The issues are 1) the misuse of taxpayer money to produce campaign videos* for the incumbent President; 2) the use of people falsely posing as journalists to deliver the campaign message; 3) the airing of these videos under the cover of news programs by stations friendly to the Bush Administration (in essence, making a donation to the Bush campaign without disclosure). It's a triple blind dodge: Campaign ads under cover of news programs under cover of reporting by fake journalists under cover of a government public service announcement.

And they still got caught.

OTOH, your defense is a weak analogy that the DNC used on-the-books campaign money to air ads in which "activists" pose as "citizens"? (At least activists really are citizens, enthusiastically exercizing their right to dissent and advocate.)

Is that your best shot?

* -- A PSA delivers information without advocacy. A campaign ad would spin it with lines like 'In December, President Bush signed into law the first-ever prescription drug benefit for people with Medicare.'...'The pharmacist says the new law "helps you better afford your medications," and the customer says, "It sounds like a good idea." Indeed, the pharmacist says, "A very good idea."'.

Pretty blatant, but then the Bushies have never been noted for subtlety.