“In September 2006, Fink filed a campaign finance complaint against the Senate Majority Fund, a Republican political organization, claiming that the “527″ organization had violated the prohibition on corporate funding for “electioneering communications” — a specific type of political communication that occurs just before an election. There was only one problem – at the time Fink filed his complaint, the fund had not made any communications, and no electioneering communications. And, as the court concluded, Fink knew it.
In his complaint, Fink also included both the Trailhead Group and the Colorado Leadership Fund, two other high-profile Republican political groups. The complaint drew plenty of press coverage before the election, but Fink quietly dropped his claims against all three groups shortly after the 2006 general election. Republicans cried foul, however, and demanded attorney fees. When the administrative court rejected that request, the SMF appealed to the Colorado Court of Appeals. More than two years after Fink’s first press release, the court ruled that he must pay the SMF’s legal fees. This is the first case in which the Court of Appeals has demanded attorney fees for a frivolous campaign finance complaint.
Fink’s complaint is not the first against the SMF. In fact, the fund had been sued three times in two years – a campaign finance complaint just before the 2004 election that was quietly dropped after the election and another complaint shortly after the election, where the fund won at trial and on appeal. In order to stop what some observers thought was a Democrat campaign if legal harassment, the fund decided to take action.
In its opinion, the Court of Appeals concluded that “Fink’s complaint was founded on nothing more than unsupported speculation.” At the same time, there is speculation that Fink himself may not have to pay attorney fees, as rumors at the state Capitol indicate that Alice Madden, the Democratic House Majority Leader, was the hidden force behind the lawsuit.
Scott Gessler, the attorney who represented the SMF, also hopes that the case will have a broader impact. “We tried to resolve this case quickly and privately, but Fink just persisted. Hopefully, these Democrat activists will now stop suing the Senate Majority Fund immediately before every general election.”

Maybe you should check your facts a bit?

2. It’s laughable to try and call a district captain a “party activist.” Especially since it can’t be confirmed that Taylor still holds such a position.

3. Any individual has a legal right to donate to who he or she chooses. A donation to a candidate does not prove party activism. Heck, look at Steve Farber. (I especially find your claims interesting considering that the Web site where you got your information from is headed by a man who has actually taken money from GOP candidates.)

I like facts, but I try to stick to only the relevant ones.