They're available here, in three, 15-second TV spots.
The content is the usual "Republicans hate kids and seniors" theme that Democrats like to use. To the viewer that takes such assertions as unvarnished fact it will cause some problems, which one could say about the BIAW ads as well, in fairness.
The ads are peculiar, however, in the pushback they allow. The script talks about contributions from "big drug companies" and "big insurance" corporations. The spreadsheets sourcing these charges list $46,939 from drug companies and their employees as well as $34,764 from the insurance industry. In both cases, those numbers include modest contributions from middling level employees like insurance agents and sales representatives.
That's fine, Evergreen Progress is getting its shots off at Rossi, with more aggressive hits to come later no doubt. Yet since it's only June, they've left their ad campaign - and thus Governor Gregoire - open to a robust counterargument.
The bulk of the cited contributions come from Rossi's 2004 run for Governor and his days in the legislature. Given that he's approaching $12 million raised between for his two gubernatorial races alone, we're talking about a rather small percentage of his dollars raised - even if one accepted the idea that they're nefarious.
In addition, yesterday the Rossi campaign announced its 36,000th donor, serving as further testimony to the grassroots base of support that is the heart of his 2008 campaign. That's not a comparison game that will end up serving Democrats well since Rossi's low dollar contribution average and infusion of new donors - think 60+% - is quite a contrast to the incumbent's publicized infusion of big contribution support (whether that be direct or indirect).
Seriously, is high dollar cash for public policy benefits really a discussion Democrats want to have in this campaign?
Posted by Eric Earling at June 27, 2008 08:19 AM | Email ThisBrilliant commentary on this and other hits. This is good info for 2004 newbies to politics.
The biggest thing Rossi acheieved in 2004 was to bring a truck loads of quiet Republicans off the sidelines and into the fight. The sheer numbers of donors shows that in colors.
Posted by: Andy on June 27, 2008 08:34 AMLet them blow their money!!
Are these even the issues this year, or is it the best they can get from push-polling?
Posted by: swatter on June 27, 2008 08:46 AMI keep asking this question every time any of you lot mention "tribal bribery," and I haven't gotten an answer yet:
What has the Republican Party ever done for the tribes in this state that would induce the tribes to support them and not the Democrats?
I'm asking you this question because you appear to be the only "regular" around here who understands that Rossi is going to lose, and lose big, and has the guts to admit that reality in public.
That is not what the tribes want to hear, so yes, they trend towards the group that says, "ask not what you can do for the country, but what can we give you?" Oh, that is the Democrats.
A big handout was the gambling monopoly.
Posted by: swatter on June 27, 2008 09:40 AMMaybe Democrats ought channel all that energy they utilize attacking Republicans into actually doing something. These idiots can't even build a ferryboat. I bet Port Townsend votes for Rossi.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on June 27, 2008 09:46 AMivan, is your point that if Republicans did something for the tribes the tribes would pay them too?
"Gov. Chris Gregoire is benefiting from more than $650,000 in campaign contributions from Indian tribes that hit the jackpot in 2005 when she killed a gambling compact potentially worth more than $140 million a year to the state."
So Gregoire received $650,000 from the tribes in exchange for killing a $140,000,000 revenue plan to the state. So there can only be one of two conclusions here. Gregoire was bribed to do this and should be in jail, or she is too stupid to be governor?
Which conclusion would you prefer ivan?
Posted by: Reality on June 27, 2008 11:11 AM
Special session anyone?
The tribes got a lot less from Gregoire than they were after, so the answer is "neither of the above," liar.
Rossi will not win in November: it's simply impossible for the WA GOP to overcome the Neo-socialist voting bloc of King County. Also, Thurston, Pierce and Snohomish Counties lean Neo-socialist, and will most likely go for Gregoire.
The reason Republicans will lose big time in November is that GWB and Company have so tarnished the Republican "brand" that it will take years of Democrat buffoonary to convince ordinary folks to vote for Republicans again. Gas prices, home prices, inflation, etc., etc., are all being blamed on GWB and his policies, deserved or not.
Your only option is to hunker-down and allow the painful process of having idiot Democrats in the White House and Congress to transpire. Sorry, but that's the way it is: you're S.O.L.
Conservatives do not use politically correct terms like that. I choose to call them what they are - illegal.
I was reading some leftist editorial in the Times or P-I this week that referred to McCain (I think) as "Anti-Choice". Perhaps that person should be referred to as "Pro-Death".
Posted by: Palouse on June 27, 2008 12:05 PMJimmy Carter will look good after 4 years of Obama and Democrats with 60 votes in the senate, but minority voices our powerless against the media machine working now to get Obama elected. I too believe that we may just be forced to let the Democrats control things for a while, and remove their ability to blame everyone else for their failures. We can raise our kids to be self-reliant so when the Democrats drive the economy into the ground, that they'll survive it.
And if Americans can not return to that understanding of the importance of liberty and freedom held by our Founding Fathers, and accept the socialist view of the government state, then maybe we don't deserve freedom and liberty. It's bad enough that people aren't upset that child rapists were just shielded from justice by the Supreme Court, but if people today can't even get upset when 4 liberal justices try to throw out the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, then maybe they don't deserve freedom and liberty.
Maybe the democratic government of Iraq, one of many "Bush failures" the left refuses to acknowledge as a good thing in the Bush legacy, will come to our rescue in 50 years when a new generation of Americans grows out of our current insanity.
Posted by: Reality on June 27, 2008 12:15 PM"No human being on this earth is illegal kimo-sabe, it's probably about time you learned that."
Except maybe palefaces? Actually, I perfer to use the term "criminal aliens."
Posted by: NW Denizen on June 27, 2008 12:26 PMI was also kind of wondering what illegal alien or illegal immigrant meant if it didn't mean what it said? Aflac duck moment again, sorry.
Posted by: swatter on June 27, 2008 12:42 PMYou may wish to to a tad bit more research on the word (illegal alien)
That term has been used by the government/law since the 1950's.
Comments like that will only make it sweeter when they're proven wrong in November, and then they'll go back to whatever hole they were in prior to election season, much like when Bush was re-elected in 2004.
Posted by: Palouse on June 27, 2008 01:00 PMI'm okay with 'criminal' too.
Posted by: Palouse on June 27, 2008 01:04 PM"The '50's had many terms that we no longer use or tolerate today."
Oh, you mean like "paleface", "white eyes", and the like, or are those terms still in vogue.
If no human being is illegal, why do liberals so intently insist on the "right" to murder their unborn children?
Posted by: NW Denizen on June 27, 2008 01:25 PMMaybe you a little dense on this one. Illegal (word) is used around the world.
And if you think I'm kidding, try crossing into Mexico's southern border and let me know what name your given.
(In the news)
The EU Returns Directive is a step in that direction. It sets common rules for deporting illegal immigrants from the 26-country bloc. Immigrants are given 30 days to leave voluntarily. If they do not, European nations are authorized to hold them in detention centers for up to six months to process deportation. A 12-month extension will be available under some circumstances.
=================================
WOW even EU which most libs think we should follow. Illegal just POPS out at ya.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on June 27, 2008 01:48 PMSwatter: Thanks for the "young fella" comment @ 22. It made my day!
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on June 27, 2008 03:12 PMI'd say the Indians are getting their revenge on the paleface. All their casinos are making tons of money. The slots at the Emerald Queen in Fife will take your money faster than a donut disappearing at a cop convention.
Posted by: Politically Incorrect on June 27, 2008 03:15 PMAnyone that wants to see hate on display, can do a search for ivan, and read through some of his comments. See if you can discern who is angry and hateful of others, vs. those who simply deplore an ideology. I sure don't have much respect for the ideology of the left, but I don't see how I could hate ivan, given that I don't even know him.
There's a difference between vehemently disagreeing with an ideology and hating the person. That's a difference ivan does not seem to understand.
And tell us ivan, how will vilifying oil company executives and mandating where they can drill actually increase supply of oil? Don't the companies need to use their geologic technology to select the best spot? Or is that something Democratic legislators can divine?
Just keep telling yourself that Gregoire has already won.
Posted by: Jeff B. on June 27, 2008 03:46 PM