Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

It's always good to take articles in The Washington Times with at least a bit of salt. Even the paper's reporting -- well, especially the paper's reporting -- comes with a rather clear agenda that should make any reader at least consider the editors' and particularly the publishers' agenda. With this in mind, an article in the paper out tomorrow on the dire situation at the Republican National Committee is rather interesting. Take a look:

The Republican National Committee, hit by a grass-roots donors' rebellion over President Bush's immigration policy, has fired all 65 of its telephone solicitors, Ralph Z. Hallow will report Friday in The Washington Times.

Faced with an estimated 40 percent fall-off in small-donor contributions and aging phone-bank equipment that the RNC said would cost too much to update, Anne Hathaway, the committee's chief of staff, summoned the solicitations staff last week and told them they were out of work, effective immediately, the fired staffers told The Times.

[...]

There has been a sharp decline in contributions from RNC phone solicitations, another fired staffer said, reporting that many former donors flatly refuse to give more money to the national party if Mr. Bush and the Senate Republicans insist on supporting what these angry contributors call "amnesty" for illegal aliens.

"Everyone donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue," said the former employee.

It doesn't take a genius to see that this article is a rather transparent attempt to influence the legislative effort to reform America's immigration policy, specifically by scaring Republicans into believing that their party's viability is threatened by the potential for a compromise on the issue.

But leaving this aside, it's also clear that the RNC is huring right now, and hurting bad. Whoever is leaking to The Times wants folks inside the Beltway to believe that this is a result of the immigration deal, but in reality it goes far beyond that. Go back to polling two months ago. Already then the Republican Party's favorability rating among the American people was about as low as it has been in the last 25 years. Go back even before that to November. Democrats won more seats in the House on November 7 than Republicans have won in any election in more than 50 years.

These numbers are not a consequence of the current immigration deal. They are a result of the failure of conservatism and modern Republicanism. Even the Republican base is beginning to understand this. It is no coincidence that Republican presidential candidates are drawing fewer voters to their rallies and fewer donations to their campaign accounts, that Republican voters are less engaged today than Democratic voters, that Republicans are having significant problems recruiting the candidates necessary to take back one or both chambers of Congress. Americans don't like the Republican Party -- and apparently neither does the Republican base.

Tags: Immigration Reform, Republicans, RNC (all tags)

Comments

43 Comments

Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

I'm still kind of baffled how the immigration issue became such a big issue so incredibly quickly for the right. It seems like there was a point just a few years ago when immigration wasn't an issue anybody thought about. Then at some point-- somewhere about when the Iraq War started going clearly downhill, it seems-- it was like somebody flipped a light switch, and suddenly Mexicans are The Most Important Issue Facing America Today, and a number of things that absolutely consumed the conservative psyche just a few years ago have been nearly forgotten. What happened here?

by mcc 2007-05-31 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

No, this sentiment has been brewing for a long time. The Republican base is comprised primarily of people who work - in the old-fashioned sense of that word - for a living, and they have seen their wages, working conditions and opportunities decline directly as a result of cheap illegal labor. I live in an upscale 'white' community, and even here, laborers' wages are adversely affected by so much cheap labor.

Also, the majority of Republican folks I know who are opposed to the amnesty program are not racist - they are concerned about protecting their standard of living. On the flip side, porgressives who advocate for amnesty are typically - it seems to me - white collar folks completely divorced from the realities of trying to pay the bills, let alone get ahead, working for wages in the trades.

by scudbucket 2007-05-31 09:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Immigration is a huge issue for the Republican base, and many Democrats as well. A lot of the culture war stuff--abortion, gay marriage, etc.--has been played out as far as it can go, and the War on Terror has been quasi-discredited by Bush's misadventure in Iraq. But concern over immigration will only continue to grow. Short of another catastrophic terrorist attack on American soil, I believe immgration will overtake terrorism as the #1 issue for the Republican party in the next few years.  

It's pretty shocking to hear that the RNC has fired all of its telephone soliciters. That's truly terrible, and the immigration bill fiasco is certainly a big part of that.

by Korha 2007-05-31 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

It's a convenient scapegoat... since Repulbican cannot blame business, since business is holy, infallable, and always works for the greater good (in their mind), they need another target.

Bingo... Mexican workers... never mind that, blaming Mexican migrant labor in, say, Ohio, is beyond ridiculous.... they are brown, poor, and can't fight back...  Bingo!  Perfect!

If only we could channel their anger and insecurity to the REAL causes of their problems:  unbridled free trade and unchecked executive power.

Thanks,

Mike

by lordmikethegreat 2007-05-31 11:26PM | 0 recs
Wrong on the facts

The lowest income voters are 66% Democratic, so your main thesis is just plain wrong. You are contending that that the Republican base consists of low-income laborers affected by immigrants taking their jobs? Nope.

Second, racism and racist language permeates the anti-immigration movement. Tom Tancredo, Michelle Malkin and all the others whipping up this hysteria repeatedly use overt or coded racist messaging, for example insulting "Miami as a third world city", or "Losing 'our' culture to 'them'". Tancredo is from the whitest, richest district in Colorado, with the least number of Immigrants. He is not personally threatened by immigration, and he doesn't give a hoot about working Americans.

Third, if the issue were truly about jobs, wages, working conditions and health care, then these anti-immigration voices would be talking about unionization, training programs, education funding, cheaper access to college, health-care reform, job programs. Instead they just rail against immigrants, instead of proposing anything that will help the jobs situation.

Polls show that anti-immigration feelings run highest in zipcodes with very few immigrants, and immigration support is highest in zipcodes with lots of immigrants.

by MetaData 2007-06-01 08:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Wrong on the facts

The "base", however, includes a significant amount of blue collar republicans... p[eople who shoudln't be voting republican, but do, because of social issues... i.e. the Reagan Democrats.  Most republicans I know are not rich, but they are wthie, racist, and have dead-end jobs.  If they weren't so racist, they should be democrats.  This is the vaunted "Base" that Bush appealed to so well when he was a winner.  This is the "base" that hates illegal immigrants with a greater passion than they hate even muslims.

Thanks,

Mike

by lordmikethegreat 2007-06-01 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Many working class people who struggle to get by or don't get by nearly as well as they'd like understand that business is taking advantage of undocumented workers just the same as they take advantage of them. They use the undocumented people to keep wages low and get away with other abuses as they are scared of the authorities and of losing their job. Giving these people a senseable path to legal status, stopping further mass undocumented immigration over the border and ensuring everyone's rights are protected is important. It will raise the working conditions for millions of people and raise their wages, especially so when these people aren't afraid to speak out any more and will have to be paid at least minimum wage by law and as they are organised into unions as unions are already working at doing with documented immigrants and at least trying to help undocumented people know what their basic rights are.

by Quinton 2007-06-01 01:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Bush is from Texas.  It6 is and always was 50% Mex

by msnstd 2007-05-31 09:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Rove happened...

Karl has this great strategy that would increase hispanic GOP votes for generations and, at the same time, give business leaders the cheap labor they needed to keep funneling funds to the GOP.

It was a great idea, really... politically, it was brilliant...

Then, the friggin' base showed up and told Karl to shove it!  Then all hell broke loose...

Like the other poster said, illegal immigration hatred has been simmering int he Republican psyche for quite a while... You didn't hear much about it, outside the Southwest, 'cos there were more pressing concerns...  it just took a truly boneheaded political move to bring it into a frothy boil.  

Let's remember that this move occurred soon after Katrina.  While the Republicans could care less about Democrats drowning in LA, they became quite outraged that Bush would have the audacity to propose that New Orleans should be rebuilt.  That set the stage for the open revolt when Bush put out his immigration plans.

Thanks,

Mike

by lordmikethegreat 2007-05-31 11:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

I hardly think anyone was "peeved" about Bush wanting to rebuild New Orleans. Hell, even the fundies want to rebuild New Orleans... in God's image, of course, so there isn't all that sinfulness that attracts hurricanes.

by AmericanJedi 2007-06-01 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Actually, the republican base was quite unhappy, for two reasons.

1.  In their mind, the residents of New Orleans "deserved" what they got 'cos they were "stupid enough" to live below sea level.  They were "responsible" for their own downfall.

2.  The "base" (not the corporatists and moneyed class who would benefit highly from Katrina reconstruction graft and corruption) were OUTRAGED that so much money would be spent on brown people who didn't "deserve" it... it was viewed as a massive welfare program with a significant amount of tax dollars that would be "thrown away" on people who "should have been smart enough to get out of there".

Thanks,

Mike

by lordmikethegreat 2007-06-01 09:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Well, of course. Clearly it's their "fault" for being poor after all. sigh

by Quinton 2007-06-01 01:35PM | 0 recs
See noonan

Yup. Karl miscalculated. He thought he could continue to shuck and jive his way through this by handing the yokels the religious right language, and distract them from the immigration bill.  While this worked when this was combined with attacks on welfare and black people, that worked fine.  The Reagan democrats were fine with this.  But not with an influx of immigrants who did not have to be paid minimum wage, workman's comp and so forth.

by jayackroyd 2007-06-01 07:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

The cool thing is that we're back on offense. They used to write these stories about Dems.

by Bob Brigham 2007-05-31 09:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

It was not very long ago we were hearing about Karl Rove's "permanent majority." Well, looks like that worm has turned, thank goodness.

by Oregonian 2007-05-31 09:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Go back even before that to November. Democrats won more seats in the House on November 7 than Republicans have won in any election in more than 50 years.

You sure about that? I seem to recall that in 1994 they won 54 seats...

by need some wood 2007-05-31 09:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

They possessed fewer seats, though.  The Democratic majority now is bigger than any that the Republicans held 1995-2006.

by jallen 2007-05-31 09:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Republicans sure were better at doing more with less though.

by Quinton 2007-06-01 01:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Yeah, I'm not talking about pick-ups, I'm talking about actual seats won. And the Republicans have not had 232 in more than 50 years.

by Jonathan Singer 2007-05-31 10:01PM | 0 recs
Rock and a hard place

The Reagan Democrats see their jobs and wage levels threatened by workers who are in jobs that don't comply with US labor law.  Those are the ones who are up in arms.

But the meatpackers and agribusiness and the construction industry and the restaurant business and on and on all employ people in jobs that don't comply with US labor laws.

The reason there are 10-20 million illegals here is because existing labor law is not enforced.  Firms are not fined for employing illegals.  This new complex "compromise" doesn't address the problems of the first group. And it makes the life of the second group more complicated.

by jayackroyd 2007-05-31 09:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Why is it that we have never had a serious effort at WORK Stoppage in this liberal out of freakin control blogoshere?

by msnstd 2007-05-31 10:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Immigration is a great issue for Democrats.  It helps fracture the Republican party.  
The true xenophobes worried about the impending "invasion" of Mexicans are never going to vote for Democrats.  The other Republicans understand that immigration is necessary for businesses to maintain ongoing operations as do most Democrats.

Plus, we have an excellent argument against xenophobes.  

Use a picture of oranges or lemons rotting in a field because there was no labor availible to harvest.  Demonstrate the threat of food shortages caused by a lack of people to pick the fruit.  Many will realize that the two issues are intertwined.

by agpc 2007-05-31 10:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

But this misses a crucial point: the Democratic party, which ostensibly is the party of the middle class, ought to be just as concerned about labor law enforcement and tight immigration controls as Republicans. And our party is just as liable to split on this issue as the GOP, with social justice progressives and union/pro-labor rights advocates coming down on opposite sides.

by scudbucket 2007-06-01 05:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Republicans aren't concerned about enforcing labor laws, so long as those laws are good for workers.

by jallen 2007-06-01 05:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

As a progressive, my only requirement is that the immigration process be fair, nondiscriminatory, doesn't establish some second class citizenry (like the guest worker program) or some form of indentured servitude.

Beyond that, pass the rules and enforce them. Nothing in any of the above requires that we not support tight controls or labor law enforcement.

by AmericanJedi 2007-06-01 06:01AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Actually, you'd surprised how many labor unions are supportive of giving undocumented folks a path to legal status so that they'd have to paid at least minimum wage by law and they'd have options to move into other areas of employment that they didn't havae before as an undocumented worker. Unions know that wages will go up accross the board and they'll be able to organise formerly undocumented workers into members of their union which will help everyone. Unions had a repretation in the past of being unfriendly to those that where black or brown and that's much less the case nowdays as they understand the changing demographics of the country and how business is taking advantage of undocumented workers just the same (or worse really) as they are of american citizens.

by Quinton 2007-06-01 01:39PM | 0 recs
Don't hang people in the trades out to dry

My own exposure to the immigration debate is as a homeowner in NJ, talking to people in the trades.  All contractors employ illegal immigrant labor.  No one gives a shit about quality.  The employers do not bother making sure their illegal immigrant workers are bonded (pray that no-one falls off your roof while working on it).  The few companies who care about quality go high-end.  Homeowners are either too stupid or too cheap to care about the garbage work that is being done on their houses.  In the long run, the homeowner doesn't save money, since you end up spending more because of all the repairs.  It's pretty depressing.  

Don't imagine this is a winning issue for Democrats, unless one starts talking about protection for the trades.  Telling a carpenter that no-one will pick fruit if we don't have illegal immigrant labor, is pretty fucking insulting to someone who takes pride in his work.

by Taylor26 2007-05-31 11:33PM | 0 recs
I disagree

Here in Colorado, the immigrants that I see working in construction work damn hard and do damn good work. Maybe New Jersey is different?

But, in an economic sense I also disaggree. Immigrants spin off opportunities, even as they compete with present workers. It is a net gain for the economy, even if the work force changes character in different sectors.

If the lower-rung workers are newer immigrants, the supervisors and contractors are children of prior generations of immigrants. The son of a tradesman becomes the owner of a construction firm. It is the American story in myth and fact.

Far from "taking away jobs from Americans", the economic history of the 20th century shows an upward flow in income, education, and skills as immigrants have families and generations follow generations.

As to insurance and working conditions. Yes, we need better protection for workers. Illegal allows businesses to take advantage of the workers' lack of documentation.

by MetaData 2007-06-01 08:54AM | 0 recs
Re: I disagree

Perhaps...

But, I have seen too many IT jobs go to H1B visa holders for a lot less money, while American programmers end up working at Wal Mart.

I realize that H1B's are not immigrants... but the theory that immigration drives up everyone's living status is not necessarily dogma.

Thanks,

Mike

by lordmikethegreat 2007-06-01 09:19AM | 0 recs
Re: I disagree

"Immigrants spin off opportunities, even as they compete with present workers. It is a net gain for the economy..."

This I don't understand. An overabundance of labor drives down wages - simple Econ 101. As to the ancillary benefits for members of society outisde that over-populated labor pool, perhaps you are correct: a trickle up theory wherein too much labor creates 'spin-offs' might benefit consumers and employers, but at the expense of the workers.

As to your claim that "the economic history of the 20th century shows an upward flow in income, education, and skills as immigrants have families and generations follow generations" I would strongly disagree. The economic history of labor in the 20th  is the rise of unions as a counterweight to the oppressive working conditions imposed by the Robber Barons, followed by their decline under Reagan.

Finally, the claim that (illegal) immigrants work hard, which I agree with, contributes nothing to the points being debated.

by scudbucket 2007-06-01 04:25PM | 0 recs
Re: I disagree

It depends whether immigrants are entering a static or a growing economy. In the short term or in situations where there is slow growth or recession, they create increased competition for jobs, pushing down wages.

However, immigrants provide a great opportunity for an expanding economy, as they bring with them increased productive capacity.

Obviously I'm over-simplifying, but what we're mostly seeing is immigrants arriving in sectors of the economy which aren't growing so much, leading to the expulsion of the original workers from those sectors and the consequent shrinking of payroll.

Cutting off the flow of immigrants is difficult and never 100% effective (probably never even 50% effective). The only other remedies are growing sectors of industry by government action and industrialisation of these new workers so that immigrants and established workers cannot be played off against one another.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-02 08:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

I know a 75 year old man (father of one of our neighbors) who votes consistently Democratic but also consistently spouts Republican talking points about illegal immigrants ruining America.  And its all lies.  One of his biggies is that illegals are bankrupting Social Security (of course the truth is the opposite:  they pay in but many don't collect).

Two interesting facts.  This man has two sons (both married to immigrants).  His screw up daughter (our neighbor) is a Democrat.  At least one of the sons is an ardent Republican who lost a high paying investment advisor job and a subsequent attempt at starting his own business under W (Republicans are poison to the stock market).  And his "smart" son still doesn't get it nor does the son's Cuban born wife.

Republicans obviously went hot and heavy on immigration based almost entirely on the results of the special election in CA-48 when the "Minuteman" candidate (Gilchrist?) polled 26%, almost as much as the Democrat, Steve Young (28%).  They became fascinated.  The anti-Hispanic ploy nearly killed the state-wide Republican party in California when Pete Wilson tried it;  demographically it is crazier today.  

by David Kowalski 2007-05-31 11:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

The Republican base is comprised primarily of people who work - in the old-fashioned sense of that word - for a living, and they have seen their wages, working conditions and opportunities decline directly as a result of cheap illegal labor. I live in an upscale 'white' community, and even here, laborers' wages are adversely affected by so much cheap labor.

I'll counter that. I do manual labor: carpentry, maintenance,etc. I'm 54 and I do quality work. Proudly.

What do I think about the Mexicans I've worked around/with? Many of them are damn fast. Their work quality's comparable to any demographic... many good, a few average, a rare one poor.

I never resented any of them. If they make less, I blame the employer who makes that choice. To me, they're just like me... eking out a living, trying to get ahead. What's there to resent? The place they got born by chance?

I may get frustrated with some Dems at times, but my IQ is a bit higher than my shoe size so you won't see me voting Republican. In fact, other than the antiwar former Oregon Senator, Mark Hatfield and long ago Governor Tom McCall, I can't think of any Republican who electively, professionally, or personally did one damn thing that benefited me in my entire life.

by KevinHayden 2007-06-01 02:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

It's simple economics: increased competition for labour means decreased wages.

The trouble is that the Republican argument is that you should stop the labour. That's wrong-headed and self-defeating. If you want to stop that drop in wages, you need more jobs and more union agitation.

by Englishlefty 2007-06-01 06:56AM | 0 recs
Yeah, but there are other factors

The economic balance sheet is much more ambiguous than the specific concept of labor supply & demand, as immigrants contribute to the local economy, paying taxes, renting houses, buying cars, shoes, food.

If some narrow sectors of the workforce are affected negatively, others are affected positively.

Look at the economic sectors with the greatest numerical impact from immigrants: Farms, Restaurants, Hotels, Meat Packing. Working conditions in these areas have more to do with desperation for jobs and ability to exploit rather than competition to Americans.

The construction trades get more concerned because wages have traditionally been pretty good. But even here, immigration opens up supervisory and business opportunities.

More than supply and demand, the lack of documentation and ease of firing leads to exploitation, poor work conditions and low wages. Unionization and legal status (papers) would do more to help workers in these sectors than immigration by itself.

by MetaData 2007-06-01 09:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Yeah, but there are other factors

"The construction trades get more concerned because wages have traditionally been pretty good. But even here, immigration opens up supervisory and business opportunities."

Meta, you're talking nonsense here. Or like someone who has drunk too heavily from the invisible hand/free-market kool-aid. Have you ever even been on a job site let alone worked in the trades?

by scudbucket 2007-06-01 04:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

I also work as a carpenter. I also don't resent illegals coming to America looking for work. The point was that many Republicans (i.e., the base) DO resent the downward pressure on wages/rates that an overabundance of labor in a market, particularly illegal labor, creates. Their frustration is exactly yours - "eking out a living, trying to get ahead."

Republicans  feel - perhaps justifiably - that their would be less 'eking' if there wasn't so much cheap labor around.

by scudbucket 2007-06-01 04:36PM | 0 recs
Smoke screen for out-sourcing / off-shoring ??

Does anyone believe for a moment the RNC is doing zero phone solicitations?

A better bet is the article is a smoke screen for an out-sourcing deal to an RNC croony for call center operations.

No doubt there's been big money donors salivating over that call center operation for years. There are literally thousands of operations--all with quite modern equipmen--that could absorb a 65 operator calling requirement overnight.

My more cycnical nature says the out-sourcing deal is an off-shoring deal, too.

This is one time I wish I was on the RNC's call list... then I'd ask the person on the other end of the line if they were sitting in India. (Or is it Bangladesh or Ukraine that's the lowest-cost call center location now?)

by WVaBlue 2007-06-01 03:40AM | 0 recs
Peggy Noonan agrees

Her piece in WSJ today laments Bush shedding the baggage of the Republican base:

The White House doesn't need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don't even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.

For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don't like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don't like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad.

But on immigration it has changed from "Too bad" to "You're bad."

The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic--they "don't want to do what's right for America."

Illegal and mass immigration is an issue that cuts across class more than party lines. The public spectacle of Republicans fracturing over immigration disguises the growing discord among Democrats, but not to the same degree.

by fafnir 2007-06-01 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

The best news is that the hard-core base buys this latest bread-and-circuses act about the danger of immigration. Abortion, gay rights, Republicans-as-making-us-safe-from-the-b ogeyman -none of this flies with much of anyone any more. And they are still under the misapprehension that immigration is another winner. Not. Makes my day.

by KitBinns 2007-06-01 05:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

I agree that the RNC's problems go deeper than immigration, that in the larger public arena the war and conservatism generally have failed.

However, the RNC call center is generally going to make contact with the base voters, known republicans who vote in primaries and/or have contributed before. Thus, what ticks them off and makes them stop giving may well be a different thing than what is the case in the rest of the country. The war probably plays into that and makes their "issue" with immigration a bigger deal than it otherwise might be, though. Put another way, if the war wasn't on the table and if conservatism hadn't failed completely, the base might not be making such an issue out of immigration. They might not be happy about it, but it might not be a deal-breaker to the extent that it's become.

by AmericanJedi 2007-06-01 06:11AM | 0 recs
What a crock

"Everyone donor in 50 states we reached has been angry, especially in the last month and a half, and for 99 percent of them immigration is the No. 1 issue," said the former employee."

Always have to have a boogeyman hiding under the bed - blame someone else for bad policy, poor planning and incompetent governance.

Immigration may be the hardliners complaint, but the RNC ship hit the rocks because of the leadership. Here's to hoping for a big explosion in the boiler room before it finally sinks for good.

-GFO

by GuyFromOhio 2007-06-01 06:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Support for RNC Dries Up Fast

Let's not forget that ONE unnamed employee is making this claim. Outside polling says the issue has grown but it's nowhere near the level of disgust with Iraq or gas prices or corruption by public officials of the Republican persuasion.

by KevinHayden 2007-06-01 10:21AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads