Friday, June 01, 2007
|
|
RNC Outsources Phone Solicitation to DNC, Apparently
|
|
Posted by:
Mary Katharine Ham at
9:43 AM
|
|
Well, either that, or the WSJ editorial board is manning the phones. You heard yesterday that the RNC canned its in-house phone bank employees, partly due to an estimated 40% drop in small donations. Whoever they outsourced the job to is not gonna get those numbers back up.
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." Emily: "And, Republican senators are supporting the bill. Why would I give you guys money to get them re-elected?" Caller: "That's ridiculous." Emily: "Yeah, I don't think I'm gonna give you any money. You just called me ridiculous."
Feel the love. I guess that's what Emily gets for not wanting to do what's right for America, huh? Brilliant donor relations by the RNC. Note: That's an edited transcript. There was a bit more argument about exactly who was supporting the bill that I didn't get, but all the quotes are accurate. Update: I search for eloquence, but Uncle Jimbo finds it. Update: IMAO presents... the right way to conduct a solicitation call!
|
|
|
I had a very similar experience with the RNC solicitor. After explaining my opposition to the immigration bill, he tried to get me to give a little less. I told him no and he just kept badgering me. My No means No. What doesn't the RNC understand about that. |
|
Anymore lefty spewpoints to grind? Look through this thread and you see several people (including me) saying that prosecuting employERS is a much better course that rounding up illegals.
And citing Charlie Rangel of all people really gives away your basic idiocy on this issue.
go away, little girl, adults have stuff to discuss |
|
Another lying liberal from Hollywood.
"Not one mention of the employers who pay to have illegals in America."
Lie. The first element in getting illegals to self-deport is making sure they can't get jobs because the employer sanctions are so drastic no one will risk it. We actually have those sanctions now; the problem is that between the "sanctuary cities" run by liberals and RINOs and Democrat Party orgs like La Raza, they aren't enforced. |
|
|
I am tired of almost daily whining in the form of mail to send more money to the RNC. All I can say is that big money doesn't necessarily include a bunch of voters with it. Play to the base to be safe. Cheap labor and votes you won't get for a generation aren't worth failing to uphold the law and will of the people. |
|
Hold that thought for just a second, I feel the need to swat a fly...
Look everyone! A liberal! Notice how, even outside it's natural habitat of mindless lockstep bitterness, it still retains it's natural behavior. Rather than bring something to the conversation, it insteads engages in throwing insults like a monkey throwing it's own poo. Also, perhaps in an effort to add some perverted meaning to it's existance, it inserts words into the mouths of other and makes broad assumptions and accusations. It inserts words into people's mouths, and casts broad aspersians,like xenophobe, perhaps projecting it's own hate and misery onto others. For, if it had been making an honest effort to partake in the discussion, or knew anything of the people in it, it would know that no one here has a problem with LEGAL immigrants. Therefore, calling anyone here a xenophobe is, well, assinine. But truth matters not to the quivering liberal, throbbing with hatred, and I suspect, a fair amount of envy. It's tell-tale effort to incite by lashing at out the VP's daughter's sexuality simply show's it's on bigoted thought process, even as it attempts to demean others. Now run along back to your little hole, jessicalange, the adults need to finish their conversation.
Okay, Harold, back to you. I'm gonna be brief, since I can't stay much longer. I would love to finish this conversation with you, and given your long response, I would like to take the time to address it in full. I personally think you have a lot of legitimate concerns, but we primarily differ on how to approach it. If you don't mind, I'd like to pick it up on my blog. If that's be okay, drop me a line at ironmonger47@gmail.com and I'll give you a link. I had a recent bog there on illegal immigration and it would fit in nicely. I have enjoyed sparring with you, and hope we can continue over in my little corner of the blogosphere! |
|
My eldest daughter is a paramedic who is regularly threatened by gangbangers... mostly illegals
I have read countless police reports and rap sheets of illegals with 5 to 10 alias names, numerous Soc Sec #'s. Identity theft is rampant. The Mexican Mafia is a defacto controller of much of CA state prisons and certainly a lot of the state's drug trade.
So Cal schools are over burdened, our ER's are barely functional (and dwindling) and health care is crumbling
Refusal to deal with illegals...to wink, nudge and allow them amnesty is going to do nothing more than set up the next 50 million wave
Does American sovereignty mean nothing to you?
do NOT tell me that illegals are a net gain |
|
Harold,
Like you I am a realist about this bill. I am sickened by the hateful rhetoric seen about Hispanics in general at many "conservative sites" and think this "fall on my sword if they don't kill the bill" is a bad move.
After 30 years as a loyal Republican I will think it is time to leave the party.
When the Republican base learns that it needs the moderates of the party more than they need them perhaps I will come back to the party. The base seems to think they can win elections with 30 million voters all in slackjawed lockstep. Good luck with that. I think you will see more moderate Democrats elected as the disgusted Republicans like me part ways.... |
|
I'm sorry if I seem a little hyper-sensitive. But quite frankly, I see no realistic alternatives to the bill. Quite frankly, the current law is about as effective as the Volstead Act. Can you tell me how to deport 12 to 20 million people? How you will pay for it? How you'll make sure it won't tick off the average person when they see coverage on the evening news or read about it?
You seem to be saying that we should enforce now, and then at some undetermined point in the future, you will deign to consider my side's desires to actually deal with the root causes of the problem.
And in a reversal of 1986, you do not tell us how much we will have to spend to do so in time and effort. And so we may get more and more raids on meatpacking plants and other businesses, and we'll deport a lot of landscapers, cleaning ladies, and construction workers, but sticking with the status quo means they remain.
We've already doubled the Border Patrol, we're increasing the budget for enforcement. And the Administration got NO credit whatsoever for those steps. There were just demands for more and more - not even a consideration for what they had quietly done. What do you think those agents did with that increased budget, played tiddlywinks?
Furthermore, pointing out the possible effects of policy on public support is not pandering. It's simply a matter of deciding what should be done. No public support for a course of action means that it either will not happen, or if it does, people are gonna get their butts tossed out of office. It's not about lacking principles - it's trying to get them advanced in the best possible way. To do that, you need people to support you - and there has been distinct failures in that regard.
In fact, in the case of immigration, we're not even a "possible" effect - the GOP's support from Hispanics dropped from 44% in 2004 to 30% in 2006. And it is more that just the term "Hispandering" - I've seen President Bush referred to as Jorge more times than I care to count. People who have supported this bill have been called all sorts of names. One Congressman who was the target of Tancredo's PAC had a bulls-eye placed over his picture. Yeah, that really wins support... NOT!
Yet it seems that nobody is willing to call that sort of stuff out. And quite frankly, over the past five years I've seen this debate, my patience has reached its limits. My well of tolerance hath run dry. I'm probably in this now for vindication of my personal views on this issue as much as I am for solving the problem.
Worse, this issue has brought out the worst in everyone, it seems, either due to patience running out (applicable in my case), or because they are determined to show they won't be pushed around (also somewhat applicable to me), that they are willing to stand and fight for what they believe in (also motivating me), or whatever other reason they have on this. I hate what it's brought out in me. But I've seen no choice but to fight. Maybe I'll lose, maybe this bill dies, but I certainly intend to let certain people know they've been in a fight.
Maybe you can understand where I'm coming from. Then again, I really don't care if you don't. I'd like to just walk away from all of this and instead try to make sure my nephew has the best slurve-splitter in his Little League, but I just give too much of a darn about this country to walk away. So, I guess I'm trapped on that front. |
|
on?
Please answer my question. How many illegals do you think America can absorb. 12/20/50+ million?
And why are you decrying limited resources to locate and deport illegals but somehow think it will take less resources to track upwards of 20 million Z visa holders over the span of years to make sure they do all their touchbacks, English language programs, stay employed, etc??
There is a good way to get many of the illegal to leave... make it impossible for them to have a job.
And the easiest way to start that is to start perp-marching employers and giving them jail time for employing illegals.
Also, start cutting off any/all fed $$$ to any so-call sanctuary city. |
|
I just found an interesting though over at RAS polls. In head to head polls Hillary leads Huckabee by 5 and Brownback by 7. The general public has never heard of these guys. Romney and Thompson were with in 3 of Hillary the last time they were matched.
We do not need McCain or Rudy to win against Hillary. We just have to defeat this bill and then regroup the party and We can win.
Yes the REP brand is weakend badly right now. We have gone from 37 % to 31 % in Republicans (lost to Independents). However, Hillary is so hated by so many people that we can still win in 2008. |
|
Put down that lead pipe! I didn't call you anything, except misguided. Maybe you should go back and re-read my post, for not once did I insult you, condemn you for defending your position, and not once did I say a word about self-deportation. That's the nuttiest notion I've heard yet.
And, in theory at least, I say your questions are good questions. AND THAT"S THE RUB! The bill says NOTHING about stopping the influx of illegals. It, in and of itself, is the same mentality as self-deportation. Well, if we let them break the law, they won't break the law. Woo Hoo. And thus, the bill is a fatally flawed piece bad legislation that will, at best, make a bad situation worse.
I would say the term "hispandering" is a shortening of the phrase "pandering to hispanics". Therefore, do you accuse anyone who believes that pandering to hispanics is a racists (ignoring for the moment that 'hispanic' is not a race)? So, when someone think politician A is pandering to blacks, or whites, or rich folks, or poor folks, they are racist too? When you start calling someone racist because a word you apparently don't understand "sounds" racist, there's something uber-touchy about your sensibilities. It brings to mind the whole stupid "niggardly" incident. A 'jig' is a device used in construction for repative fabrications; are all construction workers racist because it hints at 'jigaboo'?
My last point I want to make is how it galls me when people say "we can't". This is the United States of America. We can do anything we want. We have the resources, the manpower, and the capability. The only other thing we need is the willpower. Some of us have it. The "we can't" crowd doesn't. Thank God they didn't call the shots in times past.
I'll recap my position once more. Most of all the point discussed on this bill are pointless. Since the Bill does nothing to stop illegal immigration, it DOES NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM. Thus, ROTTEN LEGISLATION. Be gone with it. |
|
Michelle is the daughter of Filipino parents, so I'm assuming her family, at least in the Philippines, practiced Catholicism. Of course the Philippines were run by the Spanish for almost 400 years until 1898. Because of this she can be considered Hispanic. It would be socially acceptable for her to use any Hispanic conotation she chooses, just like with African-Americans and the "n-word".
Heck, my family originated in France, so somebody had to have been from Spain. I guess I'm Hispanic also. In reality, all hispanics should actually be considered Europeans.
I laugh at people who call Michelle a racist. In fact, I think calling people racists for no reason should be considered a hate-crime. Only the foolish and small-minded call those they disagree with racist. |
|
We have limited resources. The current level of illegal immigration is anywhere from 5 to 8 times the number of people we have incarcerated in prison at the federal, state, and local levels combined.
How much do you think that capturing, detaining, and processing their deportations will cost? How do you get the funds out of the current budget without raising taxes?
Self-deportation is a pipe dream. If they're willing to come here in atrocious conditions, you need to find a way to make it even WORSE for them here - and you'd better not have any mixups that catch a legal immigrant or citizen in that, because the lawsuit's gonna be a killer.
And as I have explained in earlier comments, I have to beg to differ with you when I have seen people like Michelle Malkin use terms like "Hispandering" or when she seems to be citing people like Steve Sailer, whose arguments smell a lot like leftovers from eugenics to me.
Plus, as I have exlained earlier, I have taken my share of epithets from opponents of what the Senate is debating. I can only take so much before I'm going to return fire. |
|
|
Think about the conditions illegal immigrants are willing to endure to get to the United States. Then re-think the notion of self-deportation. |
|
Up until your post, Darleen, I haven't seen one person come close to the bibggest problem of thi sbill at all. And that is, once this 12 million is folded in, nothing stops the flow of illegals. In fact, without damming the flood of illegal immigrants first, it will simply encourage a more massive influx. Happened with Reagan, it will happen now.
Harold C., I don't think ill of you, I simply think you are misguided. No name calling here. But nothing I've read from you solves the problem, not that anyone else is either. But that's the point - this legislation is horrible, and will only make things worse. You may not like enforcing the law (surely out of good intentions), because it isn't the attractive thing in this situation, but NOT enforcing it has bad consequences we will keep paying for. It's not about race, and it's quite telling when people start yelling racism. They're hiding behind an intimidation attempt rather than defending their view, because they fear their viewpoint won't hold up.
90% of what people are arguing over with this thing is crap. No legislation far superior to bad legislation. Kill this useless political pandering now.
Dread, you hit the nail on the head about informed decision in DC. Kudos. |
|
If you take away the jobs, they will leave on their own, especially if there is a better legal way to get back in. No cutting in line, no extra $5k, but if you don't go home, you get sent home with a mark that denies your re-entry for 5 years or more.
Dread has it right!! Instead of a comprehensive monstrosity that is unreadable, undecipherable and impossible to implement and enforce, there should be one bill per problem. Enforcing the current laws against hiring illegals and punishing those companies to the point that the costs of hiring illegals outweigh the benefits will end the jobs. |
|
Harold I should have answered you question a little more directly. The trigger thing does not work because too many Republicans do not trust GWB or the Democrats to enforce the immigration law.
There is no trust because of years of lack of performance. I used to be more moderate on this issue. I am tired of being lied to and I am tired of the government not doing it's most basic and fundamental functions.
In TX Rick Perry campaigned on immigration control. As soon as he got elected he flipped totally. We have no trust in two faced lying politicians who use legislation as a smoke screen to get elements into law so they can selectively implement the parts they want and ignor the rest. |
|
That was a reasoned and reasonable response. I am not interested in how many border patrol agents or how many miles of fence we have as metrics.
What I want and what the country needs to know, is who is here and what they are up to. The country also needs, like every other country, to control who comes across it's borders. I want actual control of the borders for security reasons. Most countries actually do a decent job of that. Tourists don't over stay thier visas and neighbors do not flood in except during war or other emergencies.
I am not interested in triggers or milestones. I want the flow of illegals stopped ASAP. I then want an identification of who is here. After those two things happen we can discuss what to do with the people who are here. |
|
Report after report comes out telling the story of how the people hired to stop Illegal Aliens from Illegally coming into America are hindered, and even jailed for performing their jobs. The responsibility for these inactions rests with Bush, the pro-Amnesty Senators get their share of the blame, and America will respond to these attrocities in '08'.
Newt Gingrich returned to the GOP a good amount of common sense back in the 90's. The GOP needs to be taken to the wood shed for another lesson. |
|
neither is it an ethnicity.
It merely refers to people born in (or have parents born in) COUNTRIES designated as "Latin".
So a person can be white/black/asian/arab/et al and if they are born in ...say... Central American they can legally claim to be 'hispanic'.
In Los Angeles radio host Bill Handel (kfi640) drives some 'hispanic' activists crazy because he can refer to himself as 'hispanic'...even though he is the son of a Holocaust survivor ... Handel was born in Brazil and immigrated here as a young child because his dad did the right thing and waited 11 years to come in through the front door.
THAT is what is so gaulling about this amnesty bill...the sheer slap in the face to immigrants who wait years in line and rewarding the cheats, many of whom have nothing but contempt for this country. |
|
you state: "we already know that there are some people who view anything short of deportation as amnesty"
Well, has is "anything short of deportation" NOT amnesty?
Understand that today, right now, illegals are just that..illegals. If found, they can be put on a bus and taken to the border. They have no standing in American courts vis a vis deportation.
HOWEVER, the day after this bill is signed into law THEY HAVE LEGAL STATUS re the Z visa.
from illegal status to LEGAL status re the stroke of a pen. The Z visa allows the holder to work, get a driver's license, etc.
AND the Z visa can be renewed INDEFINITELY. While many illegals may want to pursue citizenship, a great percentage have no interest in citizenship. They are here to work and send money back to their home country.
Please explain why this does not constitute "amnesty."
And please tell me at what point ...what number...of illegal immigrants do you think is "too much" for America to absorb? 12 million? 20 million? 50 million? |
|
They have to prove how long they are here. A lot of them probably saved pay stubs and other documentation. It means we will know who employed them - and it means that a government agency that will remain nameless might get the evidence to nail the employers of those illegal immigrants. Not for hiring illegal immigrants, but I'm willing to bet the IRS can have a lot of fun with the type of evidence those illegal immigrants can provide.
Once it gets out that those who employed illegal immigrants get nailed on the tax charges (which are far more easy to prove than hiring illegal immigrants).
Same principle seen on episodes of Law and Order all the time. And could anyone seriously argue that Arthur Branch undercut the rule of law by letting Jack McCoy cut deals like that?
And as for the complaint about being called racists... well, I've pointed out I've been called worse names (to wit, quisling). And I've also explained one of the reasons why (the term "Hispandering" used by Michelle Malkin is a bit of a below-the-belt blow and does raise those questions in my mind). |
|
Well, they are following script.
If you object to the continuation of the Iraq war or continued interventions overseas, you're a cheese eating Democrat lovin' surrender monkey tin-foil hat wearing isolationist. If you object to the Immigration bill your an anti-American bigot.
The Republican party, I think, has become far too comfortable with using the irrational, demonizing tactics that the Left has traditionally used to drown out debate.
So, dear leaders, how's about not dropping a gigantic bill larger than the bible on us? How's about introducing a series of small specific laws that deal with one problem at a time? One bill to create a guest worker program. One bill to deal with the question of illegals and their families and blended immigration status families already here? One bill to implement appropriate measures to enforce border controls?
Oh, right, then lawmakers might actually have a chance to read through the nonsense and make an informed decision, and god forbid we have anything resembling that in Washington. |
|
I am angry at the local republican party for the way they bent over and took it in the governor's race, just about submitting, willingly. (WA state) I am angry at the nationals because they try to get the democrats to call them nice names by agreeing with them & all they get is a kick in the face and yet they keep playing by the rules set up by their sworn enemies.
Get over the name calling and be what you truly are is my advice to my party - what do you truly believe and how are you going to give those beliefs form?
For those who call me a Nazi for believing that we should control our borders - I suggest you READ HISTORY!
OH by the way - MEXICAN/South American IS NOT A RACE - they are NOT a separate race from any other European mixed breed like yours truly. I am Mediterranean and I LOOK like them. They are part Indian and who ever has immigrated to those lands since 1492, including the Spaniards who are nearly my kissing cousins. This has nothing to do with race; it has to do with flooding our country with millions who have no legal standing, for their sake, if not for ours, we should have our borders under control and know who and what is entering our country at all times.
No one should be able to enter our country without first, at least, giving their name, country of origin, birthday & how long they are planning to staying.
No one should be able to invade a house than be sworn into the family. Do it the right way, like my ancestors did.
I don't like the bill because it is more of the same and the same doesn't work well nor is it healthy for our country. It isn't even healthy for the Mexicans though they don't seem to understand this.
|
|
I'd like some metrics for the discussion. How will we know we've enforced enough? Is it number of border patrol agents? How many miles of fencing? How much detention space will need to be built (we'll need a lot - our total prison population at the federal, state, and local levels combined is just 2.3 million - the low-end estimate of illegal immigrants is about five times that)?
The next question - why only a discussion? Why not have something in place that will be triggered at certain levels? I'm asking this because we already know that there are some people who view anything short of deportation as amnesty. Why not instead agree at points where we start the programs that are already in the bill?
For instance, I'd be willing to say that none of the Y or Z visas could be implemented until we had 700 miles of fencing or vehicle barriers and two squadrons of unarmed Predator UAVs on the southern border. |
|
You see a punishment in this Amnesty. What the 5k? Some who come here illegally pay more than that just to get over here. Plus, the felony of social security fraud is worth much, much more than five thousand. Illegal aliens are getting a break denied legal citizens.
Besides, if it's such a punishment, why should illegals even bother coming forward?
You can be upset about name-calling all you want, but your side doesn't look any better by calling us all racists. |
|
This bill states;
"It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration," the draft legislation states on page 211 on the version time-stamped May 18, 2007 11:58 p.m.
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55787
I lived accross the street from a mattress house. People who's first act is to break our laws will continue breaking our laws. Their children are all eligabel for welfare and according to our census 30% of the children of Mexican Immigrants recieve welfare.
This is war. Amnesty is war. Try to pass this bill as is, and it is war. Plane and simple. We will not be used to absorb and subsidize the population of Mexico.
On top of all that, Mexico is no releasing criminals if they promise to leave the country. They are purposely exporting criminals to the USA to save money.
WAR!!!
Are you ready? |
|
When the general public and especially the base know for sure that illegal immigration is stop off they will figure out a reasonable way to deal with the illegals who are here.
The key thing is to stop this bill now and then use this issue to the advantage of Reps in the future.
The economic arguements against illegal immigration are some of the strongest ones. Where is the Republican consituency for this bill? Even many of the small business people who hire illegals do not like this bill.
Further, this bill is the means of building the power of the right roots. There is a tremendous power shift is process right now from the Party to the right roots.
From a political strategy point of view this is one of the stupidist moves I have ever seen a party make.
McCain is toast. Bush is irrelavent. The party is fraging itself. Kennedy is gleeful. |
|
Please understand I am not trying to be mean, but my patience is rapidly reaching its limits.
You want to play the victim with regards to some comments made by George W. Bush or Lindsey Graham. I'll admit they have painted with a pretty broad brush. But you've not said much against those who have called supporters of the approach the Senate is pursuing traitors, Quislings, and open-borders sellouts who are "Hispandering" (a term that does sound somewhat racially-charged, if you want my frank opinion) - at least not that I can recall. That sort of silence can raise some questions in a person's mind. What makes it even harder to swallow is that the only proof for their vile and untrue accusations is that people like me support comprhensive reform like what is being debated in the Senate.
I've voted Republican since 1994. I've long been sympathetic to the arguments and many of the positions Republicans have held. But at this point in the immigration debate, I find myself facing two choices - neither of which I like. Option One: I can acquiesce in the face of some extremely vile name-calling - what amounts to bullying - in addition to what I believe to be a misleading characterization of the Senate plan (I would argue that illegal immigrats are being punished, just not at the level certain people want). Option Two: I can fight back, point out why I think they are wrong, defend myself against charges that are phonierthan one of Bill Clinton's promises, and show that yes, I am willing to fight for what I believe in. Maybe I'll lose, but at least those who on the other wide will know pretty darn well they were in a fight.
I wish it hadn't come to this, but I don't see any choice but to fight it out. |
|
I told the RNC telemarketer I had given my "usual" contribution to the RNC to the SPCA instead.
When she asked why, I told her that unlike the Republican Party, a dog won't turn on you when you feed it.
|
|
I consider myself a Republican, but the party seems to have left me. It has morphed into something way too much like the Democrats for my liking. I am so disappointed that I could just sit out future elections, but I most likely won't.
We need a party to rise up out of the ashes of the current mess. One that really is small government, low taxes, American citizen first-oriented, etc. Both parties are in a race to pander to the most people, and Middle Class America is losing. |
|
'Course they're IDIOTS, so what can we expect!
No RNC money UNTIL- Martinez-gone, Rove-gone,Chertoff-gone Every RINO (including and especially the RINO-in-Chief Bush) who supports this bill MARGINALIZED!!
And there is a special place in my rage for McCain-(because when I was young and stupid I actually gave him money) and LINDSEY GRAHAM (for calling me a BIGOT!) Guess what Sen. Graham- YOU SHUT UP!
|
|
|
The Republican Party under GWB seems intent on political suicide. Pandering to citizens of other countries illegally in our country while telling us we must be vigilantes if we object to illegal aliens ignoring our borders and laws. Mel Martinez is RNC Chairman to ensure an open borders candidate in '08. The cheap labor express will be kept running, regardless of the consequences, to party or country. GOP-RIP |
|
IMHO, these two can pull off another GOP landslide.
Until the RINOs are bodily removed from the rank and file of the GOP, I'll not donate a micro-penny. If I wanted a Leftinistra in office I would vote for the dnc morons. |
|
In 1996 I was able to work the phone banks at the RNC headquarters on First St, SE during the summer. It was a good experience and there were many great individuals who worked there at the time. It was a true mixing pot of people where I found black, white, Christian, Jew, Muslim, young and old. We worked many nights on the Dole campaign and the Senatorial Committee. These were very dedicated people and great Republicans.
Unfortunately, we were given scripts off of computers and phone technology from the early '80s. The scripts were downright awful and many of us were simply embarrased to go by it, so we found going off-script and talking like a regular person worked wonders. Like any tele-solicitor, we had a set amount that would be three, four times higher than the last time the people gave and to always take three nos. A few of us from college decided we would only take two nos and simply ask donors for the last amount they gave. This worked wonders.
We were told to never argue with donors, so it's sad to see that apparently that rule doesn't apply. We would simply forward them to our supervisor.
It's smart the RNC is dropping it though. Nobody likes a tele-solicitor, especially when they're looking for money. Today, it's all about e-mails and the internet.
Many of these people have been doing this for years and it is their job/career. I wish them all the best and won't forget the summer of 1996.
BTW-this exact phone bank is where Ari Fleischer got his start with the RNC. |
|
I let them have an earful on why I was not giving them another dime. And the NSRC as well. I cited chapter and verse on how they had voted against my interests and my country.
Your southern upbringin is showin MK - you were polite, even though they didn't deserve it.
Wave hello to my brother over at Wake Forest when you drive by. |
|
|
Or at least a lot, and I mean A LOT, nicer than I was to them. |
|
|
|