Creating controversy may be the Holy Grail for campaign contributions

With the global economic downturn still in full swing, almost everyone is cutting back on spending.

While many things take a backseat during such a recessive economy, political campaigns certainly do not.

Many political hopefuls have to become more creative in order to fund their hopes of obtaining office.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, for example, spent $108 million of his own money to finance his 2009 mayoral campaign instead of relying on campaign contributions.

Not every candidate in an election is the wealthiest man in New York City, so candidates must employ other means of financing a campaign.

President Barack Obama, for example, championed the grassroots movement.

Many try grassroots efforts but find it hard to get the ball rolling. Others strive to get financial support from many wealthy individuals to fund their campaigns, but relying on this method alone does not bear stability.

In the 21st century, a new type of campaign finance tool has been discovered to rake in potentially huge amounts of dough.

Take Congressman Joe Wilson, R-SC, for example.

This seemingly no-name congressman reached national spotlight Sept. 9, 2009 with his rude and ill-informed outburst of "You lie" during Obama's address to the joint session of Congress on health care.

To a lot of people on the opposite end of the political spectrum, this man seemed crazy and even was accused of being racist.

Those who saw Joe Wilson in a different light reacted in the opposite way. One day following the verbal eruption, Wilson had banked more than $200,000 in campaign donations.

Similarly, Sept. 29, 2009, Congressman Alan Grayson, D-FL, also stirred up controversy with some fiery remarks. On the floors of Congress, Grayson claimed that the Republican health care plan was:

"Don't get sick. And if you get sick America, the Republican health care plan is this: die quickly."

This angered many members of Congress, especially Republicans, but he raked in about $150,000 in just three days.

This particular situation produced several hits on YouTube and also brought very mild attention to C-Span, although that fluttered away quickly.

These two examples show that if a political hopeful is strapped for cash, creating a bit of controversy has the potential to yield monetary gain.

When Americans increase their penny-pinching, they become increasingly harder to win over for campaign contributions. This means the crazy must sometimes be brought out in order to get American's attention.

Controversy may just be the Holy Grail for campaign finance. This is a dangerous track, as being too controversial can be detrimental to campaign efforts and can potentially ruin a career.

Politicians must be careful when they wish to generate controversy for campaign cash and avoid more taboo situations.

A definite no-zone is sex controversy. Former presidential and vice presidential candidate John Edwards political career is ruined, as well as his marriage, due to infidelity and an illegitimate child.

South Carolina governor Mark Sanford is likely serving his last term holding any political office due to a personal field trip to Argentina chasing a Latin lover.

And of course, there's Eliot Spitzer, the ousted New York governor who is attempting to claw his way back up the political ladder after being dethroned amid a prostitution ring scandal.

Washington, unlike Hollywood, does not profit from sexual exploits very well.

In this day of ever-increasing technology and political uncertainty, new methods of fundraising for campaigns must be devised. Americans will not settle for traditional methods – they want raw feelings.

If a candidate wants the hard-earned money of voters, the candidates need to be willing to do more than just throw a few good speeches together.

Americans want fervent and passionate emotion from politicians to show them they deserve their campaign money.

Contributors have proven they like bitter exchanges of words, and politicians can make their names known in an otherwise seldom watched network like C-Span.

America needs a little excitement in politics, so politicians shouldn't hesitate to ruffle some feathers.