“The DSCC email went on to say that Republicans "not only have cash, but also history on their side. There are only a handful of times in our nation's past when the party that won the White House hasn't lost big the following midterm election. That would spell disaster for President Obama's agenda."
Although the intent of the RNSC email was fundraising, it also served the purpose of letting its base know that not everything is as bad as the media (constant drumbeat of Republican’s in dissarry) would have it - and with good reason - Apparently, this type of fundraising does not sit well with all Democrats. From the blog Persuasian, Perseverence and Patience: text from the DSCC is demeaned as a “cry-wolf” tactic and additional text is provided by the blogger:
Don't believe what you've heard about a GOP in disarray. They're mad, they're organized, and they're determined to return to what they see as their rightful place: ruling the halls of Congress.
How do I know? $14.4 million.
That's how much Newt Gingrich raised during a fundraising dinner last week for Republican House and Senate committees. One speech. $14.4 million.
They not only have cash, but also history on their side. There are only a handful of times in our nation's past when the party that won the White House hasn't lost big the following midterm election. That would spell disaster for President Obama's agenda.
What is perhaps, the most interesting aspect of this exchange, is that one the one hand, one can find the blogger who favors the Democrat Party in general, dismissing the emails contents:
“I wonder how many people who contribute would be so out of touch to actually buy the argument that the Republicans are organized."
It is interesting because conservatives decry mainstream media bias towards the left, dismissing the strengths of the more conservative party, and touting the invincible Democrat Machine, led by the “American Idol, Rock Star, President Obama. Therefore, the media, seen as a friend to the DNC, may ultimately end up aiding their downfall – by convincing the millions who are so in “lock-step” with a particular party, that they avoid alternative media outlets such as FOX (which is consistently dismissed by the President in speeches given to rally the “troops”.) Unfortunately, the end result is that those who believe that the Democrat Party is invincible are receiving their information from a single-minded source. (Granted, the same could be said of those conservatives who never tune into MSNBC, even for the entertainment factor.)
How far has the “star power” of the Head of the DNC fallen? A Fundraiser slated for today with Obama as the “headliner”, is expected to net 3 million dollars, a pittance for high profile speakers at such events (see Newt Gingrich reference in the DSCC email; which is not verified). Additionally, the campaign promise to ban lobbyist has gone by the wayside, as Democrats are “dodging the ban on cash” from that quarter, as reported upon by Politico.
What is missing in this entire: have and have not, crying for financial help, raffling off personalized photo’s with the President, is the current dismal state of the economy, one which, can no longer be assigned to the Bush Administration or the “Republicans”. Here again, the media came to the rescue. When Obama was pushing his Stimulus Package through the legislature at the speed of light, it was noted in press, local, regional and national, that the Republican’s were simply not cooperating; in fact, they were maligned for not voting for the stimulus. As a student of history, at that point, one had to sit back and admit: tactical error! Specifically if the student has the understanding that the stimulus would go astray, that spending more would end up meaning higher taxes, and that the “Ghost of Jimmy Carter” was in the House.
As the nation takes a sharp swing to the right, the media is still touting the strength of the DNC – which will further affect their fundraising capabilities. One must also take into consideration that the perceived ownership of certain groups, specifically those who are dependent upon the government for financial aid and college students, may have resulted in votes (at the time) but the base is not capable of financial support in the long run – leaving the bulk of the support to come from industry, unions and Hollywood – all of whom are feeling the financial crunch.
On the flip side, the return of Carter, has moved the nation right – those who have had to cut back, will still find $10 to send to the various fundraising arms of the Republican Party – in order to help the nation, both fiscally and in issues of national security. This will, of course, be either proven or disproved with the coming elections: 2009 governorships, 2010 congressional and senatorial races – should the Republican’s gain seats, and it appears that both History, the Media and the DNCC itself are on their side, then there will be a solid return to conservative governance and a reversal of the tax and spend mentality currently found in DC. That said, if this does occur, the Republican members sent by the nation to rescue the country, had best stick to those fiscally conservative principals – and finally, speak up against any bias perceived by those who would seek to usurp the government.
(See: the press as viewed by the Founding Fathers: the Federalist Papers. Reference: The Federalist Papers #84 “From the Federalist Papers: #8, Hamilton
"I go further and affirm that bills of rights, in the sense and to the extent in which they are contended for, are not only unnecessary in the proposed Constitution but would even be dangerous. They would contain various exceptions to powers which are not granted; and, on this very account, would afford a colorable pretext to claim more than we granted. Fro why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do Why for instance, should it be said that the liberty of the press shallot be retrained, when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed? I will not contend that such a provision would confer a regulating power, but it is evident that it would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretense for claiming that power.")
No comments:
Post a Comment