February 27, 2004
WE LOST - GIVE US MONEY
Attention, Wesley Clark fans! You’ve already donated money to help the General win -- and now he’s giving you the chance to donate again after he's lost! Following is an edited version of Clark’s Feb. 26 begging note to supporters, via Josh at bushblog:
Dear supporter,
It’s an exciting time to be a Democrat.
While ending my campaign was one of the most difficult decisions I’ve ever made, seeing the unified spirit and energy of Democrats around the country confirms that it was the right decision at the right time. Now that two weeks have passed, I hope you too can appreciate just how important our work has been.
But please realize how much work is ahead for all of us.
So that I may properly transfer the incredible support, energy and resources of my campaign to the eventual Democratic nominee, I need you, one of my most loyal and generous supporters, to help today. The costs of shutting down a national organization are costly. I can assure you that we have a strong team working on this matter quickly and cost effectively.
"Costs are costly." And people doubted this man’s knowledge of economics! Clark continues:
Your personal contribution of $50 or $100 right now will help us close the books on my campaign and will allow us to focus our complete attention and resources on the great challenge ahead.
Over the coming days we will be treated to an intense debate between the remaining candidates. It is a valuable debate about the issues we face, and the American people are listening. Voter turnout is setting new records across the country. Together, we stand poised to win in November – and we will.
What do you mean "we", Paleface? Clark’s website these days is a sad, barren place. None of the internal links ("about wes clark", "issues", "community blog") are active; the only button still functioning is the one marked "contribute".
Howard Dean, having chewed his way through $41 million before a single primary had been held, is also begging:
One-time presidential candidate Howard Dean, whose campaign fund went from boom to bust, is pleading with donors to open their pocketbooks one more time and help him retire at least $400,000 in debt.
"Can you help by making a small contribution today?" Dean asked in his Tuesday e-mail. "I won't suggest a specific amount: $250, $100 or even $50 would be appreciated. ... This debt is of huge concern to me. I need the help of good friends like you now."
Get a job, doc.
Posted by Tim Blair at February 27, 2004 04:24 PMI sent Tim here $50 once - I was on the Beer, obviously - but at least he hadn't burned through $41 million dollars of cash money first. Well, the next $50 is contingent on you losing a primary election. Good luck.
Posted by: Dylan at February 27, 2004 at 05:43 PMDoes anyone remember Philip Adams' wet dream a few months ago about Prime Minister Crean welcoming President Clark to Australia?
Both of his two great hopes have struck out. How sad!
is pleading with donors to open their pocketbooks one more time and help him retire at least $400,000 in debt.
My old-fashioned mathematics skills aren't quite able to help me out here. He wants me to donate money to help him retire in debt ? If I am *really* generous, will he retire $1M+ in the red ?
As for Clark, surely the cheapest option is for everyone to stop partying and go home.....
Johnny, you're getting caught up in the details. He's asking for money for nothing (except to make his easy life easier).
Posted by: aaron at February 27, 2004 at 06:53 PMWe're going to CASH CONVERTERS and the PAWN SHOP and to the SALVATION ARMY and to the SOUP KITCHEN and to SOCIAL SECURITY...
YEEEEEAAAAAAEEAAAAAARGGGGGGGHH !!
Posted by: The Gnu Hunter at February 27, 2004 at 07:12 PMDoesn't he get the free credit card offers with no interest if you transfer existing debt? That seems to be the solution.
Posted by: Ron Hardin at February 27, 2004 at 08:25 PMMy entire working life (and I'm only 25) I've calculated, in a basic sense, that I've earned approximately $100,000, and spent about $98,000 of it. Give me $US41 million and you'd likely see my racing yachts, coupling with supermodels etc. Thank god for the Australian way, says I. The idea that 'he/she who has most to spend on marketing deserves the position' is totally abhorrent.
Posted by: Adam at February 27, 2004 at 10:41 PMI can just see the general and Dean washing car windows at the stop lights. Or Dean could carry around a fund-raising sign - "will scream for money." It really is a cruel world and fortunately for these guys everyone likes a loser pfffft.
Posted by: Rob at February 27, 2004 at 11:22 PMHey, I'm owed $225 by the Dean campaign and in the unlikely event I get it, I plan to make penance for my being an ad whore who couldn't resist the lure of working on a presidential ad campaign by sending the whole amount to Chief Wiggles' toy drive. So please donate $4 million to Dean so Iraqi kids get some toys, wouldja?
Posted by: Mike G at February 27, 2004 at 11:35 PMAnd Wesley Clark has the unmitigated nerve to put his picture on his "new" website holding his new baby. I think that it's shameful for a man of his age to be having children when the world population is straining our resources!!
Posted by: Wallace at February 28, 2004 at 02:10 AMIf these two "contenders" are an example of how Democrats handle their own money - just imagine the horrible mess they will make with a national budget!!!!
I get this image of Clark replacing Brando in "On The Waterfront". Send me more money, "I coulda been a contender."
Posted by: Jim Smith at February 28, 2004 at 02:44 AMAnd why have we seen so little of Kerry's wife?? Much was made of Dean's wife not being present as his side almost constantly in Iowa. What do they know and when did they know it? (To coin a phrase)
Posted by: Jim at February 28, 2004 at 02:48 AMIt's an extorting time to be a Democrat.Didn't any of these people cost the job out properly?Couldn't they have set their sights a bit lower,on a cheaper country perhaps,like Haiti?
Posted by: Peter UK at February 28, 2004 at 04:52 AMWhere was Clark's offer to shut down his campaign for a measly fifty bucks a few months back?
I think I would have been more likely to donate back then.
[i]I won't suggest a specific figure: let me just mention these....[/i]
What a bunch of pathetic bafoons! The way the Democratic party has plummited into the abyss of utter foolishness since Clinton is simply mind-boggling. I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
Posted by: Nathan at February 28, 2004 at 05:33 AMActually, this is kind of fun. It just goes to show the power of decentralized media. Neither one of those turkeys could overcome the (potentially) unlimited exposure of them and their policies, no matter how much damn money or Clinton backing they had. Just a few short years ago, large media would have massaged the images into what they (the large media) wanted. Now it's at least much harder.
I spent several years in the early '90s working on research into how television, especially, presents Pres. candidates. They still do a lot of the same stuff, but they can't cherry-pick so much, and more raw data comes to the public mind.
They probably still would have trashed Dean eventually, but by the time they could have, he might have already clinched the nomination.
It's going to be interesting to see how Kerry and Edwards fare. My guess is they'll both be shredded like cheap, wet paper bags. It hasn't even really started yet, and both of them are looking a bit raggedy.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie at February 28, 2004 at 05:41 AMI won't mention a figure, but, say you were to donate $50 or $100, it would really help me wrap up the books regarding my comments career.
Dean opted out of the federal finance funding. So I say he should eat the debt.
As for Clark, his campaign's main accomplishment was to impress me with what low standards the Army must have for promotions to General. I'm glad he's out of the race, but I'm much more happy that he's no longer in the Army and that Kerry is no longer in the Navy. America is safer today just having those two out of the military.
I wonder if Clark will switch parties now, since he heard in the Washington cocktail party circuit that Republicans have more money.
Posted by: AST at February 28, 2004 at 08:00 AMYou got it, AST. Howie should declare his campaign bankrupt. Or is that redundant?
Posted by: mojo at February 28, 2004 at 09:12 AMYour personal contribution of $50 or $100 right now will help us close the books on my campaign..
"Mary, Help !!"
"ANYONE, Help !!!!!!".......
I sent email after reading a post here linking me to Weasley's website, where I read his 100 year or 500 year or 1,000 year plan(can't remember which), taking him to task on a number of issues.
All I got back were a barrage of weekly emails asking for cash, including the aforementioned.
What a f***ing maroon!
It's cocktail time in the States, and I hear a Jacob's Creek Chardonnay calling me.
Posted by: joe at February 28, 2004 at 10:58 AMCan I give money to Kerry to shut down HIS campaign? I'll give him at least sixty bucks.
Posted by: Quentin George at February 28, 2004 at 11:58 AMJust wondering, is there anybody running or ran who isn't in the "Winston Howell the Third" class?
Well, aside from Dennis...
Sorry, not "Winston Howell the Third, I meant Thurston Howell the Third.
Posted by: Timothy Lang at February 28, 2004 at 02:22 PMSo, if I understand correctly, unless Clark is given more money he can't shut down the money spending machine. That is too comical!
Posted by: PC Martin at February 28, 2004 at 02:48 PM> This debt is of huge concern to me.
He's an MD as is his wife. Even in Vermont they make good money.
Since they were going to cash the paychecks if he'd won, surely they should be willing to pay this debt.
As to the possibility that Dean, Clark, etc. might not pay campaign debts, I'm not sure that that's a bad thing. Shouldn't folks who loan them money/finance goods&services lose money when they loan to deadbeats?
Posted by: Andy Freeman at February 29, 2004 at 04:52 AM