Snowflakes in Hell has an interesting post regarding the pro and antigun PACs this election cycle. Brady Campaign's PAC has under $50,000, and has so far raised... $73. NRA's PAC has over six million, and has raised eight million, of which about 3/4 came from donors of under $200.
His guess that perhaps Brady has been forced to cross off PAC fundraising in an effort to keep its regular operations bankrolled does seem a likely explanation. But $73?
Hat tip to Instapundit, whose referrals are keeping Snowflakes in Hell swamped for the moment...
Things seems to have quieted down for now. Turns out I had some pretty suboptimal settings on the server that I didn't notice until being linked by Glenn. Hopefully a new server will be had shortly.
Posted by: Sebastian at May 6, 2008 11:23 PM
The Brady campaign is getting so desperate that they are calling, and sending letters to me asking for a handout. I'm on every pro-gun mailing list in the country. I still can't figure out why they would ever think that I would stoop low enough to help their anti-American cause.
Posted by: Jeremy at May 7, 2008 08:10 AM
I've been wondering about this and would like people's thoughts.
Assuming we get a relatively strong individual rights ruling from the SCOTUS this late June...
Do folks think such a ruling would add to or detract from the (A) fervor and (B) effectiveness of organizations such as the Brady Campaign, VPC, LCAV, etc.?
Posted by: Carl in Chicago at May 7, 2008 08:55 AM
It would work the Brady folks and their ilk into a frothy lather and give them something else to distort and baldly lie about with their insane and absurd predictions of "wild west" shootouts and "blood running in the streets," blah, blah, blah. So I think it would temporarily add to their fervor but I doubt it would do much for their effectiveness.
The rest of us will simply nod in acknowledgement of what we already know, and move on.
Posted by: Bill at May 7, 2008 12:36 PM
Sooner or later one side will be perceived as irrelevant. The faster we get Brady into that category the better, otherwise it will be us.
The genuine problem, is that history has a habit of moving on its own and rendering arguments moot. The underlying political trend in the world in general and the US in particular is towards a bigger more authoritarian government and away from individual rights and responsibilities.
If we rely on the decline of western civilization to empower us, we'll end up like Great Britan and the EU -- hopelessly encumbered by a parasitic bureaucracy that simply cannot be killed. If the Patriot Tax Movement succeeds (don't hold yer breath), they will do most of the work for us.
Right now, we are looking at being absorbed by the Mexican diaspora, conquered by militant Islam, and purchased by China. How do you deregulate an economy to fight this when the tax-eaters outnumber the revenue-makers?
Posted by: Jim D. at May 7, 2008 01:00 PM