM   

What would her damages supposedly be -- anticipated loss of pay-offs from big oil and other corporate interests should she lose the election?

Reid should tell her that he'll see her in court. It will draw attention to Angle's angle.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:31 PM    in reply to Matthew

Best idea yet! Any lawsuit would be good for publicity far beyond November. But, I'm not a professional campaign manager, just a rank amateur.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:31 PM   

Rachel Maddow spoke about this last week. This is the biggest problem wingnut candidates face; their inability to defend their positions outside their usual comfortable bubble of Fox News and right wing talk radio.

Of course Fox exists to just fluff and endorse any wingnut so Angle never gets pressed or challenged on her batshit insane views.

But once she actually has to do a real interview where her views do get challenged, she totally fails.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 1:00 PM    in reply to Duck Stab

Thing is, Duck, if God forbid she should win this election, her campaign's m.o. has now been lab-tested and given the U.L. Seal Of Approval. Sharron Angle's 2010 campaign will BE the "Republican playbook".

All extremist RW candidates, from now on, can run for office with impugnity as "moderates"; the press can never call them on it (BY LAW, if it were decided that her lawsuit had merit); and Capitol Hill will be glutted with flaming RW nut jobs, sent there by low-information voters, who "just felt it's time to give the other party a chance"! Oy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:44 PM   

Short and simple-Sharron Angle is a lunatic.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 4:55 PM   

While Angle is clearly an extreme wingnut, Reid is once again looking like a weakling in not ignoring the cease/desist letter. I took a look at a few of the topics on the underground bunker site, and rather than have quotes of phrases from Angle's original text, the site is almost entirely a paraphrasing of that text. It's unimpressive.

Given the choice between a weakling and an asshole, too many people will choose the latter. Reid is what he is, and in the end, if he should lose to her, it will be his own fault for this weak perception of himself he insists on creating.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 10:16 AM    in reply to Jim C

You need to get a grip, and forget the Harry bashing.
Ried gains by taking down the site under her "threat".
1. Publicity over her previous positions is created.
2. He gets to say things like "Sharon Angle doesn't want you to know..." "What is she hiding?" He can put up pictures of himself with duct tape over his mouth that has her name on it.

He's actually playing this just right.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:03 PM   

Perhaps if ALL politicians posted their opponents previous promises and positions... voters would wake up and...
Sorry, I was just dreaming.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:26 PM   

I think Reid took down the old one because the name "The Real Sharron Angle" could confuse folks, not because they buy the idea that it is somehow impermissible in a political campaign to turn your opponent's own words against her.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:37 PM   

The woman is an idiot.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:40 PM   

Well played Sharron, well played.

How is that publicity control angle (pun intended) of your campaign working out for you so far?

/to be filed under:
another "too stupid to breath" GOP/Tea Bagger

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:42 PM   

Reid could make a flip flop page with little\no exposure liability, but he has NO BALLS

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:45 PM   

In the unlikely event she does file this absurd suit, discovery should be a hoot.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:49 PM   

Um ... serial lurker here delurking. Gee maybe some crack news organization could find a copy of the old site and post it with a story about the interesting changes that have come over her. Lurking cloak reactivated.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 5:18 PM    in reply to expat54

Oh, I remember those days, when reporters reported. Good times, good times.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

eve

user-pic

July 5, 2010 5:51 PM   

It is a smart political move for Reid to remove it from his website at this point. To leave it up changes the story and makes Reid the topic rather than Sharron's loony positions.

We want the hoopla to continue to be about Angle and how crazy she is. Not about whether or not it should be on Reid's website.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:51 PM    in reply to eve

eve, with all due respect, Fail.

There is also a "WHAT" mandatorily implicit in this story, not just a "WHO".

The moment that "WHAT" rears its head, the Angle forces are screwed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:52 PM   

I think this is all a part of God's plan for her.
There is a reason things like this happen to you, Sharon.

Oh, and what were you wearing?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 5:53 PM   

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:30 PM    in reply to MarciaJ720

well isn't that a handy dandy link! thx

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

eve

user-pic

July 5, 2010 5:57 PM   

I'm no political expert, but I think Reid is much craftier than many give him credit for being.

You don't get to be Senate Majority Leader without great political skills and the balls to play the game.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:16 PM    in reply to eve

Excellent campaign staff.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:56 PM    in reply to eve

"You don't get to be Senate Majority Leader without great political skills and the balls to play the game."

Let me know when Reid shows any political skills or balls. And JFYI, I'm a liberal.

Cheers,

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:03 PM   

I think it was smart of the Reid people to do this because it keeps Angle stumbling and backtracking, looking like an amateur. I hope Reid wins but the Democrats need to update their leadership in the senate no matter what happens. Democrats need to look like a younger party that can project a progressive vision of the future effectively. We can’t characterize the Republicans as the party of the old corporatist white guys when that’s what we have leading Democrats.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:15 PM   

This will be interesting.
By now it's obvious Angle will lose, but it's been a long time since a candidate has committed just about every form of campaign suicide there is .
So it'll be interesting to see the effects this has.
Suing the opposing candidate! That really is one of the worst things one can do in a campaign.
I wonder if she's getting her advice directly from the gop cabinet rather than from actual campaign experts? Likely any good operatives have kept clear - given the Palin experience and Angle's uncanny similarities to the former half term governor, I doubt many quality campaign operatives would want to have anything to do with her for fear of being publicly blamed for her own stupidity, as Palin did to her campaign staff.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:23 PM   

The cease and desist letter is hilarious!
They claiming that the content is not for voters to be aware of Angle's actual policy and opinions, but for the "Reid campaign to obtain the names of Angle supporters under false pretenses".
Talk about underground bunkers! If the lawyer is in any way a decent one, s/he must have been as embarrassed as hell to put forth such bizarre assertions.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:34 PM   

Nice to see Harry socking his opponent with some solid brass. I hope he buries her in November.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:41 PM   

Oh this is absurd. Even Palin wouldn't try something like this! This is one of the funniest and most ridiculous things I've ever heard of.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 6:52 PM   

Don't listen to the women behind the curtain!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:01 PM   

Bring it, beeot... er, angle.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:07 PM   

Your GOP at their creative best

They treat their histories just like they treat facts.

They mix 'em up, they make 'em up, they deny their existence.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:14 PM   

Just like the GOP, Angle is the gift that keeps on giving. Everyone I know here in Vegas thinks she's a laughing stock.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:02 AM    in reply to ariuszme

Well, I hope they're the majority, and I hope they vote!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:14 PM   

A mistake on Reids campaign part to remove the material. They should have forced her to fight and spend the little money she has in the legal battle, then later after the publicity, take it down. This would have forced more attention to the message that Reids Campaign was trying to get across. Bad move. I should be their campaign stratigist.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:23 PM    in reply to Middleclassvotingbloc

Well, don't quit your day job just yet.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:17 PM   

I hope Reid fight fire with fire. This crazy lady will not go down easy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:22 PM   

Sharron Angle is truly a moron as are sadly many of these right wingnuts.

Viacom just lost a huge case to Google/Youtube for infringement policies. This will play into everything from now on (on) the internet.. it sets a precedent.

She has no case.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:28 PM   

Its been such a great week for Republicans.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 7:46 PM   

She's ridiculous, of course. So are Boehner and Michael Steele and McCain and Rand Paul and Palin. It's hard to take any of them seriously. They're such easy targets, and the Republican Party is obviously in disarray. Which is why I'd like to see bolder policy initiatives from somewhere, preferably the Administration. Democrats are trimming their sails when they could be doing a lot more. TPM was such a go-getter news source under Bush. I guess they're not as hungry as they used to be.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 10:25 AM    in reply to Tanjaoui

"It's hard to take any of them seriously"

Obama seems to take them very seriously. He's convinced Bush was right about Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama will sacrifice his Presidency to prove Bush right.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 10:42 AM    in reply to Mooser

I'm sure the Administration is figuring out how to say we've pulled out on schedule when, in fact, we will left left thousands of troops and a military base or two behind.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 9:28 PM   

Don't you love intellectual property law? Really what she is saying is that Reid could not post her campaign's words exactly as they appeared. Funny. How dare he quote from her! The nerve!!!

Too good. Some things in politics you cannot make up. It's like that gift from Louisiana, Vitter. Yes, Mr. Family Values has hookers that he visits. Angle is the same way.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:06 PM   

A Scientologist abusing the legal system to bully...get outta here.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:17 PM   

That Sharon is one smart person. I heard in the men's room today that she has hired David Limbaugh as her attorney in this matter.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:20 PM   

Darn, please excuse me for spelling Sharon's name without the two r's. I knew it has two r's because Sharon put the second r in for her policy position which is: RadicalRepublicanism.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:23 PM   

Oh, by the way, has anybody heard the news from Salt Lake that KSL will be dumping Hannity come October 1 for "radical broadcasting"? Come on media, let's get to the bottom of this factual story.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:28 PM   

Reid taking down the site in true pussy fashion

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 10:46 PM   

Unless Fox makes a story from it, most republicans will never know about it anyway.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 11:54 PM    in reply to BrownEye

Well, unless Fox spins it to try & make Reid look bad (& in the Fauxniverse anything is possible), we know what'll happen from there!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 5, 2010 11:44 PM   

I hope this is a trend for the future:
Republicans' misdeeds, lies, fakery and scandal, extreme views put forward by the Democrats.
The age of 'bi-partisanship' was killed by the Republicans, now let's have a little Carvelesque Democratic campaigning , shall we. We havent forgotten how.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 12:27 AM   

This is great! May it will go to court and Angle's nonsense will be read into the public record.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 1:18 AM   

I'm not sure if Reid should have left it up or took it down... but I suspect taking it down is the correct answer. The initial reaction will be to ask what she is hiding. Not able to get a quick answer some will expect the worst. And you got to know the press will smell the story.

Sharron Angle, hoisted by her own petard, twice, by her own hand.

Brilliant:

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 1:26 AM   

oh man.. this is a joke, right? she really thinks in this day and age, the age of the internet and blogs, she can prevent her past (past? really?) positions from being published/posted/broadcast at many different sites/blogs/locations for anyone who wants to see them?? so she's really that stupid?? and there are people willing to vote for someone that stupid??

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 3:01 AM   

(I'm sure I'm not the first to express this sentiment, but I'm a lazy reader.)

They should have called her bluff. Can you imagine her trying to litigate this with a campaign going on? Even if she wins, she loses.

Lawyers and court costs are expensive and all, but it would still be worth immeasurable advertising value to Reid's campaign. Why run ads merely telling people that she changes her positions when she's willing to show everyone how she changes positions?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 6:23 AM   

Honestly, republicans are so pathetic it's hard to even bring myself to care or comment any more. Angle is obviously a right-wing nutjob; her original website proudly displayed her wingnuttery for all to see. Now that she needs to appear "normal" in front of thinking people, instead of her usual friendly audiences of fellow loony tunes, she wants nobody to ever find out what her true opinions have always been.

This is so fundamentally, shamefully dishonest it makes me sick to my stomach. republicans are so pathetic! What a different world it would be if conservatives were capable of shame.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 8:11 AM   

All GOP/TP would love this case to be won by Angle, as they would love for all their statements on their Web Sites to be scrubbed and appear lilly-white and Centrist. Next they will say that anything they said historically should be categorized in the same manner. Then say that they are looking out for and protecting us from Socialism and that only Their idea of Freedom of Speech is being protected.

Next, the GOP will fight the FCC for Net Neutrality, saying that only "their version" of neutrality will protect us from all those virulent DEM/Liberal websites!

We DID NOT TORTURE and have the website to "prove it"!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 9:01 AM   

People like her and Palin have this distorted view of reality and "fairness." Fairness is a one-way street going in their direction and reality is whatever strikes their fancy at the moment. Forget about honesty and integrity. They have guns for that.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 10:38 AM   

Reid should just keep publishing it with 100% clarity that it is not his or his campaign's own wrok product and is soley being posted as a quote. Then, he shoudl send her a response letter that he has rubbed thoroughly on his anus.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Joe

Facebook

July 6, 2010 10:41 AM   

two words... 'google cache'

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 11:42 AM   

Go back far enough and you'll find her fan letters to Hitler.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 1:50 PM   

That's hilarious...after listening to the right drag up what various Democrats or their nominees to appointed office said and did IN COLLEGE for the last couple of years, the right doesn't want you to repeat what they said and did DURING the campaign season?

Gad...the hypocrisy of the right runs so deep...is so commonplace...so...ever present...that it is becoming boring.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 2:11 PM   

What the hell...when I search on myself, 90% of the hits are things I did before the Internet even existed (back when it was ARPANET, not open to the public). It's all stuff that got transcribed by third parties. Another item that comes up is an old classified ad I took out in a company newsletter for selling off some unwanted household stuff - in 1995! For some reason, my post '90s footprint on the WWW is rather small.

Republicans and other right-wingers seem to be clueless when it comes to technology and newfangled things like audio and video recording. How many times do we hear the plaintive cries, "I was taken out of context!" or "I never said that!" when their statements and actions are on news feeds, YouTube and The Daily Show for all the world to see?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 2:28 PM   

Harry is nuts. He should leave the site up there until the sheriffs come and make him take it down. Don't hint to the low-info voters, PROVE it to them!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 4:04 PM   

I totally agree, he should no way have backed down. First, I think it was fair use - second, material posted on the internet is accessible for decades. Once she posted it for a significant period of time, freely accessible to the public, I don't think she can claim copyright infringement, or more significantly, I don't think she could prove any DAMAGES from such infringement, since she herself posted the same material publicly during her campaign.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 4:44 PM   

no reid and camp made the right move......it's already being talked about ....angle does not want it to be TALKED ABOUT.....i guarantee you at their next debate,the question will be "what about that cease and desist letter you sent to harry reid's office" ? she can't run and she' can't hide

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 6, 2010 9:09 PM   

Considering Reids crew was phishing by enabling the volunteer button, he was obtaining her supporters info by fraud. George Soros must be proud.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 7, 2010 9:01 AM   

http://www.xolook.com

xolook,Inc. We are the best online dealer,about all kinds of

jordan.run retailing and wholesale trade wordwidely for

years. Free Shipping And Customs,Super Sale Off

Retailing,With 1Week Delivery to your door.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 12, 2010 2:16 AM   

Is there a Potomac River In Nevada? Perhaps Senator Harry Reid would like to describe what he sees hidden in this Declaration of Independence, New Bible finding in a cave. It is nothing but Political Stalking to him (is that on the criminal list) how about CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA & ITS VOTERS.

I just can't imagine leaving out Reid from the magic threesome Rahm, Geithner, & Obama, Reid is to big a political player not to have had some swing (poaching - the Obama Candy Man). What gave out at the WH recently was regular prayer here is the story they tell (just how can this be related to some clandestine hiding of documents on the Potomac in a cave. The words seem to indicate that Progressives have known about this cave but for how long, you know a Bible just don't get changed by itself there was someone behind that publication creativity. I think it goes back to a political NYC planning session in the basement apartment but William Ayers would have had to be a partner. WHO EXACTLY HAS NOT BEEN FOUND TO BE MISSING & DEAD YET> READ MORE http://bit.ly/axwu2P

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 12, 2010 3:20 AM   

At least some old paper stacked in a old NYC building perhaps a old 6 story apartment had a printing press and old paper, the type building that has screen windows which one could fall out of if worried that someone might have stalked him back from the Potomac River where he had deposited the items inside a cave. I don't want to get the scientific Archeologists working for the Smithsonian Institution worried about what they found to be a fake in a since of truthful documentation but its all about how untruthful a political movement became, losing partners they had promised really big payments and support but nothing happens. Yea, this looks like a author that had some other interest boiling over inside that could help out some friends in the basement and the pot never got warm so it became a progressive nightmare, Conspiracy Reverence - All Pay Back For Neglecting A Promise and Obama got hit really big. What a showmanship, a few days earlier and the arm would not have been in a sling and both hands could have been used to look out that window. Darn, failure, the friends in the basement cannot depend on liars for a income break.
Actor and playwright Robert Spillane fell from his midtown Manhattan apartment Saturday morning, July 10, 2010, leaning against a screen when it gave way and he fell through the open window. One arm was in a sling perhaps from a July 4th (Independence Day Declaration Beer Summit) injury from moving some objects from the building to the Potomac River. Absolutely absurd that the son of legendary New York City mobster Mickey Spillane died as a result from tumbling out the window of his sixth-floor apartment. What significance is this other than a old connection between a NYC building and abilities that Robert Spillane possessed. Who did he vote for President Democrat or Republican? Is it important to solve this mystery, I am not in NYC, not near the Potomac River and know nothing about the Revised copy of the U.S Constitution dated 1790 called “the Dead Potomac River Scrolls,” because they were found in a previously unknown cave on the bank of the Potomac River.

URL: http://bit.ly/axwu2P
Included Found Documents:
a) Court precedents supporting the revised constitution
b) a new version of the Bible that strikes out any connection between the Jews and the Holy Land
c) a history of Chicago politics
Bill Ayers is the New Archeology Czar whom will release the documents soon to the public after they have been examined.

Someone popular did not showup, wondering why?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 12, 2010 5:05 AM   

Wrestler Michael Spillane was the brother of Robert Spillane. It was Michael that Robert had been looking for outside the apartment through the window when he went crashing to the ground through the window quite by accident from leaning on it to hard and died on the Manhattan street below.
Read life of Mickey Spillane: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Spillane_%28mobster%29
It reminds me of when the non-famous William Ayers had his hopes set on being a mindful terrorist in NY then in Chicago up until his closest friend Obama got his mind set on Harvard and then got hungry for a sexy future and got married, all that did not stop the money laundering scam they were handling together with Timothy Geithner whom also lived in NY. The 1970s was good time with gambling motivation footed by Mickey Spillane, no drug scene for him. Tony Rezko became the leading operations manager for Obama & William Ayers plus the Reverend Jeremiah Wright became a money wart for communities building the TUCC from a pizza parlor.

Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan, New York City, New York Quite Famous:

Alicia Keys was raised by a single mother in the Hell's Kitchen area of Manhattan in New York City.

George Ranft (September 26, 1901 – November 24, 1980) was an American film actor, born in Hell's Kitchen, New York City to German immigrant Conrad Ranft and his wife Eva Glockner.

A performing artist in Hell's Kitchen, New York City that lived in Manhattan Plaza, a federally assisted apartment complex, is an American stand-up comedian named Kenny Kramer (born May 1943). He also managed a British reggae band. Jerry Seinfeld lived across the hall from Cosmo Kramer in the television show, Seinfeld co-creator Larry David lived across the hall from Kenny for six years.

Vanessa Lee Carlton (born August 16, 1980) attended Columbia University and performed in bars and clubs in Hell's Kitchen Manhattan, New York.

Benjamin Appel (September 13, 1907 - April 3, 1977), was an American novelist specializing in detective and crime fiction, a living from his writing, he was a bank clerk, farmer, lumberjack, factory-hand and a housing inspector for New York City & grew up in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood.

Mario Gianluigi Puzo (October 15, 1920 – July 2, 1999) born in a poor family of Neapolitan immigrants living in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood of New York. As an American author and screenwriter, known for his novels about the Mafia, especially The Godfather (1969), which he later co-adapted into a film with Francis Ford Coppola. Winning the Academy Award for Best Adapted Screenplay in both 1972 & 1974.

Joseph Patrick Mullen (born February 26, 1957 in New York City, New York), grew up in Hell's Kitchen, Manhattan neighborhood, where he initially played roller hockey using a roll of electrical tape for a puck.

Lawrence Gene "Larry" David (born July 2, 1947) lived in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood of Manhattan across the hall from Kenny Kramer, the inspiration for the Cosmo Kramer character in Seinfeld.

Joshua Michael "Josh" Peck (born November 10, 1986) was born in the Hell's Kitchen area of Manhattan, New York City, where he attended The Professional Performing Arts School. Highly concerned with a career in Filmography since 2000, his latest work is Red Dawn (2010).

Jerome Bernard 'Jerry' Orbach (October 20, 1935 - December 28, 2004) lived in a high-rise on 53rd Street off Eighth Avenue in Hell's Kitchen & a regular personality at restaurants & shops. In 2007, the intersection of 8th Avenue and 53rd Street was renamed in his honor.

Brian Patrick Mullen (born March 16, 1962 in New York City, New York) is from a Irish-American family in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood of New York. Both him & his brother were regular street roller hockey players in Manhattan, New York during their childhood.

Many people have some residual reference to Hell's Kitchen in Manhattan New York and lived mighty good lives. That is just the tip of the iceberg.

WHO DID THAT FOLKS, Tell me about it on Twitter - I am: Jonalist?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

July 13, 2010 7:44 AM   

Is fantasy so bad these days, Senators are accomplishing quite a bit with a fantasy use of Sharron Angle website information. Isn't there a Unfair Use Tax that Sharron Angle could wager against Senator Harry Reid? I think fun can go absurd and how Reid is using Sharron Angle is illegal. Obama has used so many Corporates, banks, Insurance Companies, and Medical Hospitals with his Health Care Insurance proposal which cannot ride on word alone there has to be improvement in hospitals, many states do not have enough hospitals to cover their entire counties. I think Officer Reid Has forgotten the reality we are all facing here in America. Is there some Muslim organized feedback in Arizona that would be opposing the ideal of Immigration Law Sharron Angle has supported? I read about Islamic Muslim's planning to overthrow the government, I see television ads of their ideology and it makes me wonder why states allow their conferences to take place, it is like allowing a rally at a Turkish University to take place just to recruit vigilantist to go into Afghanistan & Iraq some into America just to fight against the Freedom & Democracy and they really do that in Turkey and they really get volunteers that do go to fight. It is a struggle to make our economy work as long as states continue to allow such gatherings that are counter productive to our way of life, hasn't Senator Reid got any intelligence?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on