I sent a private email to a former IPDI staffer, directed at Carol Darr, that was undoubtedly angry. Darr reacted angrily to the email, and forwarded it in a
bizarre letter to the Chairman of the FEC.
This morning, I have sent the following email in response to the FEC and Ms. Darr:
Dear Chairman Thomas:
I regret that the Institute for Politics and Democracy on the Internet has chosen to make a public fight out of a personal email to a former IPDI staffer. It is ironic, to say the least, that the IPDI initially used its freedom of speech to submit a comment to the FEC recommending that it place new legal restrictions upon bloggers' ability to fundraise on behalf of others, and now is complaining loudly that I privately expressed an interest in using my freedom of speech to affect the IPDI's ability to fundraise for itself.
This is a distraction from the important issues at stake, and I trust that the FEC will base its decisions on the thoughtful submissions of all 800+ parties which have provided comments, and that as in the blogosphere, the better argument will win the day. I look forward to testifying before you later this month, and confirming why we believe our approach is most consistent with First Amendment values and the law.
Sincerely,
Markos Moulitsas
For the record, I didn't even know IPDI's annual conference was a big fundraising event. But still, the anger she has displayed at the
perceived efforts to squelch her free speech is the same anger I feel at her
overt and active efforts to squelch mine.
Like I wrote, I do love the irony that Darr is using her freedom of speech to deny my ability to do fundraising on behalf of others, and complains that I'm planning to use my own freedom of speech to deny her ability to fundraise on behalf of herself.
Update: Oops. Sorry for not providing context. If you want to understand the root of this disagreement, start with this post, then read this one.