If you want to tell the Democratic Party that enough is enough, they pushed too far, it’s time to pay up. You have to give of your time, your money, or both. There is no sitting on the couch and simply bitching on the internet or at the dinner table anymore.
Following the Twitter conversations of yesterday, Great Satan Inc. pointed to this post that shows just how little political improvement can cost.
Conservatives/Libertarians/Independents are, by this point, acutely aware of the need to remove Democrats from office. This takes money. Lots and lots of money. As someone who is woefully underemployed, I donâ€™t have large stashes of cash to send to candidates, so I was thinking that the best option would be to contribute $10 every week to a candidate of my choice until the election.
If someone who is woefully underemployed can do it, so can someone who is fortunately still fully employed. It’s the equivalent of two lunches a week. Can you brownbag it twice a week for the rest of year to undo the damage of Obamacare? If you or someone you know wants to help, but is unemployed, then give a day of labor instead.
Last night, I gave (more than $10) to Charlie Dent in PA-15. He’s in a D+2 district with a top tier challenger who was personally recruited by the White House to help pass the Obama agenda. Dent has traditionally been popular, even with an uphill battle for electoral success, but this is the biggest test he has faced since he initially won office. This is a battle where money and boots on the ground will make a direct impact on the outcome of the election.
On guns, he’s a reliable vote. On health care, there was never a doubt. So if you’ve got $10 or more burning a hole in your pocket this week and want to put it toward a race where it will be needed and will help defeat Obama’s agenda, Charlie Dent is your guy.
16 thoughts on “The Price of Liberty”
Does anyone know where we can get a roll call on the vote? I want to find out who in PA voted for this, and if my rep was one of them.
Sebastian – I take it you have moved beyond the gun issue politically? No more support for â€œBlue Dogsâ€ who support gun rights but voted for Nancy Pelosi as speaker and this healthcare monstrosity?
The Blue Dogs always disgusted me with their hypocritical conservative talk to the voters and liberal votes in Congress. Then again, Iâ€™ve always been conservative and have been steadily tracking towards libertarian / Jeffersonian positions over the past decade.
I will never move beyond the gun issue politically. It’s important to me. I am fortunate that in my district I have an anti-gun and Pelosi stool as my representative.
I can also tell you I will be hard pressed to donate to blue dog Dems who voted for Obamacare just because of the gun issue. Kanjorski voted for Obamacare, and in 2008 I went out of my way to help him out, even though he’s not in my district. Not this year.
Obviously we are talking about supporting conservative who are also pro-gun. (Not sure if you can claim to be conservative without supporting the 2nd)
I think support for pro-gun Dems has to be measured. There are some districts where I would still call for supporting a Blue Dog. For example, in districts where they will still vote for only Dems, well, try to put up the more pro-gun choices. (Yes, there are some of those races in Pennsylvania at the state level.) But, someone like Kanjorski or Holden who have competitors who could feasibly win the district, support their GOP opponents.
From a real-life activist standpoint, we will recognize that some of these Democrats are pro-gun if asked about it directly. Like Sebastian said, we went out of our way for them in 2008. This year, I won’t lift a finger for them since they aren’t in my district anyway.
Money alone isn’t enough. The Republicans/Libertarians need to put up better candidates.
And just who do you think will fund/promote/get out and help the better candidates? Do you think there’s a GOP-fairy who goes around crowning candidates? Generally, that’s not the case. It’s voters who decide. So, don’t just sit around and blame the party. It doesn’t work that way.
I would suggest that people research candidates before sending them money. Don’t just send them money because they have an “R” behind their name.
If prominent local Republicans are endorsing the Democrat candidate, that means the Republican candidate has a fatal flaw and he won’t win.
Of course, everyone can send their money wherever they want to — but it’s nice to send your money to someone who has a chance of winning.
I’m in California and, in this state, being a Republican doesn’t mean you aren’t for gun control. Meg Whitman, who is the leading Republican candidate for Governor, is for gun control.
Orange County is known as a bastion of Republicanism, yet the gun control group in that county is run by Republican women.
Everybody always seems to paint guns in broad brush strokes: Republicans= good, Democrats = bad. The real world doesn’t always work that way.
Wow! I’ve NEVER heard of an anti-gun Republican or pro-gun Democrat before! Ever! OMG, my whole world view has changed! It’s not like I just wrote a post on how this issue is above the partisan issue and that is why it succeeds or anything.
Jackass, you’re the one who is painting the world in broad brushstrokes. You’re making an awful lot of assumptions about me given that I’ve voted for Democrats more than Republicans and lived in multiple states of one-party rule where you find and make friends where you can if you don’t want to fall into political irrelevance.
Do you honestly think that Charlie Dent isn’t pro-gun? Because that’s the assertion you’re making here. If so, prove it. If you’re going to step up and sling around such accusations, dig through his record and prove it. Find me something about his past that makes him anti gun. Then explain to us who you consider politically dumb why his opponent who is working with Michael Bloomberg to push gun control here (with the shared Bloomberg/Brady lobbyist Max Nacheman) is somehow better on guns. If you know oh-so-much and aren’t just painting this in broad brush strokes, then surely you have all of that information ready. You have one week.
I thought this post was about political donations? I’m not trying to say anything other than “Research who you give money to before you give them money.” That’s it. Charlie Dent sounds like a fine guy. Give him money.
Well, since you assert that we’re painting with such broad brush strokes that we’re supporting Republican candidates at the expense of gun rights, then I’d just like to see you back up such implications.
If you agree that the issue has nothing to do with party, then why is this the first sentence of the main post?
“If you want to tell the Democratic Party that enough is enough, they pushed too far, itâ€™s time to pay up.”
Because the morning after the vote, many people were mad at the Democratic Party in regards to health care reform. If they want to see them punished, they have to pay up. Dent’s opponent supported the health care bill. Therefore, if people want to punish the party that actually threatened something as reprehensible as “deem and pass,” and they give a damn about the health care vote and/or guns, this would be a wise campaign.
I don’t read all the posts on this blog. I read this one and commented on this one individually.
It appeared to be down on Democrats and supporting Republicans because they are the only ones who support gun rights. And it supported sending money to Republicans because, apparently, any Republican is better than a Democrat.
If I’m wrong, then pardon me — but that is the way I read this particular post.
Comments are closed.