Replies

The moonbats are spinning this news this way:

So, let's put all of this into context, shall we? The DC establishment Dem party bigwigs are peeved that Dean has been working hardest at state party/local fundraising -- you know, where it can actually do some serious good -- Because it cuts into their cocktail weenie events. And they are griping to the press about it, helping along the Mehlman fax machine journalism storyline, because it's about them and not the good of the party. Nice.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, state party chairs actually have cash in their coffers due to Dean's work which is not only new, its more effective. The story is not that Democrats have no money -- because, frankly, the DNC is still doing better this year than Terry McCaullife's presidential election fundraising numbers, according to Kos. The story really is how much better the state party establishment is doing.

And the fact that Dems have actually worked on state party strengthening, after years and years of neglect, is big news. When you add in fundraising number changes from state party work along with the DNC's increases, you get a much broader picture. But the WaPo fails to do this...again. But there is one thing they don't fail to do -- kiss Mehlman's ass.
....
Do they talk about the fact that Dean has been to all 50 states and done substantial party fundraising for state coffers? Or that state party chairs love Dean for doing this -- after years of being ignored by the beltway establishment? Oh sure -- they get a whole sentence. "The Democrats -- led by DNC Chairman Howard Dean -- spent considerable resources in 2005 on resuscitating state parties and now have operatives on the ground in all 50 states." Nothing like portraying the Democratic party as being on life support and in need of oxygen while the GOP is a well-oiled machine (Of course, no mention that's it's been built on a foundation of corruption or Abramoff and his ilk or anything. Nope.)

Oh, and a quote from Dean or someone else from the DNC? Nonexistent. But you knew that without even looking at the article, didn't you?

How about it freepers? Is there anything to the argument that the dems have raised a lot of money and are just saving it for the local parties?