PLEDGE WEEK CONTINUES.... Have I mentioned that we're holding a fundraiser? Yes, the Monthly's annual fundraising drive is still underway. Our most sincere thanks to those of you who have already contributed. For those who haven't, here's a reminder that your tax-deductible donation can make a big difference.
If you're a regular, you know that the Washington Monthly offers the kind of cutting-edge reporting and analysis the country needs now more than ever, breaking big stories well ahead of major mainstream outlets.
But to keep us going strong, we need a little help. Your donation will not only help the magazine, but also help support this blog. In fact, we've already begun work on a redesign -- a development more than a few of you have requested -- but need some additional funds.
The Monthly is a nonprofit organization. We have print and online ads, but this only covers a small part of our expenses, which means that we depend on contributions from readers to stay up and humming. The truth is, without an annual pledge week, we can't stay in business.
So, I hope we can count on your support. In honor of the Monthly's 40th anniversary, the magazine is asking for $40 donations, but any amount is welcome. If every "Political Animal" reader chipped in just $1, we'd surpass our fundraising goal.
Just click here to help out. You can donate online, through PayPal, or through the mail.
Thanks.

—Steve Benen 6:00 PM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (2)
There's a great scene in the TV movie about Albrecht Speer (starring Rutger Hauer) from back in the day. It's 1940, and the Germans have been bombing the hell out of the UK, so the British launched a bomber raid on Berlin. It was a weak raid, that only did cosmetic damage, at best. Probably a waste a resources. (Much like the American raid on Tokyo in early '42.) Speer (Hauer) is going to work in the Chancellery and runs into his secretary. As they step over debris from bomb damage, his secretary plaintively asks, 'Why are they doing this?' And Speer says, 'Because they're trying to win.'
From my point of view, the situation could have been reversed, and the point would still apply. Since the R's have no better capabilities to do anything about a bill they don't like than this, this is what they're going to do.
I'm not in favor of the R's doing this, but I do think it's a shame the D's couldn't muster the same will to fight, back when Bush was behaving in unconstitutional and illegal ways. Of course, back then, I was informed that that would be mean and the D's shouldn't do that.
max
['I say, 'Why the hell not?'']
Posted by: max on December 22, 2009 at 8:12 AM | PERMALINK