Dem Finances
I called up the MT Democratic Party today to ask about their finances.
I got Trent Bolger on the line right away.
I asked him why the Dem Part had $50,000 in payroll taxes off of $34,000 in salaries.
He asked if I was a reporter. I said yes. He directed me to New Yorker, Roy Lowenstein…who didn’t pick up his phone.
The guy’s paid about $1,000 a week but he can’t pick up his phone at 9 AM.
I called up the MT GOP after that. They didn’t even have anyone to answer the phone.
So I called up the Dems again.
This time I didn’t get anyone. I tried Trent Bolger’s extension, but got nothing.
Trent Bolger…the Wyoming finance director for the MT Dems. Guy makes about $5,000 a month but refuses to talk about the Party’s finances with ‘reporters.’
It’s not that he refuses. It’s that he’s scared. He’s scared of talking to me on the phone. No…let me call him again…
Got his voicemail.
Left him a message:
Hey, Trent…Greg Strandberg from Big Sky Words here…I’m wondering why you guys spent $95,000 out of the $107,000 you raised last month on yourself.
Why should MT voters continue to give money to a Party that doesn’t give it to candidates, but uses it to eat out, travel, and pay their salaries?
I told Trent that I wasn’t expecting a call-back. What I am expecting is that the Montana Dem staffers will play around on Twitter all day.
And why not…you pay them to do that. That’s where your donations to the MT Dems go – right down the toilet.
I feel sorry for people that give money to the MT Dems.
Where do they think their money is going…what do they think it’s accomplishing?
From my perspective, it’s enabling out-of-state staffers to show up late for work and not answer the phone or answer questions when they get there.
So keep donating…maybe $5…$10?
Update: By 10:30 AM I'd left two more messages for Trent Bolger, and one each for Nancy Keenan and Roy Lowenstein.
No response.
I imagine I'd have to go to their Sixth Street HQ to get answers...though I'd probably just be thrown out of the building.
Part of the People, eh?
Update: By 11 AM it was clear I wasn't going to get these guys on the phone. Hopefully a lot of people will read this letter when the Missoulian publishes it on Sunday:
The Trump/Bannon Feud
I started reading Conn Iggulden’s War of the Roses series this week.
I like it. I read his 5-book Gates of Rome series about 6 years ago when I was still living in China. It was always easier to get British authors in Hong Kong bookshops than American authors (good luck finding English books of any worth in the Mainland).
Anyways…I was struck by the similarities between the 14th Century and the 21st.
It comes down to family.
If you’re halfway normal, you don’t betray them. And 90% of the global population is halfway normal.
That’s why Trump turned on Bannon yesterday – Bannon threatened Trump’s son. Same reason Michael Flynn turned - they threatend his son.
Same as the York’s and Lancaster’s going at it back in the 1400s. All came back to Edward III’s death in 1377 back then.
Yeah…I don’t remember it either. Sure as shit didn’t study it in high school.
How many will remember the ‘games of court’ and ‘lines of succession’ 600 years from now?
Hardly anyone. Dry historians, mostly.
Yeah, yeah yeah…I know – we all think the world can come to an end at any moment because of North Korea…or Iran…or [insert country here].
They were thinking the same thing back then.
God had a lot more influence in the 1400s, and every year could be the last (imagine the century-end New Year’s Eve’s back then…God, they must have been depressive).
Thankfully we live in modernity.
A Little on Jeff Essman
Boy, he lost big in the Billings mayoral race 2 moths ago.
Still gets out there everyday expressing his views and opinions and beliefs on social media.
I see him a lot on Twitter. Boy the liberal media lambasts him. Well…let me hold on there. It’s not so much the liberal media as it’s the paid staffers.
We need to make a distinction, here.
I don’t see Mike Dennison or Holly Michaels or Jayme Fraser or Phil Drake lambasting Essman on Twitter (well, I don’t see anything from Phil Drake as he blocked me over 2 years ago…but still called me on the phone asking political questions a couple months ago).
Anyways…it’s not the liberal media attacking…it’s the paid staffers.
The Roy Lowensteint’s and everyone else that’s getting paid by the Democratic Party of Montana.
And what does getting paid by the MT Dem Party mean, exactly?
It means that for every $5 you give to the MT Dems, $4 goes to paying to feed them, house them, and give them health insurance.
We know this because we’ve looked into their spending.
So what the hell does all this have to do with Essman…that damn anti-marijuana crusader from Billings?
It’s because we’re both the same. He calls himself a conservative Republican and I call myself a conservative Democrat.
While we might disagree on the pot issue, we do agree on having more money in your pocket, less in the government’s.
Why in the hell is this?
Simple.
When you have an extra $100 you spend it on groceries or gas or beer or cigarettes or…whatever business is in your local community!
When the government has you money it sends it out of state.
We know this damn-well because so much funding for elections both originates out-of-state and is spent out-of-state. We’ve tracked it on this site for years, now.
More, when Dems get control of the government, they actually seek-out out-of-state companies to do their bidding. Shouldn't be a surprise - they primarily hire out-of-state staffers to tell you what to think.
Hey, the GOP ain’t any better. Remember our story about them having a German company do their website? Wow!
Mostly, neither Party gives one flying fuck about your, your family, or your future.
You know this.
And oh! How little will change!
Talk is that Zeno is going to take over for Fox as AG in ’20. Bullock wants to take over for Daines that same year, and if he don’t…no big deal – Tester is 2 years past his re-election and he’s got the influence to get Bullock his lobbying/MTSuPCo gig/whatever…
Meanwhile, our wages remain stagnant, our hours stay below 40, and benefits are something for the well-off.
For us, it ain’t a battle against the ‘rich’…whatever they are…it’s a battle against the well-off.
Pitting $30,000 a year earners vs. $100,000 a year earners.
Single incomes of $15,000 vs. $50,000.
Easier to pit the poor off against the ‘poor.’ Takes the attention away from the ‘rich’…whatever the hell they are.
Boy, we’re rudderless, aren’t we? Quite directionless, indeed. Deep in the doldrums, so sad Pink Floyd wouldn’t even sing a song about it.
And yet we must persist.
What else can we do?
It won’t get any better; it’ll surely get worse…but how in the hell did we think it’d get better if it didn’t?!?
Cycles.
The wheel turns; the pendulum swings. What was will be and what is will be again.
Yeah, I’m a fan of Vico but the truth is…we see this a lot. If you study history, you see this a lot.
Toilet bowels swirling.
Starts at the top, gets to the bottom…again and again and again…history.
Tried calling the MT Dems one more time...
Silence.
