The Washington Post reports on an effort by a group of wealthy Democrats "to fund a network of think tanks and advocacy groups to compete with the potent conservative infrastructure built up over the past three decades."

But conservative think tanks and campus organizations developed as a response to the overwhelming dominance of leftism on college campuses. That leftist dominance still exists. So these efforts by the left to create and fund think tanks and campus groups of their own amount to just piling on another layer to institutions they already control. What's the point of that? Do they really believe they keep losing elections because they aren't organizing their fundraising in just the right way? Because George Soros sent his checks to Organization A instead of Organization B, John Kerry lost the election in '04? Is control of the universities and major media not enough? Apparently not. So the liberals keep rearranging the deck chairs, hoping for a different result next time.

This sort of context goes totally unmentioned in the Washington Post article. It seems like some critical assessment of the central premise for these groups would be warranted in the article, don't you think? But to the writer and editors at the Washington Post, it doesn't even warrant a mention.

More from La Shawn Barber, and Tigerhawk.

Very interesting: Speaking of where limousine liberals give their money, Charmaine Yoest notes some rather severe money problems for the National Organization of Women:

The Wall Street Journal reported yesterday that political donations to the National Organization of (Some) Women declined from $327,000 in 1992 to $44,000 in 2004.

No, that's not a typo: $44,000.