And have Obama and Clinton each raised more than the RNC? I wouldn't be surprised.

Hookers and blow.

President Remains A Skilled Fundraiser

Damn, looks like there's something he's actually good at. I wouldn't mind collecting bribes for a living either.

Fundraising, is that where he goes off to when he doesn't want to play President?

Yeah, but he has an unfair advantage--he gets to print his own money.

FTFA -He has already clocked 31 political events this year, raising nearly $70 million for GOP candidates and the national and state parties

Chicken feed.

And a disingenuous statement- the Dems have been focusing on the primary, and most of their money has gone to the individual candidates.

"Fundraising? YAY! That's where I'm a viking!"

Marcus Aurelius:Damn, looks like there's something he's actually good at. I wouldn't mind collecting bribes for a living either.

Odd, that was exactly what I was thinking.

good, maybe he can pay back the country for what he did to it.

well, pay for a week or so of his folly anyway.

So . . . just thinking about the math here, he's raised a third of what Obama and Clinton each managed to raise?

Mordant:good, maybe he can pay back the country for what he did to it.

well, pay for a week or so of his folly anyway.

Keep going, Bushie. You've done a heckuva job, but there's more work to do. Keep working on that pace and you should have paid down the debt you ran up in a mere 39,286 years. Get back out there and "Git 'er dun!"

This proves, once, again, that Howard Dean rules and is a fundraising wizard.

Duh.

1. McCain wins presidency.
.
..
...
....

8. "BUSH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. GINSBURG, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, and BREYER, JJ., joined."

Bravado,

The Democrats should have a clear majority in the Senate after 2008. Therefore i'd imagine McCain won't get thaaaaat much leeway with his administration.

Not in MY economy he hasn't.

McCainDemocrat:Bravado,

The Democrats should have a clear majority in the Senate after 2008. Therefore i'd imagine McCain won't get thaaaaat much leeway with his administration.

Oh I know. Bush wouldn't ever get that position, even with a GOP majority. I don't think we'll see a non-lawyer take a seat there anytime soon, let alone Bush. But I do so enjoy the thought of it, if for nothing more--than to imagine all the Code-Pinkers around the country gouging their eyes out in anguish.

Bush is going to do what every ex-pres should do: go home, relax, and enjoy retirement. Leave the policy-making to the currently elected officials. Play some golf, ride a bike, enjoy the grandkids...

BravadoGT:Oh I know. Bush wouldn't ever get that position, even with a GOP majority.

I think the suggestion was that it would be Jeb Bush, not W. check the first initial.

Control_this:Hookers and blow.

FIFY

Keeping things as they are, no matter how much it fukz up the economy, the ecology or the democracy, is paramount. There's no sense of duty amongst the rich, only a sense of entitlement so intense that they'd rather see America go down the tubes around them than make any real efforts to help the country. They know they'll survive the storm, even if it means learning Chinese.

I think the suggestion was that it would be Jeb Bush, not W. check the first initial.

That's a J for "Justice", "C.J." for "Chief Justice", and "JJ" for "Justices."

ZAZ:I think the suggestion was that it would be Jeb Bush, not W. check the first initial.

That's a J for "Justice", "C.J." for "Chief Justice", and "JJ" for "Justices."

Oops. I'll just go over here now.

/hangs head in shame

What can you say, the 24%ers are gullible.

Zalan:What can you say, the 24%ers are gullible.

It's been my experience that those who rely on the assumption that they are smarter and/or more clever than their political adversaries--rarely are.

Hell, Bush has, in his way, raised more money for Obama than he has for the entire RNC.

jimmyhaha:Hell, Bush has, in his way, raised more money for Obama than he has for the entire RNC.

1+

BravadoGT:It's been my experience that those who rely on the assumption that they are smarter and/or more clever than their political adversaries--rarely are.

uh-huh.

Someone has to be smarter than someone else. We're not all equal.

MrGumboPants:BravadoGT:It's been my experience that those who rely on the assumption that they are smarter and/or more clever than their political adversaries--rarely are.

uh-huh.

Someone has to be smarter than someone else. We're not all equal.

That's not what I said. Of course some people are smarter than others. But to assume that someone who disagrees with your politics does so because they are dumber, more gullible, etc. than you--that sentiment reflects more upon you than anyone else...

BravadoGT:That's not what I said. Of course some people are smarter than others. But to assume that someone who disagrees with your politics does so because they are dumber, more gullible, etc. than you--that sentiment reflects more upon you than anyone else...

This is true. The reasons for which the 24% still support Bush would make us wish they were just ignorant.

MrGumboPants:Someone has to be smarter than someone else. We're not all equal.

Yes, but those who rely on the assumption that they are smarter are generally not coming up with awesome plans that actually take account of their opponents positions and using them to their advantage. This is what smart people do. They develop comprehensive strategies rather than relying on hubris. It isn't fool proof. Lee was probably a better and smarter general than Meade, but he still ordered Pickett's Charge. That said, look at the way most of those campaigns went. The Union thought, "We're better so we'll win." The Confederacy thought, "We need to defeat their formidable army." When the Union stopped thinking that way, their superior resources were brought to bear and they defeated their opponents.

SUCK IT, LIBS!!!! Those patriots at KBR have figured out how to avoid paying U.S. taxes on their Iraq profits via Cayman Island accounts:

Link (new window)

BravadoGT :
It's been my experience that those who rely on the assumption that they are smarter and/or more clever than their political adversaries--rarely are.


It's been my experience that idiots tend to believe that they aren't as stupid as they are.

so, Bush alone is more corrupt than the entire DNC? yeah, that sounds about right.

mcwebe0:MrGumboPants:Someone has to be smarter than someone else. We're not all equal.

Yes, but those who rely on the assumption that they are smarter are generally not coming up with awesome plans that actually take account of their opponents positions and using them to their advantage. This is what smart people do. They develop comprehensive strategies rather than relying on hubris. It isn't fool proof. Lee was probably a better and smarter general than Meade, but he still ordered Pickett's Charge. That said, look at the way most of those campaigns went. The Union thought, "We're better so we'll win." The Confederacy thought, "We need to defeat their formidable army." When the Union stopped thinking that way, their superior resources were brought to bear and they defeated their opponents.

I wonder if there is a lesson therein for the occupation of Iraq.

culebra:I wonder if there is a lesson therein for the occupation of Iraq.

Perchance. What would happen if our Commander in Chief read The Art of War before starting one? How could things have gone differently?

/they who begin a battle and then seek to win it will always lose
//they who first win a battle and then begin it cannot be defeated

submitter:"Since the start of 2007, Bush alone is responsible for raising more money than the entire Democratic National Committee"

In other news, representing the interests of corporations and lobbyists pays a hell of a lot better than representing citizens. The K Street Project was a big success.

mcwebe0:culebra:I wonder if there is a lesson therein for the occupation of Iraq.

Perchance. What would happen if our Commander in Chief read The Art of War before starting one? How could things have gone differently?

/they who begin a battle and then seek to win it will always lose
//they who first win a battle and then begin it cannot be defeated

To be fair, he was half-way through The Butter Battle Book at the time of the invasion of Afghanistan. So we weren't operating entirely on hubris, anyhow. He's more into Animorphs these days...big kid stuff.

When has a president not raised insane amounts of money? He's not the first to do this and he won't be the last.

There are a lot of people who are willing to pay for a $5,000 a plate dinner with that idiot for some reason. But they've done it with a lot of other idiots just because they are President too.

Bush has enabled a small number of people (many of them, his friends) to get incredibly rich as a result of his policies. This is their way of showing appreciation.

What's scary is that he is a very unpopular president! The bodes poorly for the DNC if they can't out raise an extremely unpopular president. Someone needs to biatch slap Howard Dean over this.

Doesn't most of the money in politics go to individual candidates/office holders? I mean Obama has raised WAY more than 70 million right?
Shouldn't the comparison really be: Who has raised more money, the DNC or the RNC?

jba:Bush has enabled a small number of people (many of them, his friends) to get incredibly rich as a result of his policies. This is their way of showing appreciation.

[citation needed]

soy_bomb:What's scary is that he is a very unpopular president! The bodes poorly for the DNC if they can't out raise an extremely unpopular president. Someone needs to biatch slap Howard Dean over this.

Specious reasoning? In my Fark?

"Since the start of 2007, Bush alone is responsible for raising more money thanfor the entire Democratic National Committee"

FTFY

MrGumboPants:Someone has to be smarter than someone else. We're not all equal.

BravadoGT:That's not what I said. Of course some people are smarter than others. But to assume that someone who disagrees with your politics does so because they are dumber, more gullible, etc. than you--that sentiment reflects more upon you than anyone else...

Uh-huh. Mmhmm. Right, right. I see your point.



http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/US-Election-IQ2004.htm (^)

A football team scored more points than a baseball team.

The point is...

Angry Hatter:MrGumboPants:Someone has to be smarter than someone else. We're not all equal.

BravadoGT:That's not what I said. Of course some people are smarter than others. But to assume that someone who disagrees with your politics does so because they are dumber, more gullible, etc. than you--that sentiment reflects more upon you than anyone else...

Uh-huh. Mmhmm. Right, right. I see your point.



http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/US-Election-IQ2004.htm (^)
I love those graphs. Who'd they poll? How many did they poll? How were the numbers derived?

But yeah, there ARE a lot of dumbasses still giving Bush and the GOP a buttload of cash. As if hemmoraging money for gas and everything else isn't enough, let's GIVE them donations too. Sheesh.