Recently there have been stories going around about party brass calling other party officials encouraging them to support well-funded incumbents because these incumbents will be able to give more money to coordinated campaigns with people further down the ticket.

I know that it takes money to run successful campaigns, but does this seem just wrong to you? It sure sounds a lot like the whole problem in Washington with folks like Abramoff and Delay. Money for votes, buying influence.

It is my hope that the rumors are false, or at least that party officials are standing up and telling the party brass that they are damaging the party. We need to support candidates based on their positions and how strongly they lead on these positions.

Are they willing to challenge the administration on a mismanaged war? Are they willing to boldly stand up against nominees for attorney general, ambassador to the U.N., or Supreme Court Justices that do not represent American values? Are they willing to fight against tax breaks for the wealthy as the rest of us get left behind? Are they willing to stand up against pork in omnibus bills, like the Bridge to Nowhere?

If we end up selecting our candidates based on how much they might be able to contribute to other candidates, then we run the risk of electing Senators to Nowhere.