When I see a piece like this it sets my blood to boiling.

It is not because I feel the writer does not have an absolute right to their thoughts, but I do object to anyone transposing the face of the President on foreign currency.

This is what appears to have lead to the graphic at the link above.

I happened to be at my friend Emily Dunham’s house when the RNC called to see “at what level she was comfortable renewing her contribution.” It went a little something like this.

Ring, Ring

Emily: “Hello?’

Caller: “Hi, ma’am, this is the Republican National Committee calling.”

Emily (aside to me, with a big grin on her face): “It’s the RNC.”

Caller: “We’re just calling to see at what level you’d be comfortable renewing your contribution. Would $75 be all right?”

Emily: “How about nothing?”

Caller: “Oh, why’s that?”

Emily: “I’m not real happy with the immigration bill.”

Caller: “Well, that’s not Republicans. Just the President loves that immigration bill.”

Emily: “The President is head of the Republican Party.”

Caller: “Not for long.”

How interesting that the person conducting the solictation seemed to speak for all Republican Senators. There are those who assisted in crafting this bill..are they against it? And only the President is for it..well there has been nothing signed yet so how do we know what President Bush is really for. This person should never work for the RNC again in any capacity if he or she made these statements..no political party should employ someone who deems to speak on behalf of every elected oficial.

My problem comes not with the solicitation, the articles or writers opinions. It lies instead with the fact that something so trivial as a cash solicitation can lead to another attack on the Presidency. We are moving away from respect for the office and portraying our Commander in Chief as other than American is disrespectful at the very least.

What happened to this well-oiled machine?

The Republican National Committee, hit by a grass-roots donors’ rebellion over President Bush’s immigration policy, has fired all 65 of its telephone solicitors, Ralph Z. Hallow will report Friday in The Washington Times.
Faced with an estimated 40 percent fall-off in small-donor contributions and aging phone-bank equipment that the RNC said would cost too much to update, Anne Hathaway, the committee’s chief of staff, summoned the solicitations staff last week and told them they were out of work, effective immediately, the fired staffers told The Times.
The national committee yesterday confirmed the firings that took place more than a week ago, but denied that the move was motivated by declining donor response to phone solicitations.
“The phone-bank employees were terminated,” RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt wrote by e-mail in response to questions sent by The Times. “This was not an easy decision. The first and primary motivating factor was the state of the phone bank technology, which was outdated and difficult to maintain. The RNC was advised that we would soon need an entire new system to remain viable.”
Fired employees acknowledged that the committee’s phone equipment was outdated, but said a sharp drop-off in donations “probably” hastened the end of the RNC’s in-house phone-bank operation.
“Last year, my solicitations totaled $164,000, and this year the way they were running for the first four months, they would total $100,000 by the end of 2007,” said one fired phone bank solicitor who asked not to be identified.
There has been a sharp decline in contributions from RNC phone solicitations, another fired staffer said, reporting that many former donors flatly refuse to give more money to the national party if Mr. Bush and the Senate Republicans insist on supporting what these angry contributors call “amnesty” for illegal aliens.

Story