Cool. I saw this at Roy Edroso's place and thought, "What Unfogged poster is going to put this up?" I was betting on Becks doing it (in Apostropher's absense).
Random note: Dusty Foggo is a cool name for a conspirator.
I'm really surprised that people don't seem to be doubting it more. This has to be a joke. (Although I couldn't find a tip-off on the site.)
I don't know—I listened to the clip, and Colbert plays it really, really straight. Maybe the DD people know what Colbert is up to, but consider him to have filmed the perfect attack piece despite himself?
Frankly, I'd rather it be a hoax myself, so I could deasplodify my head and Restore My Faith In America.
Maybe I'm confused by not watching actual right-wing talking heads (I suppose I really should, but I just don't), but surely the intro question of "Who hates America more, you? Or Michael Moore?" comes off as comedy regardless of the audience. Right?
I saw it over at the Salon, reported as not being satirical.
The thing is, though, they are still soliciting money, complete with Credit Card form, detailed regulations and appropriate legal disclaimers ("The Tom DeLay Legal Expense Trust can only accept contributions that comply with the rules for legal expense trusts set by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. The rules prohibit contributions by registered lobbyists and registered agents of a foreign principal. A single contributor cannot contribute more than $5,000 in a calendar year. The Trust is required to report to the Standards Committee any contribution by a corporation, labor union, or other entity and any contribution or cumulative contribution by an individual that exceeds $250 in a calendar year."). So even if the word "PWN3D" comes up after you put in all your credit card details and click "Submit", I'd still say it's going pretty far for satire.
Hey, Kieran! The test, of course, would be to try to donate money. If the donation page works, it isn't a hoax. But the fear of finding out that it does work, and actually donating money to Tom Delay's legal defense fund, has put me off checking it.
That was a cross post, but I see we're thinking along the same lines.
The test, of course, would be to try to donate money.
You first.
I was going to say: "I'm voting for hoax. If everything was on the up-and-up, wouldn't there be more information about who you are sending your money to."
But, with a little sleuthing (i.e., googling the name of the trust administrator, I came across this from CNN:
"Speaking of ad spending, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) has posted ads on Web sites asking donors to help with his legal defense fund. Brent Perry, administrator of the Tom DeLay Legal Expense Trust, said they have decided to advertise "primarily on Web sites frequented by conservatives."
Perry said the ads are running on the drudgereport.com and hughhewitt.com, among others. Perry said they began advertising on these websites a "couple of weeks ago," and was not able to say how much the trust has raised through the click-through ads that feature a picture of a smiling DeLay against the backdrop of the American flag with "Defend DeLay" written across the bottom.
"It is an alternative way to raise money," Perry said. "That is not to say we are disengaging with the way we have (raised money) in the past." The trust reported raising $318,000 in the third quarter of this year, money which will be used to help DeLay fight charges that he violated Texas campaign law."
Link to Nov. 7 2005 CNN page:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/07/sr.mon/index.html
Quote is about 2/3 from bottom.
Rich
I saw it over at the Salon
Neat. I've never been coiffed to anything more political than the top-40.
Just because they're collecting money, doesn't mean it's not a hoax. Michael Moore did something like that for his show TV Nation years ago. To prove you can send out any crap direct-mail solicitation and convince at least someone to give you money, he collected money for Michael Keating and Jeffrey Dahmer:
In our country, courtroom arguments are based on prior legal decisions, called precedents. The Dahmer case has a set a alarming precedent that endangers us all. If Jeffrey Dahmer cannot be declared insane, what chance do the rest of us have should we be unfortunate enough to break the law while suffering from an emotional disorder? A group of citizens concerned with the continued protection of civil liberties has recently formed the Friends of Jeffrey Dahmer. Our ranks include lawyers, journalists, business people and homemakers. We need your help! Your contribution will help us to protect the civil liberties of you and your loved ones.
Maybe they realized it was a joke, but just genuinely thought it was funny?
You know, I was going to say "the Daou Report" and then thought maybe it was "the War Room," so I changed it to "Salon," only I guess it was "the Salon" by accident.
But a happy accident. I'm going to try to refer to it as "the Salon" from here on out.
Just because they're collecting money, doesn't mean it's not a hoax.
Isn't that actually called "fraud"?
16 - Not if they actually give DeLay the money. If they collect very little money to pass along and manage to undermine the credibility of his supporters in the process, it would be worth throwing a few dollars DeLay's way.
Do you think maybe the point of it is that after the Press Corps thing, Colbert is considered an evil propagandistic liberal, and this is meant to show how DeLay is up against the Liberal Media Bias?
To add to 16, it would be sort of like that Matt Tai/bbi piece in Rolling Stone where he donated $500 to Sen. Conrad Burns to pose as a lobbyist who wanted to drill for oil in the Grand Canyon. Sure, Burns got $500 richer, but the amount that $500 does for Burns is outweighed by how much of a corrupt ass he comes off as in that piece. (Not that I think that article is a fine piece of journalism. It's just something I could see as being in the same vein, if this was a hoax.)
That should probably be the subjunctive or something.
Oddly, her comment is showing up in the RSS feeds.
Huh. I didn't realize how that would work, thanks.
eb, what have you done?
Just a cut and paste from the bridgeplate.rdf feed.
That's top secret.
Delay thinks the existance of "the big buy" movie shows that Mr. Earle was cooperating with the filmmakers to do him in.
In Delay's mind, having the documentary promoted on the Corbert Report is additional evidence that Mr. Earle's procecution is partisan.
Could you donate $0.01 and see what happens?
surely the intro question of "Who hates America more, you? Or Michael Moore?" comes off as comedy regardless of the audience. Right?
You'd think. But I've encountered a depressing number of conservatives (on and off the internets) who would regard that as a question with a serious answer.
Anyway, I suspect the Delay defenders A) know that Colbert's piece is satire and B) don't care as long as it makes money. This is Nigerian spam, Texas-stylee.