The DNC position: "We don't really need actual "fighters," do we? Couldn't we just entrust our security to these redoubtable peacekeepers?"
Posted on 02/22/2011 2:51:27 PM PST by rhema
Democrats have apparently given up on the NASCAR vote. Several of the party's House members are backing an amendment to the fiscal 2011 budget that would block any Pentagon money from going towards the sponsorship of stock-car racing as part of the military's marketing efforts.
It wasn't so long ago that Democrats actively courted NASCAR fans. They became all the rage after Democrat Mark Warner won the Virginia governorship in 2001 partly on the basis of his assiduous attendance at NASCAR races. In the 2004 presidential election, Democrats were hunting down "NASCAR dads" (mostly Southern white males) for votes the way Republican were angling to secure the support of "soccer moms" in the 2000 election. But John Kerry, the party's 2004 presidential nominee, fell flat both in the South and with NASCAR fans, and Democratic interest in the demographic waned.
It apparently has hit rock bottom now. Rep. Betty McCollum, a Minnesota Democrat, wants to yank $7 million a year in Pentagon funding for NASCAR sponsorships, despite a strong overlap between enthusiasm for the sport and areas where large numbers of young people volunteer for the military. Surveys have found that one out of every three members of the military is a NASCAR fan.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
I agree. I have no problem with the Military buying recruiting commercials during NASCAR events. But they should not be sponsoring drivers.
Trade...NASCAR for WIC
So, is she (and all of you who agree with her) in favor of stopping all Federal government advertising payments to CBS/NBC/ABC/CNN etc.
I seem to remember a lot of TV and radio ads for the military and other Federal departments.
I’ll be that the cost of TV ads FAR exceeds the $7 million figure.
Obama put the screws to the bondholders, gave GM to the unions and made the big loans that will never be replayed.
Government Motors then spends tens of millions on NASCAR and GM's TV ads, do we hear one word from congress about that spending?
Betty McCollum and the liberals hate the US Military or NASCAR or both as told by their actions and words.
Great response. Wish all libtards could hear your comment.
If Dems didn't constantly practice double standards, they'd have no standards at all.
Pentagon NASCAR participation is advertising for them. The Pentagon does not spend this money because they like cars. They do it to get recruits and get their name out there in a positive light.
Shall we stop them from running radio spots, TV spots, magazine ads?
Renting spots in malls? How about sponsoring air shows? Shut down these wasteful air shows!
We could save even more than $7M if we did all these things!
I’ll bet the military TV ad budget is bigger than 7Mil and does not buy the same coverage as NASCAR (they have drag rails too, you know).
If we let this go through, you can bet that other forms of military advertising will be next. Gosh, why would dems be against outreach and advertising by the military they love so much? Must be purely budget consciousness, eh?
The DNC position: "We don't really need actual "fighters," do we? Couldn't we just entrust our security to these redoubtable peacekeepers?"
Don’t disagree with you, but we have bigger fish to fry. Let the Democrats have Pyrrhic victories while the GOP gets something accomplished for a change.
The Army is used by blacks and hispanics and any other group as a way to move up or get out.
You ever been to Canute, Oklahoma?
Car broke down there in 68.
Went through there again in 2009.
I’d do anything to get out or do serious drugs if I were there forever.
And there are a whole lot of Canute, Oklahomas.
And a whole lot of folks wanting to move up.
I'm not going to wade through it, but yes that is public knowledge. It is buried in all the available data about Pentagon spending. There is a number for how much each recruit cost in advertising, and whether the number is increasing or decreasing. And yes, every use goes against a “metric” of results.
Many years ago the military sponsored several cars in NHRA drag racing. There was lots of complaining when they stopped. But it was simple - the results stopped so the money stopped.
I noticed that congresswoman dingbat said nothing about the money spent advertising on MTV - and yes there is LOTS of it. A friend of mine was complaining about that some years back. As I told him, where should it go, to “The Military Channel”? Who watches that? Well I do for one, and so do most of my friends. But why would you spend money on a channel that has mostly 50 and 60 year old ex-military viewers? None of us are going to join again unless the age and medical standards get relaxed - a bunch.
Ultimately the rules of advertising are the same, no matter what you are selling. You have a target audience, and you buy head count. And that's true whether it's NASCAR, or Two and a Half Men, or even MTV. You have to spend the money where you get the results.
“but are these chaps really ignorant of the existence and purpose of the American armed forces until “OMG! the Air Force logo is on that car!”
How many people do you think you can find that have never heard of “Coke”? Yet they will spend about 300 million next year on advertising.
Almost sorry to say it, but advertising does work. We tend to buy what we see. That’s why people like Coke, and Home Depot, and IBM, and Ford, and Chevy, and etc, etc, etc will continue to spend BILLIONS on advertising.
They would rather spend that 7 Million at a gay pride parade for recruiting apparently.
What you're missing is they're not doing it for charity to Nascar, it's to advertize, the same reason all the other sponsors are on the cars. The military outbid others to sponsor a car, and then used that sponsorship for recruitment, the same as a TV commercial. You can debate whether or not the sponsorship was successful in recruitment, dollar for dollar compared to expenditures on traditional commercials, but it certainly wasn't charity, it was a business decision.
I can’t say I blame the Dems on this one, given the way they tow each other around the track. It’s really annoying.
Saturday, February 19, 2011 (Updated 7:08 am)
By Dustin Long - Staff Writer
DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. -- The House voted Friday against an amendment that would have banned military sponsorship of NASCAR teams, but the Minnesota Congresswoman who introduced it vowed to continue fighting taxpayer-funded racing.
The amendment lost 281-148. Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., who sponsored the amendment, did not vote because she was traveling to the Middle East on government business. Her office, though, issued a statement saying she "intends to introduce legislation to prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for sponsorship of race cars, dragsters, Indy cars, and motorcycle racing.''
The failed amendment specifically targeted military sponsorship of NASCAR teams. The U.S. Army, National Guard and Air Force will spend about $30 million combined this year to sponsor Sprint Cup teams.
• The U.S. Army pays $7.5 million to sponsor Ryan Newman's team.
• The National Guard pays about $20 million in sponsorship fees -- down 35 percent from last year -- to be with Dale Earnhardt Jr.'s team.
• The U.S. Air Force pays $1.6 million in sponsorship fees to be with AJ Allmendinger's team.
The Air Force's funding for its NASCAR program represents less than 2 percent of its marketing budget, an aide said. The National Guard's funding last year ($32.7 million) represented 14 percent of its marketing budget. The Army's sponsorship of Newman is nearly double the $3.9 million it spends to sponsor an NHRA team. Army's sponsorship of a NASCAR team has dropped more than a third since 2009.
end snip
The dems aren't proposing to cut this for fiscal reasons. They know it's a heavily republican crowd and NASCAR fans are very pro military.
Thank you!
it took 20 posts for someone to point this out, and you did it well.
Surely the IRS has a car or two.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.