A few days back, the phone rang and I stupidly answered it. I usually don't unless I know who it is, but lately I've been getting a lot of phone calls from health insurance adjusters and therapists and whatever-whatever, so I've taken to actually answering the damn thing sometimes.
So this lady is on the other end of the phone line telling me that she is a "professional fund raiser" and "this call may be recorded" and all about how the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is gonna use my money to make sure there are more Democrats in the Senate, yadda yadda.
I interrupted her. I said "You guys gave away Ted Kennedy's seat." She started to say something. "Do you have any idea who I am?" I said. She started to say something. "I'm an influential science blogger. I can raise money for a candidate just like that," snapping my finger into the phone. "But after you morons lost the most unlosable seat in the country, I contacted your chairman and told him to get back to me." She started, again, to say something. "And do you know what? I've not heard from him. I was going to tell him he had to resign. He has not gotten back to me, nor has he resigned. What's up with that? You call that fund raising?"
She started to say something, and I cut her off again. "Never mind. You guys are useless this year. This year people will just need to give to the candidate of their choice. Your committee is a waste. Take me off your damn list." Click. Or beep, actually (the hang-up noise).
I really am annoyed with the committee, and I really do not support giving them a dime this year after they screwed up Massachusetts. I mean really. Had the Massachusetts debacle been followed by the swift resignation of Bob Menendez, the DSCC chair, and an admission that they screwed up and will try to do better, than I might support them. But at this point, I see the DSCC as an unnecessary middleman with unnecessary "professional fund raisers" wasting dollars that could be used to directly fund campaigns.
The blogosphere can help with the process of drawing attention to various campaigns around the country where there is promise for a Democrat kicking out a Republican, or where a Democrat needs help staying in office.
So, you'll see the occasional post by me in this regard, and feel free to contact me if you have any specific suggestions about who should be supported.
- Log in to post comments
Stop holding back. Let out your feelings. ;)
I was really really annoyed. She started out with "Oh, hi. Actually, I'm a PROFESSIONAL fundraiser. I'm calling about...."
I laid on the bit about being a highly important element of the liberal blogosphere really thick. I told her about how I lived in Boston for 17 years, and how I've worked in several of Ted's campains, and he was the hero for all of us, and how there was no way in the world to screw up keeping his seat in the party, and so on and so on. It was truly inspired. I'd love a copy of that conversation.
Greg, the important question to ask is how much of your donation actually goes to the charity that funds are being raised for.
Professional fund raisers are in it for the money. They take a cut, often a big cut, often more than what the charity gets. The charity thinks of it as "free money" because they don't have to do anything for it.
There was just a scandal about the president of the Boy Scouts making over a million dollars a year. Why? Because he can.
The bit about the professional fund raiser isn't to impress you, it is to inform you so they don't get hit with charges of fraud if you find out that 90% of your donation is going to the professional fund raiser and not the charity.
Interesting. She said it like it was an afterthought.
Yep, true story. I was sitting at a bar talking to a professional fundraiser who gets hassled by his fellow professional fundraisers for only keeping 85% instead of the normal 90%.
But if you want my advice on who to give money to this year:
Tarryl Clark, 6th dist. Minnesota.
Yes, straight to her campaign, and not to the DCCC.
I strongly urge all Minnesotans reading this to support Tom Bakk for governor in 2010.
Our families have been friends for generations, and I've known the man since I was in diapers. Tom is not a typical politician. An ox of a man with a robust personality, he's down to earth, strong on labor issues, strong on the environment, has sponsored GLBT legislation, supports family planning and women's rights, and I'm willing to bet good money that if a medical marijuana bill came across his desk, it would get signed.
Is that a picture of him up on the lake? What lake?
Never say, "Do you know who I am?" in a sentence.
Of course they say it like it is an after thought. They can't come right out and say they are scamming the donor or they wouldn't get any donations.
Always ask what percentage goes to the charity. Usually they won't tell you, and refer you back to the charity.
Lake Vermilion. The bestest lake in the state, IMHO.
(And yes, that's him in the picture.)
Loosing the Kennedy seat did take special effort. Loosing it at the end after an early great multi-percentage-point lead in polling numbers, that took more insight than normally is shown. Loosing it to a documented paid "poseur" was the cherry on the sundae.
Was it the wrong candidate at the wrong time, what?
Minnesota's Sixth District, Tarryl Clark, earlier comment. A great candidate. Another great candidate, same race, Maureen Reed.
Last cycle against Michele Bachmann, neither stepped up. Now there is a great choice between two excellent, honest, and talented people.
The voters in the district may not deserve it, nor honor it, given how they have favored Michele Bachmann time and again, and GOP regulars before that.
But this time, it is a bonanza.
Not having to write in Aubrey Immelman in order to have a sound candidate to vote for, this cycle, will be refreshing.
"...I can raise money for a candidate just like that," snapping my finger into the phone.
You can be funny sometimes ... when you are not annoying GOD.