The de facto reality is, this cycle, the GOP is reverting to media and robo-calling campaigns produced and implemented by a group of folks with known connections to, among other things:

2.) serial violators of basic FEC regulations.

A comment from a New Jersey blog on convicted GOP felon, Allen Raymond,  author of "How to Rig an Election: Confessions of a Republican Operative."

"As for his three months in a Pennsylvania prison, he wrote: 'After 10 full years inside the GOP, 90 days among honest criminals wasn't really any great ordeal.' "

Yesterday it was announced that an "arm" of the GOP is going to release attacks ads this weekend against Obama.  The NRA also announced intentions to spend $15 million attacking Obama.  After Obama decided not to use federal funds for his campaign to fight off the coming attack ads, the media said "there is no one out there attacking him."  Well they are now rearing their ugly heads,  giving Obama the proof he needed to justify dropping public finance.

Off topic but just a word about McCain in Colombia.  Clearly Bush knew about the hostage raid.  I think Bush told McCain it was about to happen, hoping those freed hostages would be returning home on McCain's plane.  It didn't quite work out that way, but I think this whole event was timed and staged.  Rebels just gave up?  Please.  Colombia probably had those hostages already freed and sitting in the jungle waiting for McCain.

After nearly a year and a half into the 2008 cycle, which has seen the Democratic campaign committees generally hold a 50 percent or even 100 percent cash-on-hand advantage over their Republican counterparts, the GOP committees have finally begun to catch up (or at least the Republican National Committee has). Take a look at the latest numbers filed with the Federal Election Commission Friday:

The congressional campaign committees for the Democrats continue to hold about a 3-to-1 cash-on-hand advantage over those of the Republicans, strongly suggesting that those who believe that the two parties' efforts to control the 111th Congress will be financially on par are just not right. The Democrats' 7-to-1 advantage among House campaign committees is particularly remarkable.

Obviously the numbers from the Republican and Democratic national committees leave room for concern. The RNC is raising a huge amount of money -- no doubt in part because John McCain is soliciting contributions in amounts approaching $100,000 in value, a huge chunk of which goes to the national committee -- and the DNC isn't matching it. Yet. If you want to help eat away at that difference, head over to Act Blue today and make a contribution.

Wisconsin democrats voted yesterday to strip Debra Bartoshevich's status as a delegate to the national convention late Friday evening.  DNC and state party rules state that delegates that oppose the party's nominee will not be permitted to attend party convention as a delegate.

This is one of the strangest stories that I've ever heard, especially considering that Obama won Wisconsin with overwhelming margins.  I was honored to be elected to serve as a delegate for John Kerry in 2004 and for the first time, I was able to view the convention not as a spectator but as a participant.  At no time did I consider voting against my party's nominee, in fact, if I did, I would fear the backlash I would receive when I returned home.  She was chosen to support her party, not the status quo.  I'm not familiar with Ms. Bartoshevich's background but she obviously lacks political acumen. This is our year and there is no room for games and fake protests on the convention floor.  This is not 1968.

From Ben Smith at Politco.com:

Senior political officials tell Politico's Mike Allen that Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).is likely to hold a huge rally Tuesday night in the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul, the site of the Republican National Convention from Sept. 1 to 4.

Tuesday is the night of the final Democratic primaries, and the choice of venue is a mischievous, aggressive way for Obama to unofficially kick off the general election campaign against Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). The location gives huge meaning to the moment, with Obama likely to frame a tough case against his new opponent in the very hall where McCain will accept his party's nomination.

All of the parties' political committees were required to release their monthly campaign finance details yesterday. Here is what the reports show:

As you can see, this was a big fundraising month for the GOP, cutting the Democratic committees' cash-on-hand lead by about a third. This underscores the need to ensure that money continues to go into the committees -- particularly the Democratic National Committee, though presumably the DNC's fundraising issues should virtually fall away when the nominee takes over the committee -- so that the Democrats' fundraising advantage is not frittered away.

That said, let's not overlook the fact that despite the remarkable month the Republican National Committee had in April, the Democratic committees nonetheless hold a $20 million overall advantage in available money. What's more, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has close to a 7-to-1 net cash-on-hand advantage over the National Republican Congressional Committee, and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee still has close to a 2-to-1 advantage in that metric over the National Republican Senatorial Committee. On top of that, Barack Obama raised in excess of 70 percent more in April than did John McCain, and Obama and Hillary Clinton combined to raise about three times as much money as McCain. So overall the financial health of the Democratic Party remains very sound.

The Democratic National Committee tomorrow begins running a rather ingenious ad on national cable news networks: Allowing John McCain to speak for himself on the issue of Iraq.

According to DNC chairman Howard Dean, the ad attempts to do two things (and I think accomplishes that goal, but you can see for yourself above):

1. Showing that John McCain is willing to keep American troops in Iraq for 100 years. McCain supporters, including the folks at the Republican National Committee who are throwing a tantrum and have threatened to file what would appear to be a rather spurious and empty suit to stop the ad from airing on national television, say that McCain doesn't mean this. But McCain speaks for himself here.

   As Dean says, Americans simply do not want to be in Iraq for 100 years. This is the case under any circumstances -- "whether there is a war going on or not." What's more, Americans do not want to continue to spend billions and billions of dollars every year for another 100 years to sustain U.S. forces there, again whether hostilities continue or not.

2. Anyone who thinks we're going to occupy Iraq for 100 years but there would not be consequences for American troops doesn't know what's going on in Iraq. By saying that he would be fine with maintaining a military presence in the country until the next century indicates that McCain is either oblivious to this concern or suggests that he just doesn't care about it.

In short, Dean said that the RNC "wishes" that drawing attention to McCain's weaknesses -- on Iraq, on the economy, on healthcare, on waffling on issues like campaign finance reform or immigration or taxes or you name it -- would be illegal. But it simply is not illegal to talk about where a candidate is wrong -- particularly when using that candidate's own words to do so. As DNC general counsel Joe Sandler put it today, to suggest, as the RNC does, that there is anything unlawful about the ad above would be "completely baseless."

And just one more point, this one from me: By raising the specter of legal action, drawing out dueling press conferences, isn't the RNC drawing more attention to this ad rather than figuring out a way to convince American voters that McCain didn't say he'd be comfortable keeping troops in Iraq for 100 years?

On Brit Hume's Flagtastic Election center, they've been asking how much "racial prefernece" effects black canidates, and their go to guy was RNC (chair?) Michael Steele, who said soemthing that was both unfortunately true, and perhaps a career killer:

" When i ran for the Senate in Maryland I discounted 20% of my base because they simply wont vote for a black man."  

I'm a bit shocked, I mean isn't this the sort of thing that ends careers (I would hope its not true to this marghin on our side, I'd think its around 10% of dems that wont ever vote for a black uy) he basically said that 1/5 of the GOP is out and out cross-bruning stlye racists.