This morning Roll Call released an article discussing the NRCC and their dilemma that they have been facing with fundraising this election cycle

From Roll Call:

Rep. Tom Cole’s (Okla.) decision to overhaul fundraising operations at the National Republican Congressional Committee appears to be a key factor in the NRCC’s precarious cash position. The changes are expected to pay dividends in future election cycles — but not in time to help House Republicans in what is turning out to be a very difficult 2008 cycle.

Cole, the NRCC chairman, indicated in an interview this week that his move to transform the committee’s fundraising from a telemarketing-based operation to one built around direct mail is partly responsible for the NRCC’s nearly $30 million cash-on-hand disadvantage compared to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Still, Cole contends his committee’s thin $6.4 million war chest is largely the result of his desire to spend 2007 paying off $14 million in debt.

Cole declined to reveal what the NRCC has spent on building its direct-mail fundraising program since January 2007, citing the need to protect trade secrets. But the chairman acknowledged that the committee continues to invest significant resources to build a small-donor fundraising base that he hopes will eventually rival what new NRCC Finance Director Janice Knopp built for the Republican National Committee during her 15 years there.

“You have to think of the long term. That usually calls for some people being willing to have less so that their successors can have more,” Cole said. “It will take several cycles, in my opinion, to get where we need to go.”

While everything that Cole is claiming seems fine, this story was taken to a completely different level this afternoon when the following article was released about an unfortunate situation one employee of the NRCC has created

From CNN.com:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — An accounting scandal at the Republican Party’s House campaign organization has federal agents investigating what happened to hundreds of thousands of dollars and could affect several congressional campaigns, party officials said Thursday.

Christopher Ward, the National Republican Congressional Committee’s longtime treasurer, was fired in January after committee officials learned that he had been making unauthorized fund transfers dating to 2004, said Rep. Tom Cole, the committee’s chairman.

“Based on analysis conducted to date, it appears likely that over a period of several years Ward made several hundred thousand dollars in unauthorized transfers of NRCC funds to outside committees whose bank accounts he had access to, including joint fund-raising committees in which the NRCC participated,” Cole said in a written statement.

“He also appears to have made subsequent transfers of several hundred thousand dollars in funds from those outside committees to what appear to be his personal and business bank accounts.”

I think this could be a small factor in why the NRCC is having some difficulty raising funds.

Luckily, they were able to catch this crook before the election came even closer, and more races were put in jeopardy.

Unfortunately, actions like this can destroy the groundwork of any organization, especially those like the NRCC that have time sensitive projects, where they need donor money to come in fast and at a high level.

I have a feeling that in the short term, this is going to severely hurt the NRCC’s fundraising abilities, at least for the next quarter.

With the outcome of house races looking bleak for the GOP across the country, the NRCC is going to have a very tough time building the war-chest that they need to compete with the Democrats.

However, the NRCC still has one thing working to their advantage, that being the fact that politics is completely unpredictable. If there is a large news story that exposes a scandal on the other side of the aisle, this will become the story of the day. But, with the media coverage I’ve been seeing lately, I don’t know if that will happen.

I was reading this story the other day, which I found incredibly sad, but found myself with a few questions that I thought really needed to be addressed regarding this case.

From CNN:

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) — Jamiel Shaw was just three doors from his house on March 2. His father told the 17-year-old high school football star to be home before dark. That is exactly what he was trying to do when, just before dusk, gunshots rang out.

Gang members pulled up in a car and asked Shaw if he was in a gang. Shaw didn’t have time to tell them “no.” He was mowed down before he could answer, police say.

This kid obviously wasn’t a thug, and it doesn’t seem as if he had any affiliations with any gangs. In fact, his father made compromises with him to ensure that he would get good grades, stay out of trouble, and get into college, which he did.

Another unfortunate to twist to this story involves the mother of Shaw:

More than 7,500 miles away, Army Sgt. Anita Shaw was serving her second tour in Iraq. Her commanding officer called her into his office and told her to sit down next to the chaplain. He then informed her that her son had been killed on the streets of Los Angeles

It’s incredibly sad to think that while she is away defending our country, here her son is, trying to stay out of trouble and didn’t even get a chance to defend himself.

Again, there is no doubt that this is an incredibly sad story, however there is one segment of the article that really stands out to me that nobody seems to be discussing.

Blue-and-white flowers — his school colors — adorned his casket, and photos of Shaw over the years were displayed at the service. Eric Clapton’s “Tears in Heaven” played as mourners entered the church.

Why would any school in a gang-ridden neighborhood choose their school colors to be blue and white, especially in Los Angeles.

For those of you who haven’t followed the gang wars in Los Angeles, one of the biggest players there are the Crips, which is one of the largest, predominently black street gangs.

Can you guess what the Crips main colors are? Blue and White.

From what I have read, the relationship between the 18th Street Gang and the Crips has been one that fluctuates. At some points, they are rivals, where at others they share turf.

With most gangs, one small action can lead to any truces and/or partnerships being eradicated at a moments notice. In no time whatsoever, a partnership can, has, and will again lead to an all-out gang war.

While I’m not saying that there was necessarily a rivalry between the 18th Street Gang and the Crips during the time of this shooting, what I am saying is that in a neighborhood that is notorious for gang activity, having school colors be colors of one of the largest gangs in the neighborhood makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I’m really curious to hear what people have to say about this, because to me it seems like having different school colors would be a no-brainier and something that would have been changed a long time ago.

CNN is displaying a variety comments from readers regarding the ridiculous situation with Geraldine Ferraro and her comments that in my opinion, really weren’t all that bad in comparison to what some of Barack Obama’s supporters have said.

Anyway, here are a few of what I think are the best:

Sylvia Mays of Beaver, West Virginia
Whether you believe in her statement or disapprove, Ferraro has the right to say what she feels. That is why we live in this country. We have freedom of speech. That is why we have a war going on, so that we can give a country their freedom. I think the media have forgotten why they have the right to print what their views or beliefs are. Do you want to have restrictions placed on you? People need to think before they judge. It is a two-way street.

I absolutely agree. It almost seems like the media assumes that we are bored with the stump speeches and need something more titillating. The Elliot Spitzer “situation” is titillating, but the focus on comments from people other than the candidates is just becoming annoying and I’m sure there are some Democrats that will agree with that.

Leann Chan of New Hyde Park, New York
I do not think Ferraro should have to apologize for her statements. She might be wrong but definitely had a point.

Politics is about the free exchange of ideas. How can we live in a free society and engage in politics as encouraged by both of these candidates when you cant say what you want because you fear it might cause you your job or position with the campaign?

Susan Baldwin of San Francisco, California
As a 59-year-old woman who felt such pride when Mondale selected her as a running mate, I am disgusted by what Geraldine Ferraro has become: a shrill, uncompromising, bitter-sounding woman. Should she apologize? Why? It’s gone so far now that not only would it be disingenuous, it would just make this whole unfortunate situation make another news cycle. From what started as a history-making race, with such promising opportunities for change, has become a muckraking spectacle that is playing to audiences around the world. Shame on all the Democrats and the media for letting this happen.

I can’t even begin to imagine what people watching this in other countries are saying. I’m sure they find all of this quite humorous.

Lawrence Hartung of Elysian, Minnesota
I think her comments are appropriate; why shouldn’t she say what’s on her mind and how she feels about it? So what if it offends someone? Apologize for what? Get over it.

Amen.

Mary Murray of North Canton, Ohio
Ferraro is just verbalizing what many others are thinking, although she needs to learn not to say everything on her mind. Barack Obama has gotten very positive media coverage that has helped him amass the votes/delegates that he has received. Were he a 46-year-old white male senator with little experience and no real plans for the future except unspecified “change,” he would have been virtually ignored.

I think we can all think of a few candidates from various races that fit that mold.

Last one:

Christopher Nichols of Palo Alto, California
Geraldine was absolutely right in what she said. Her comments were taken out of context, and they are not racist at all. She is simply stating the facts. If Obama were white, he wouldn’t stand a chance in this election. People recognize him as a “different” candidate, and not just because he’s about his crazy rhetoric of hope and change. It’s because he is different from the usual white male presidential candidates who we’ve seen grace the stage time and time again.

In all fairness to Obama, Hillary may not have the same appeal if she weren’t a woman. They both need to accept and embrace that they aren’t the average presidential candidates. Hillary graciously accepts being a woman running for office. Whenever someone approaches Obama about it, he accuses them of being a racist. Ferraro speaks the brutal truth and absolutely should NOT apologize for her remarks. There was nothing inflammatory in what she said, and she is not a racist.

I’ll leave it at that.

I just really wish the Dems and the media would move on to something with some substance soon.

It’s often been said that the Democrat Party is one that prides itself in its tolerance and steadfast fight for the allocation of civil liberties to everyone in the United States. Among these liberties of course, if the freedom of speech.

However, in recent weeks it has become quite clear to me that if you say something that goes against the grain, regardless if its just opinion or perspective, if its taken as offensive and you happen to be on a campaign, you will probably be forced out of your job and get more airtime than a Super Bowl commercial.

This latest story involved Geraldine Ferraro:

From CNN.com:

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former congresswoman and vice-presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro is resigning her fundraising position with Sen. Hillary Clinton’s campaign after controversial comments she made about Clinton’s rival, Sen. Barack Obama.

“I am stepping down from your finance committee so I can speak for myself and you can continue to speak for yourself about what is at stake in this campaign,” Ferraro wrote in a letter to Clinton.

“The Obama campaign is attacking me to hurt you. I won’t let that happen.”

While I understand Ferraro’s logic in doing this, the fact that she even had to consider this move truly brings into question how tolerant either of the Democrats seeking the Presidency are when it comes to handling controversial statements.

With Hillary Clinton having the potential to be the first woman President and Barack Obama having the potential to be the first black President, neither of them should be surprised that from time to time there are going to be comments made that might not have been thought through. If they cant handle comments from campaign staff and/or affiliates, how are they going to handle the job of being President of the United States?

While it might seem that I am blowing this way out of proportion, this is something that should really be watched over the course of the campaign. If both Democrats stick to this mentality of pushing people off of the campaign roster when they say something wrong, they’re going to create a mentality that if one of them wins, will lead to a very interesting White House.

Lets face it, in politics people (particularly staff) make comments that don’t represent the person they are working for. However, the vast majority of the time these people don’t get fired or get forced to resign over their first offense. Instead, a statement is released retracting the comments, apologising, and asking to have the situation put behind them and focus on the real issues.

Just look at how much attention this ridiculous Ferraro story has received. Instead of wasting TV time talking about what someone affiliated with the campaign has done, that time should be spent evaluating the candidates and how they differ.

It’s important to remember that each candidate has ties to people who aren’t exactly the most upstanding citizens, so really all this back-and-forth doesn’t make much sense to me.

But, on the upside, John McCain can sit back, relax, take notes and raise his money while these two go at it.

Is it all or nothing for Obama?

From CNN.com:

(CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama Monday flatly rejected suggestions he would be a vice presidential running mate for Sen. Hillary Clinton.

Clinton, Obama’s rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, and her husband, former President Clinton, have suggested a joint Clinton-Obama ticket — with Obama in the second slot.

Obviously, this was a good ploy for the Clinton campaign, because this would be an easy way to lure many of the Democrats who are “on the fence” over to her side. However, understanding what she was trying to do, Obama fired back

“Sen. Clinton is fighting hard. She’s tenacious. I respect her for that. She is working hard to win the nomination. But I want everybody to be absolutely clear. I’m not running for vice president. I’m running for president of the United States of America,” Obama told supporters during a rally in Columbus, Mississippi.

I think that this could have one of two outcomes for Obama.

In one respect, people might see him as standing up to the Clinton machine, by sending clear signals that he isn’t going to cave into their political games.

On the other hand, some could see him as being cocky, not wanting to settle for anything other than President. An argument can be made that Barack Obama is now just chasing his childhood dream, and will stop at nothing to get to the top. A few years in the state legislature, a few years in the Senate, the only thing that might be fitting for him to be at the top is by becoming the President of the United States.

Republicans should be thrilled by this. There has been so much talk about a “dream ticket,” which has given many Democrats more confidence in this election. Now, when Obama shoots down that idea, the fight has to go on.

While they are duking it out, John McCain is traveling the country raising money for what will without a doubt be an expensive campaign.

I hope Hillary and Barack keep it up, it’s making our lives much easier — as well as making November look a lot more promising.