Bush, Dann, WVWV: Breaking the law versus perception and image

Impact. Intent. Perception. Image.

When you are in law school, these words take on very specific meanings - they become terms of art in dissecting whether someone has “broken the law” or not. But we know that the legal determination doesn’t necessarily make whatever was done (or not done), acceptable. The determination merely reflects an assessment of behavior or circumstances based on legislation proposed by legislators and signed by a mayor or governor or president. Whether or not it represents what we actually believe is okay can be and often is very different.

One of my favorite BlogHers, Professor Kim Pearson, tweeted about an article written by Helen Thomas in which she quotes President Bush admitting that he approved of torture. His excuse? Because the law lets him.

Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann is twisting in the wind right now as a result of admitting to improprieties related to a romantic relationship with a subordinate and many other allegations now substantiated by an internal investigation of his office. But how many of you had a conversation before the report was released yesterday that involved one or more people saying, “But did he break the law?” as if that is all that matters in this instance.

But now let’s take something much closer to WLST: Women’s Voices Women’s Votes. I stopped updating this thread because there is just so much out there now about this organization. However, I want to link to two pieces posted yesterday.

The first was written by actor Julia Louis-Dreyfuss (an Obama supporter) and appears on The Huffington Post. She filmed and still supports and promotes WVWV’s efforts to register voters and to focus on unmarried women. Here’s her take:

The news reports [about WVWW] came about because there was evidence that an individual or a small group of individuals affiliated with WVWV may have issued misleading robo-calls in North Carolina designed to suppress voter turnout in African American neighborhoods. I find these activities appalling and hope WVWV will immediately disassociate themselves from such individuals and denounce such actions.

I am not affiliated with WVWV in any way other than participating in this PSA campaign, and I debated whether to ask WVWV to pull my PSA from their website. In the end, I realized the message of the PSA is more important than the actions of some its members. Every woman, 18 or older, should exercise their right to vote for the candidate and the issues they believe in. As women, we are a powerful voting block. But that does not mean we will automatically align with female candidates.

My spot was set in a replica of the Oval Office and entitled “Who Do You Want in Here?” This was meant as a legitimate question, not to serve as an endorsement for a particular candidate. The PSA was meant to inspire women to vote regardless of their party or their position. The PSA, like me, is not pro-Clinton, but rather pro-women. And yes, you can be both.

Well done expression. I know exactly how she feels.

Alex Koppelman (also an Obama supporter) of Salon.com’s War Room published this post yesterday. I encourage you to read the entire column but here’s one excerpt that highlights the blogosphere’s role:

Last Thursday and Friday, North Carolinians received the following message:

Hello. This is Lamont Williams. In the next few days, you will receive a voter-registration packet in the mail. All you need to do is fill it out, sign it, date and return your application. Then you will be able to vote and make your voice heard. Please return the voter-registration form when it arrives. Thank you.

In all, that robo-call was made 182,236 times. Those who received it would be justified in being very confused. First, at least some of them had already registered to vote. And second, the registration deadline for the state’s primary, which is on Tuesday, had already passed by the time the calls were made. Also, WVWV appears to have violated North Carolina law because it did not provide contact information in the message, or a way for recipients to decline future calls. WVWV is subject to civil penalties for the infraction.

Soon, the blogsphere was abuzz with accusations. But the coverage of the incidents was severely flawed, and people like Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall — who has written for Salon and is one of the blogosphere’s most respected residents — were lobbing criminal allegations against WVWV before all the facts were in. In fact, some had made these charges even before they knew who was behind the robo-calls. Writing about the calls on Marshall’s TPM Muckraker on Tuesday, before WVWV had been identified as the source of the calls, Paul Kiel said, “Here’s another for the annals of vote suppression.” Kiel further characterized the calls as a “scheme.”

The situation has become a classic Andre Agassi image is everything versus did they actually do anything illegal textbook example. Throw in the passion of this election cycle, the devotion of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama supporters and you have what Booman Tribune aptly described as “a big mess.”

I wrote about how badly I feel that I didn’t know and very unlikely could have ever known, as well as whether I should have known. And my involvement was as minimal if not more minimal that Louis-Dreyfuss. I will also feel badly about the minimal role - because I don’t like being duped or feeling duped. Regardless of whether what WVWV did is illegal, the image of screwing up so badly is bad enough to warrant concern and apprehension. Condemnation to the tone of some? Well - if you feel it’s intentional voter suppression, support case and condemn. I cannot condemn anyone for feeling that way - I completely understand. And I am sorry.

I wrote Digby to tell her how perfect her post on this episode was. I didn’t ask for permission to re-publish what she wrote to me, but I will tell you that she was very comforting, reiterating how difficult it is to be a blogger and feel a responsibility to ourselves as well as a community. This reflection of hers which she shares with me demonstrates why there is a reason why, no matter what WVWV has been involved in, you can trust that Digby is our favorite female blogger, in reality, intent, image and perception.

Sphere: Related Content

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:06 am May 3rd, 2008 in Barack Obama, Law, Voting, Science, Marc Dann, Gender, Campaigning, WH2008, Ohio, Politics, Elections, Women, Government, Blogging

Comments

2 Responses to “Bush, Dann, WVWV: Breaking the law versus perception and image”

1 Judy C on May 3rd, 2008 9:26 am

Well said Jill.
2 Breaking the law versus impact, Part II | Writes Like She Talks on May 3rd, 2008 11:27 am

[…] In this post, I mentioned impact as one of those terms that gets extra meaning in a legal context compared to when we use it in a conversational sense. And in regard to the Women’s Voices Women’s vote controversy, it is impact that has everyone most concerned, but also ties into the concept of not always making illegal that which we don’t like, support or approve of. […]

Leave a Reply