Well, that’s the NRCC’s claim:
A few weeks ago Green Party candidate Matt Funiciello went on the radio and claimed that Manhattan multimillionaire filmmaker Aaron Woolf was running for Congress solely to write a documentary about the experience. He repeated that accusation to DenPubs a week later.
Turns out Funiciello’s smoke leads to some fire – specifically in Woolf’s FEC report. A quick look at Woolf’s disbursements shows that he added two documentary filmmakers to his staff in April.
…and now I’m starting to wonder, too. Basically, the two people in question appear to be independent of the people doing Aaron Woolf’s campaign ads; if they’re not there to do election-related filming, then why are they there? Is it, in fact, to do a documentary of the campaign?
The reason that this matters is because NY-21 is going to be a tough seat for Democrats to defend: its incumbent Bill Owens is retiring and it’s traditionally Republican (Bill Owens got it largely because of poor decision making on the part of the local Republican party). Elise Stefanik is the GOP and Conservative nominee (failure to acquire both was the primary, pardon the pun, problem for the GOP in 2010*), and she is in a good position to win this race, given that it’s a midterm. You would think that the Democrats would have picked a serious-minded person to oppose her – but if Michael Woolf does[n’t] care if he wins, because he’ll get an unique documentary out of the experience even if he loses… well. That’s kind of a good way to ensure that he loses.
Moe Lane
*And the 2009 special election that put Bill Owens in office in the first place.
you mean “doesn’t care if he wins”?
Yup! Fixed, thanks.
Sounds like the perfect liberal politician: Results don’t matter so long as your intentions are pure. And ART is the purest of intentions, especially when newly defined as “self-aggrandizing pretentious attention-wh*ring.”