Hello! The Iowa Independent is using DISQUS, a powerful comment system, to manage its comments. Learn more.
Community Page
- iowaindependent.com/ Jump to website »
-
Subscribe -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
-
Recent Comments
- Whatever. We need SEX-ED. I just found out the largest HIV dating&support site Positivefish. com. It has more than 500,000 members! OMG! Why so many guys and girls on the site are very sexy?...
- Ouch.. it's a bad news :(
- Well I hope when the going gets tough as president she wont just up and quit.
- If it's not possible to eliminate the HIV law in Iowa, amend it to add intent; probably most persons in Iowa that know their HIV status (and you have to know it to be prosecuted under the law)...
- Bradshaw, if you're reading this comment, keep up the good work!!!! The jokers at WHO "Newsradio" (lol) and The Des Moines Register (lol) need someone to keep them on their toes....
The Iowa Independent
Iowa's top online-only news outlet
A network of Iowa Republicans is playing a leading role in a secretive group advocating nationally on behalf of âconservative and free market idealsâ in congressional races around the country. Among the group's leaders are two media consultants who played key roles in the Swift Boa
... Continue reading »
10 months ago
10 months ago
Methinks the funding may be getting used for some less-than-journalistic purposes...
10 months ago
And we adhere to the Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics, which you can find here: http://newjournalist.org/ethics/
If you have any more questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
10 months ago
I checked out your named supporters -- major liberal labor union SEIU and liberal activist Tim Gill among them.
How about all the ones that are not disclosed?
Who are they?
Does that make you a shady liberal interest group masquerading as a media organization?
10 months ago
Anonymous? Please.
If you're willing to list liberal, gay, out-of-state activist Tim Gill - WHO, by the way, invested thousands to defeat Republican legislators like Danny Carroll - and SEIU, the largest liberal special interest group out there, then who are you keeping private?
Doesn't that make YOU shadowy?
Frightening. You shouldn't call yourselves "Independent."
10 months ago
We do not participate in electioneering activities, and we do not endorse political candidates. As a 501(c)(3), we are prohibited from many of the activities that a 501(c)(4) organization might engage in regularly. We have anonymous donors just as other nonprofit news organizations like Public Radio and Television. Our donors do not influence our editorial decisions.
10 months ago
Chase, are you comparing Iowa Independent to Public Television? Really?
10 months ago
You DO hide what you are by calling yourselves "Independent."
You ARE a shadowy group who hides their funding.
Wow - I can't wait to tell people about this. You guys are NOT what you appear. This is frightening. I'm glad you sent the link of your donors, who come from out of state to influence our elections, but then just "happen" to prop up a blog that's "not" to be used for electioneering.
Um, right. Can I get another Greenwald love story on your site? Waaaahoooooo!
10 months ago
What is there to hide?
Or are you just going to say that you don't have to?
10 months ago
All the Harkin and Greenwald love stories make sense now.
Hey Chase, is Iowa Independent a business or a c 3? If you are a c 3 it might be interesting to compile your funding resources and your coverage. Would you provide that and publish it on your blog?
Do you submit grant applications to get your funding? Will you publish them if you do?
What kind of correspondence is there between you and your parent entity?
Are you under the control of that entity?
How much of your funding comes from the Tim Gill-SEIU charity?
How does it feel to give Tim Gill a tax deduction for funding your liberal reporting?
I wonder if those donors think they are getting nonpartisan, unbiased reporting? What kind of material do you provide them?
10 months ago
10 months ago
i have to admit that the more i learn about the iowa independent the more it appears to be just a sham organization.
whats the deal with carroll? what is the connection there?
and why all the funding from an out of state c 3 that is supported by the same donors that run iowa republicans into the ground?
this sounds like something the iowa ethics board might be interested in.
or the irs.
truth squad -- share more.
10 months ago
10 months ago
10 months ago
I guess when they gave up being fiscally conservative they really didnt have a leg to stand on.
At least know you know what you are getting with John McCain. A smear artist who will raise spending lower taxes and increase the national deficit in ways that will make George Bush look like a conservative.
Im voting Obama, he may be a liberal, but at least he is not trying to proclaim he is something else
10 months ago
Sounds just like the Center for Independent Media.
Follow the money, dismantle the lies and what do you have? More immoral, corrupt liberals.
10 months ago
search last name: Bennahum
'08 election cycle
10 months ago
Go to the Iowa Secretary of States website and see what you find.
When you do a search for "Iowa Independent" and think you might get a business, corporation, or non-profit -- guess what you get?
You get a registered trademark.
"Iowa Independent" is merely a registered trademark of a liberal non-profit group based in Washington, D.C.
The same group that is funded by the likes of SEIU and Tim Gill.
That kind of looks like "Iowa Independent" is the group that is really operating in the shadows.
Digging through much of what is written here -- and where the funding for this group comes from -- makes it pretty ripe for a complaint with the IRS and the Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board.
Does "Iowa Independent" even maintain a bank account? Do they have a board? Who makes their editorial decisions? How much money is disbursed to them from SEIU's DC-supported charity? What does that group tell them to write or do?
10 months ago
Run and funded by a liberal DC based non-profit.
Not very Iowa. Not very independent.
10 months ago
How long has this been going on? Is nobody looking into their practices?
This will really rock those who believed Iowa Independent was actually non-partisan. They're not even Democrats - they're left of them! For good reason, I guess. You can't turn down that kinda money.
10 months ago
I mean, I know their donors show that they have to be liberal, but they could at least get their facts straight with regard to issues, people and their titles.
Must not have enough time to do so, however, given all the checks coming in from out of state that they have to sort through.
Priorities, priorities...
10 months ago
Sure, their money comes from a handful of out-of-state liberals who successfully push their leftist agenda through the site, but hey...
Oh, wait a minute. Now I see where you guys are coming from.
10 months ago
Dana Boone: Voter Registration – Democrat
Jason Hancock: Voter Registration – Democrat
Chase Martyn: Voter Registration – Democrat
T.M. Lindsey: Voter Registration – Democrat
Other “players” straight from http://iowaindependent.com/about:
John Deeth: “He left journalism to do campaign fieldwork for the Democrats.” I believe writing for the Iowa Independent allows this statement to continue to be accurate.
Dien Judge: “son of Iowa Lt. Gov. Patty Judge and former state Senator John Judge.”
Alec Schierenbeck: “president of College Democrats of Iowa.”
Lynda Waddington: “on the Democratic State Central Committee.”
The only place where I see Iowa “Independent” as being “independent” is with Doug Burns. He is sooooooo “independent” that they even list that “He is registered to vote as an Independent.” Oh, but then again he used to work for “U.S. Rep. Pat Danner of Missouri, a Blue Dog Democrat.”
10 months ago
10 months ago
As for the criticisms lodged below, all I can say is that nothing has been said to criticize the actual content of this story or any other story. If you feel that we have written something unfair, respond to our stories with specific complaints and not general indictments of us as people. We make it clear where we are coming from, and we do our best to treat everyone fairly, even when they have a different point of view. We will respond well to complaints when they are lodged respectfully, and we hope you will continue to participate in our site.
10 months ago
"We did it! Iowans showed up and did their part! Now it's up to the rest of the states to keep it going! We set it off! Victory!!!"
10 months ago
"We are a nonpartisan, progressive organization, and we make no attempt to cover it up."
First, 'nonpartisan progressive' is an oxymoron.
Second, the difference between Iowa Independent and the AFF is that one is a journalistic outlet and the other is a political activist group. By your very nature, you are to maintain impartiality, not try to mold and shape the news to fit your liberal agenda.
And your name - Iowa Independent - is purposefully misleading!
10 months ago
1) If you can't deny the facts, attack the source
2) If you shout loudly enough, people might believe you
3) If I say it ten times, and you only say it once, I win.
4) "A lie can stride across the world, before Truth has put on its boots"
Good to see there are some Iowa Republicans with a true sense of history, who are able to exercise their God-given right to malignant idiocy.
10 months ago
All I need is your latest to make my case
"Gutless Guardian" - sounds to me like an ad hominem attack - no debate here, just call her names and smear,smear,smear
"Is everyone who skunks you in a debate a Nazi?" - Nobody said that, but if you use their "argumentative" techniques, and if the shoe fits ... Oh, and how do you read "skunked" into anything so far?
"Re #4...what lie are you referring to?" Well, we have conniving Chambers of Commerce (prove it, or shut up), behind-the-scenes corrupt and immoral liberals (prove it, or shut up), "purposefully misleading" disclosures of funding (show me where, or shut up) and a whole series of verbal shotgun blasts (who knows, maybe something will stick...), just because you don't like what a blog (whether independent or dependent, doesn't matter) says about a group that seems near and dear to your shriveled little heart. YOU tell me, WHERE precisely did Chase lie? Stop smearing, and start dealing with facts, if you still have any memory of what one looks like.
"There is a total disconnect in your arguments. Produce the lie in your opposition's remarks on this thread." - And THAT is my challenge to you.
You have now succeeded in using every single one of the techniques I mentioned, in a very purposeful attempt to distract from the statements in the article.
Q.E.D. sweet Peggy, Q.E.D.
10 months ago
Just to make it nice and easy for you, in case your logical faculties have been drained by your own propaganda:
Chase says AFF exists. True or False?
He says it's sponsoring advocacy ads in several races across the nation. True or False?
He says that its roster of luminaries includes Schlinger, Albrecht, Kochel, Ginsberg, McCarthy, et al, some of whom have roots in the Iowa Republican establishment. True or False?
He said there's a pending ethics complaint against the IFF and the Minnesota DFLP has filed an FEC complaint against the AFF. True or False?
This could go on forever, but you get my drift, don't you, Pegeen? Put up or shut up - these questions aren't very hard, you know.
What's bugging you really? What was it that Chase said that you REALLY didn't want anybody to know?
10 months ago
That points you listed from Chase's AFF article were never disputed by me, were they? I'll go back to my point from several days ago - AFF is obviously working to further Republican ideals so it's not going to be an earth-shattering scandal to point out to people that they're....Republicans.
I call you gutless because you don't use your real name to post, so this is quality is not limited to you but everyone who posts here who does the same. What's to stop me from posting under several different face names? It's compromises the debate and it's dishonest.
You deny calling me a Nazi but then say, "if the shoe fits." Need I say more?
Lies? I won't address posts made by other commentors because I don't have access to their brains and their information but I'll dissect what I said:
"immoral, corrupt liberals" - this is in reference to a group of journalists operating under the title Center for Independent Media, whose name conjurs up visions of righteous, idealistic journalists, when, in reality, as has been proven here, they are liberals and they're activists, plain and simple. This website, their careers, the entire endeavor is based on deception of the public.
10 months ago
That points you listed from Chase's AFF article were never disputed by me, were they? I'll go back to my point from several days ago - AFF is obviously working to further Republican ideals so it's not going to be an earth-shattering scandal to point out to people that they're....Republicans.
I call you gutless because you don't use your real name to post, so this is quality is not limited to you but everyone who posts here who does the same. What's to stop me from posting under several different face names? It's compromises the debate and it's dishonest.
You deny calling me a Nazi but then say, "if the shoe fits." Need I say more?
Lies? I won't address posts made by other commentors because I don't have access to their brains and their information but I'll dissect what I said:
"immoral, corrupt liberals" - this is in reference to a group of journalists operating under the title Center for Independent Media, whose name conjurs up visions of righteous, idealistic journalists, when, in reality, as has been proven here, they are liberals and they're activists, plain and simple. This website, their careers, the entire endeavor is based on deception of the public.
10 months ago
That points you listed from Chase's AFF article were never disputed by me, were they? I'll go back to my point from several days ago - AFF is obviously working to further Republican ideals so it's not going to be an earth-shattering scandal to point out to people that they're....Republicans.
I call you gutless because you don't use your real name to post, so this is quality is not limited to you but everyone who posts here who does the same. What's to stop me from posting under several different face names? It's compromises the debate and it's dishonest.
You deny calling me a Nazi but then say, "if the shoe fits." Need I say more?
Lies? I won't address posts made by other commentors because I don't have access to their brains and their information but I'll dissect what I said:
"immoral, corrupt liberals" - this is in reference to a group of journalists operating under the title Center for Independent Media, whose name conjurs up visions of righteous, idealistic journalists, when, in reality, as has been proven here, they are liberals and they're activists, plain and simple. This website, their careers, the entire endeavor is based on deception of the public.
10 months ago
Including you, Peggy2.
" What's to stop me from posting under several different face names?"
The fact that we've registered with the site.
"It's compromises the debate and it's dishonest."
Only you could have called the name-calling and smears a debate.
"That points you listed from Chase's AFF article were never disputed by me, were they?"
Gee gosh, no - you were too busy bashing to ever address them.
"AFF is obviously working to further Republican ideals"
God help us, those are "ideals?" Horton? Swift Boats? I think the term I'm looking for is "morally and ethically bankrupt"
"- so it's not going to be an earth-shattering scandal to point out to people that they're....Republicans."
No, Peggy (or should I call you by your last name - 2?), it's not an earth-shattering scandal. So why are you so disturbed by it? For the rest of us, it's just more of the same old same old.
By the way Ms 2, the four principles of propaganda that got under your skin weren't, in the beginning, intended as a comment on you, but rather on the AFF, that great idealistic Republican Truth Machine.
A little sensitive, aren't we?
Sincerely,
Ms 32
10 months ago
You are the one who's overly sensitive.
10 months ago
As a result, you're starting to bore me - and I'm sure we're both boring a lot of other people who have much better things to do than listen to the rattle of a closed mind (Yours? or mine? - who cares. We're talking past each other...). So -
Have a nice day, and always remember - today is the very next day of the rest of your past.
10 months ago
10 months ago
"Iowa Independent doesn't like AFF because of what they stand for and because they're beating them at their own game. Other than that, there's really no meat to this story."
Really? So what in God's own name have you and your little scurrying buddies been blathering about for the last five days?
And you can bet your sweet patoot that I at least (can't speak for the Independent) don't like what the AFF and its congeners stand for - they're a stench in the nose of civilization.
10 months ago
Start at the beginning and re-read the posts. We called Ia Indy on their hypocrisy. Jason's story really didn't say much other than to pontificate to a conservative group about something he himself is guilty of by being associated with this covert website.
And I just noticed Chase didn't write the article, Jason Hancock did. Apologies to both.
10 months ago
Even Democrats don't think this website is impartial!
10 months ago
When's the last time you had 28 comments on a story?
It's strange that you moved this off the front page so quickly.
10 months ago
Stories are sorted chronologically on the front page. This story is still on it. I'm not sure what your point is. We're a daily news site. We update our front page with news a lot.
10 months ago
10 months ago
Is everyone who skunks you in a debate a Nazi?
Re #4...what lie are you referring to?
There is a total disconnect in your arguments. Produce the lie in your opposition's remarks on this thread.
10 months ago
That points you listed from Chase's AFF article were never disputed by me, were they? I'll go back to my point from several days ago - AFF is obviously working to further Republican ideals so it's not going to be an earth-shattering scandal to point out to people that they're....Republicans.
I call you gutless because you don't use your real name to post, so this is quality is not limited to you but everyone who posts here who does the same. What's to stop me from posting under several different face names? It's compromises the debate and it's dishonest.
You deny calling me a Nazi but then say, "if the shoe fits." Need I say more?
Lies? I won't address posts made by other commentors because I don't have access to their brains and their information but I'll dissect what I said:
"immoral, corrupt liberals" - this is in reference to a group of journalists operating under the title Center for Independent Media, whose name conjurs up visions of righteous, idealistic journalists, when, in reality, as has been proven here, they are liberals and they're activists, plain and simple. This website, their careers, the entire endeavor is based on deception of the public.
10 months ago
"purposefully misleading" - you're qutoing me directly here but taking it out of context. I said this outfit's name, Iowa Independent, is purposefully misleading but you tried to tie it to disclosures of funding. ???
"WHERE precisely did Chase lie?", you ask. I don't see where anyone has accused him of lying - on this thread. But he did lie on one of the other threads. But maybe he-and you-would call it spin. I call it lying. I'll find it and post it here.
YOU are the one who first accused others of lying so the burden of proof is on you, my friend.
10 months ago
Posted by Peggy2:
"King has declined to participate in a forum sponsored by The Sioux City Journal and League of Women Voters because he is upset with a story The Journal published about the level of his effectiveness in Congress." [ quoting a D. Burns article]
Another classic case of spin by Doug Burns.
Chase's reply:
"Nope, not spin. Steve King gave that as his reason for declining the Sioux City Journal's forum. "
Peggy2's dissection of the spin:
Again, Burns purposefully misleads his readers with what he gives as King's reason for not debating, i.e. the Journal questioned his effectiveness, when he knows full well there was a cheap shot printed in that article and King thought it was below the belt for the Journal to include it.
So, Burns lied and Chase repeated his lie.
10 months ago