The New’ York Times has a story today about a subject I’ve covered several times in the past (see category “grifters”): the prevalence of grifters on the right, who raise piles of money from the true believers, mainly to line their own pockets. They’ve gone into overdrive recently, and are now raising money with calls to protect the Republic from that liberal, Paul Ryan. It’s almost comical how they justify the huge percentage of the money that goes into their own pockets:
Larry Ward, the founder of Constitutional Rights PAC, defended the move to derail the ascension of Mr. Ryan, calling it a worthy goal.
“Politics is supposed to be bloody. It is supposed to be a battle of will,” Mr. Ward said. “And the one who can get the American people siding with them is the one who wins.”
But Mr. Ward also has a financial stake in the fight. He runs Political Media, a Washington-based firm that will charge Constitutional Rights PAC a fee for sending out the blast email with the dual purpose of asking conservatives to help dump Mr. Ryan and to donate to Mr. Ward’s political action committee.
“Help us fund the fight by making an emergency donation of $30, $50 or even $100 today,” the email said, even though records show that Mr. Ward’s PAC spends every dollar it gets on consultants, mailings and fund-raising — making no donations to candidates. Mr. Ward defended his use of his own firm, saying he gave his PAC a discount on his company’s regular service charges.
Well, that’s alright then. So long as he keeps giving himself a discount, it’s all on the up and up.
In the past I’ve argued that this is great for Democrats, as it diverts money that might otherwise go into actually supporting Republican candidates into the pockets of consultants, where it lies fallow. But as I read the article in the Times, it occurred to me that there is perhaps a double blessing, though also a looming threat in all of this. For while these folks have not been particularly effective at getting some of their purported political goals enacted (death to homosexuals and to Obamacare, for example), they have succeeded in driving the Republican party in the direction they say they want it to go. In fact, they might cogently argue that they have achieved what they’ve promised the suckers. Boehner has tumbled; McConnell is in a precarious position, and Ryan, if elected Speaker, will be living on borrowed time. The party will be increasingly perceived as irresponsibly crazy by the American public. Who knows, even the mainstream media may come to see them as they are. But even that would be good for the grifters, because it will merely increase the suckers’ sense of victimization. Of course, there is always the possibility that they will get the shutdown/debt default that they claim to want, and that would not be terribly good for the rest of us. Thus the looming threat.
But the grifters don’t want success, at least not over the long haul. A few minor victories are probably useful, but for the long term, nothing succeeds in their business like failure. It would be way harder for them to raise this kind of money if the Republicans were in control of the White House. In fact, the reason they’ve had to go after their own is because, since they control both Houses of congress, the only remaining targets are Obama and the Republican leadership, which must, since Obama is still president, gays are still living, and Obamacare still law, be selling out to the liberals. Or so they must be painted in order to keep the ATM functioning. Nothing would please the grifters more than to see Hillary win, and a majority Democratic congress would be “very heaven”. The money that would bring in would make their present “earnings” look like peanuts.
Thanks to FS for pointing me to the Paul Krugman post that referenced the Times article.
