A New York Times editorial praised a court's decision denying the Real Truth About Obama's (RTAO) request to block Federal Election Commission (FEC) campaign finance rules. The editorial states; "The wholesale descent into Swift Boat campaigning has been blocked - for now - by a federal judge in Virginia." If the group were to win on appeal, it would signal open season for countless stealth groups to flood the remaining weeks of the campaign with underhanded attack ads. [. . . ] Posing as a mere 'issue advocacy' operation, the group's ad attacks Mr. Obama's character and accuses him of 'lying' about his abortion record. In truth, it trashes the candidate's nuanced position. In response the Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) states; "the RTAO issue offers a good example as to why we should not fear the advocacy efforts of outside groups. While RTAO believes that Obama's position on abortion is wrong, many other groups and the Obama campaign itself thinks that Obama's abortion position is correct." The question of issue advocacy, as the New York Times brings up, should be left alone because the court had to decide whether or not to grant the group protection in case the FEC were to consider the group a political committee. The issues are a bit muddled, and each of these reactions, a bit zealous.