CLICK HERE FOR THOUSANDS OF FREE BLOGGER TEMPLATES »

Monday, November 26, 2007

Just Shocked

Shocked, I tell you. I was shocked to discover that Republican party strategists are turning to wealthy individuals to mount candidacies for congressional races, because Republican fund-raising is lagging behind Democratic Party efforts. According to an article in the NY Times:


... Democrats, who have been closely monitoring the Republican millionaires, assert that the recruiting underscores the Republicans’ financial weakness since they lost control of Congress in 2006.

The most recent figures show that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has raised $56.6 million and has $29.2 million at its disposal. By contrast, the National Republican Congressional Committee has raised $40.7 million with a cash balance of $2.5 million.

That is a striking turnabout for the Republicans, who have outraised the Democrats by considerable margins for years. As recently as 2006, the Republican Congressional campaign committee raised $40 million more than its Democratic counterpart, $179.5 million to $139.9 million.

“National Republicans are in disarray, forcing them to recruit inexperienced and unprepared self-funders,” said Doug Thornell, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

I think the message is becoming clearer that the fractious principles and convenient morals of the Republican Party, and conservatism generally, are not those held by the majority of Americans. The citizenry is rediscovering that the Republicans were always about two things: protecting the interests of the wealthy, and providing a home for those elements that think calling people "chihuahuas" because they may be "Mexican" is somehow appropriate. The same elements that think slandering a religion because of the violent actions of a small minority is somehow serious discourse.



















The fact that fundraising is lagging is a clear sign that Americans are tiring of this type of message.

h/t Brew City Brawler

9 Swings of the bat:

Jeni said...

You say this stuff at a time when democrats were just pronounced to now be the party of the rich? Of course they're going to have more money. They're robbing all of us working republicans blind.

See for yourself:
Democrats wake up to being the party of the rich
http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed110607a.cfm

For the demographic reality is that, in America, the Democratic party is the new "party of the rich". More and more Democrats represent areas with a high concentration of wealthy households.

I won't try to speak for America as so many dems try to, but this American is flat out furious being taxed unto death, and that's all a democrat stands for. Out with 'em (and all their favored illegals, aliens and refugees).

Other Side said...

You're always welcome to comment, Jeni.

That's a very simplistic way to look at the data, especially, too, since it comes from a very biased source. What it really means is that more and more Americans, including those with more disposable income, are switching to the Democratic party. They're just as tired of the politics of hate that Republicans have stirred for the past 20 years as are the core Democrats.

What's wrong with refuges, Jeni? You should really be more careful about what you write. Are you saying we should throw the Hmong refugees back to SE Asia? Jessica McBride would get a little upset since they are a pet project of hers.

Taxed unto death.

Spare me.

Jeni said...

Hm. Welcome, am I? Let's see; you spin my words into something they are not. Where did I bring up Ms. McBride -- and why did you? Where did I bring up Hmongs? And why did you? (There ARE other refugees, you know). Is it written in stone somewhere that the Heritage Foundation is an unreliable - or wait, you said "Biased", resource? Do they not have a right to their opinons just as you do? Or is this the usual double-standard thing going on here -- you have the right, you are the only one IN the right and anything anyone else says is just plain biased, bigoted, or flat out WRONG just because YOU SAID SO? Sorry -- don't play that game.

You don't REALLY make me feel welcome here at all. In fact, you "spun" me right on "outta" here...this was a waste of time. 10-4. Good buddy. ;)

Other Side said...

But Jeni, you bring data to this discussion from a source that I do not think is credible and it's my problem I don't agree with the spin?

Whatever happened to independent thought? I read your post and understood your point. I didn't agree with it and said so. What's wrong with that?

See, this is what is weird about your kind of conservative. You say: Is it written in stone somewhere that the Heritage Foundation is an unreliable - or wait, you said biased resource? Do they not have a right to their opinions just as you do?

The answer is: Absolutely! But just because they're entitled to their opinion does not mean that I have to agree with them. Am I not entitled to mine? But for you, that's a discussion breaker. So sad.

And regarding Ms. McBride. You spoke of refugees and how they should get outa here. Since you did not provide an example, I did. And since I know you have posted at Ms. McBride's site, I offered an example to refute you.

But again, you don't like that, so you decide to leave.

You should really read more of dad29 and Wigderson Library @ Pub, two conservative bloggers. James and Dad are excellent at arguing a point and don't cut and run at the first sign of resistance.

And, I've been forced to agree to portions of their arguments ... occasionally.

You're still welcome, but if you really thought I was going to be swayed so easily, well then I think the French say it best: Adieu, mon ami.

capper said...

Ok, I'll try this again.

Well, that was an interesting "conversation". I'm glad she didn't find my site(s). (But that's what you get for hanging out at McBride's too much)

And not to be a nitpicker, but to avoid a McBridean faux pas, it should be "Adieu, mon amie". That is presuming Jeni is female.

Other Side said...

Never presume. I think mine is correct in the absence of any gender evidence.

In any case, my language of choice was German, mein freund.

She was a little odd. It's like arging with children.

capper said...

With all due respect, all indications from the dark side of the cheddarsphere indicate she is a female.

So, even then, in your preferred language, it would be meine freunde.

I'm just trying not to be sexist, racist, or speciesist.

Other Side said...

You, however, would be mein freund since I was referring to you, capperoo.

However, you're correct. These days it is good to be careful, especially when speaking with the terminally outraged.

capper said...

Ach du lieber! Entshuldigung, mein Herr. I misread to whom you were referring.