Wouldn't it fall under "false advertising"

[shraby]

when politicians and organizations like the swift boat bunch put out ads with lies in them?

[cestpaspossible]

1. No, political speech is constitutionally protected free speech

even if it is a total lie.

[BrklynLiberal]

2. Bwaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. Truth in Advertizing? How naive.

Politicians aren't held to the same standards as hemorrhoid meds!

[Warpy]

3. No, political ads are exempted from slander and libel statutes.

However, that book they put out is not exempt from libel laws.

Why Kerry didn't sue them the day that thing came out, gaining subpoena power and tying up their resources, is something I will never understand.

Yes, I know how hard it is for a celeb to win a libel suit. Winning wasn't the point. Subpoenas that turned up their funding and ties to the Bush gang were the point. Tying up their resources fighting the suit was the point.

Bullies don't go away until you fight back.

[Just Me]

4. No. It could fall under fraud and/or intentional misrepresentation,...

,...if certain other elements can be established. Moreover, if ties can be established with other groups and/or individuals, a conspiracy charge (perhaps along the lines of RICO) may be appropriate. I'm pretty sure their behavior may be subject to other laws but I haven't spent much time researching the issue.

I'll bet there are some folks doing lots of research though! :bounce:

[forgethell]

5. I don't think

we want to go there. It's not like Democratic politicains don't lie, too. I think it's a occupational hazard.

[RaleighNCDUer]

6. Any politician who isn't clever enought to spin without telling a

flat out lie is a politician who loses. And I don't want lies from the politicians I support, either. The truth can shoulder its own burden.

The SBV's are not politicians and should be held accountable for their lies.

[forgethell]

7. What do you propose? n/t

What about freedom of speech? Why doesn't John Kerry sue, he's the one who has been harmed. Not us.