I've been watching Cimperman for a while and I really want to like him - young, bright and energetic - seems his heart is in the right place - and then I see who he hangs out with... it is hard to believe...

Disrupt IT

Kucinich’s chief opponent in the March 4 Democratic primary, Cleveland City Councilman Joseph Cimperman, has already raised $226,000. The Kucinich campaign charged the money has come from business groups and a right-wing pro-Israel group that is angry about Kucinich’s support for an even-handed approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

-- Unions go all-out for Kucinich re-election

(Use the phrase site: on Google to search within a particular site. Here's the search I used to find this article.)

Jeff S.,
Thanks for the new knowledge re: site.search on Google. 

The out-of-district-donors who supply  Kucinich  {and Cimperman) with funding raises the question:  is our constitution still working as it was intended?

The answer might be NO or it might be YES.

Money buys media.  Media buys votes.  With this modus operandi, we are no longer a representative district by district democracy in this day and age . 

Or are we?

At a maximum of $2,300 per election cycle per person, and with computer networks (and other media) organizing blocks of wealthy advocate-donors from around the world, any one of the 435 congressional districts can be “purchased” by out of towners. 

From election cycle to election cycle district after district can be bought. 

Should there be regulations governing out of district money?

I end this with more questions than when I started…

 Such regulation could work against movements like the civil rights movement in the south in the 60’s which was funded from the North.  And if there were regulations limiting out of district funding,  a very wealthy in-district candidate might self fund to  a campaign and set up a multi term dynasty.

So, perhaps the best way to allow the people who live in a district to have “representative” government, is through more publicity as to who each of any candidate’s donors are, and where the donor works and where the donor lives. 

It is a difficult act.  And maybe “balance” isn’t what is most equitable.

Jeff, you bring up a good point about Lesic, and the truth. Here's a link to the whole sorry crew over at LesicCamper: http://www.lesiccamper.com/staff.html

As we found out with their work for the GCP during the PutItOnTheBallot campaign, they're not constrained by truth, fact, or fairness. They're fairly creepy and clumsy as well. They may, if we analyze their work, even be a regional embarrassment. And that's what we need to do--go back into the beginnings, the 90s, and have a look at all the cheap, no-class pimping they've done. Their business is built on relationships, not excellence.

When Cimperman announced they were handling his campaign, I knew that was a good sign for all the other candidates. That first ploy, going up to Kucinich's door to give him the Welcome Wagon basket, was just plain klutzy, or doofy. I'm surprised Joe bought into it, but apparently somebody had touted Lesic as the expert. The commercial did get a lot of commentary, but not much of it was positive for Joe.

As the dialogue changes around here, it becomes more and more apparent that Lesic should never have been a player in the first place, and certainly should not be now. Innuendo and dirty tricks done dirt cheap are passe.