Originally Posted by aceventura3

Please stop trying to tell me I am confused. I know the difference. And I know the NAACP walks a fine line and perhaps crosses it regularly. There are more similarities between the (c)(3) AND (c)(4) than there are differences, in fact assuming a set of people who actually know what they are, few of those could tell you the important differences.

Well, you have to explain what makes an issue partisan. It may be no fault of an organization if a social welfare issue they promote becomes partisan. And even if it does become partisan does that negate the real intent of the organization? I think not. I am very uncomfortable with bureaucrats having the kind of power you seem to want them to have.

I think the problem is in the law. A person like Rove can easily exploit the intent of the law and be in compliance. In these circumstances I agree the law has to be changed, but I doubt I would agree with you regarding how to do it. I think such laws unfairly restrict those who do not have Rove's resources. These laws hinder real grass-roots political activities.

My questions do no deflect the issue. I ask you to understand the broader context of what you advocate for, there is a difference. You rarely show an understanding of unintended consequences or a vision of what is beyond what is directly in front of you. You should welcome and encourage my questions. Given that you don't, it reflects a closed mind on your part