Guitar lovers, Green Day fans, Alan Grayson supporters, eBay investors... have until midnight tonight (any U.S. time zone) to get in a last minute contribution to Alan Grayson's campaign and be eligible to wind up with the beautiful blue and white Squier stratocaster that was autographed by all three members of Green Day.

Friday morning we'll announce to whom Blue America randomly selected to give the guitar. Alan's final e-mail on the subject Monday night was pretty funny... and what an honor for me personally.

But what this is all about is neither Green Day, the guitar nor me. It's about getting Alan Grayson, one of the most effective leaders progressives have had in my lifetime, back into Congress. (And I'm old.)

We want Alan in Congress for a lot of reasons, and it's not just because he can be counted on as "a good vote on progressive issues." Much more valuable than that is Alan's ability to figure out how to approach problems and come up with solutions, his abilities as a galvanizing leader and his unshakable integrity.

There's an incredible behind-the-scenes cat fight going on in the Democratic House caucus to determine who will be the next leader-- and perhaps Speaker-- after Nancy Pelosi retires, something her daughter flatly stated would be soon. The prospects are horrifying. All the most corrupt hacks vomited up from the bowels of empty, cash-driven power politics think it's their turn: Steny Hoyer, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, Steve Israel, Joe Crowley.

This is the bottom of the barrel, not just of the Democratic Party, but of our whole model of national politics-- an ugly dead end. Is there a giant progressive leader waiting in the wings, building power the way Pelosi did? Not that I've noticed. Is there even someone grassroots Democrats would rally behind?

That's why I was happy to contribute one of my most prized mementos of my years at Warner Bros, the beautiful signed Green Day guitar that the band gave me as a retirement present. I want to see Alan Grayson back in Congress-- and back in Congress with a safe seat this time like the Florida legislature drew him in the Orlando area. So, like I said... you have until midnight your time. Any amount gets you a chance at the guitar. And any amount gets our country a chance at leadership that isn't based on grotesque corruption and the art of a**-kissing.

There are a lot of reasons why Obama's fundraising lags Romney's. It's always harder to govern than campaign, Fox viewers have been thoroughly brainwashed into seeing the Kenyan Socialist and his National Healthcare Takeover as A Major Threat To Our Democracy, Wall Street is too narcissistic to realize they're not in jail because of Obama, and instead see him as ungrateful for their past beneficence. Also, a lot of voters are quite blatantly racist.

Finally, a lot of the people who trusted him to make things better feel betrayed. They thought he would punish the banks, stop the Bush assaults on privacy and human rights, and stop the economic cascade of mortgage foreclosures. Not only didn't it happen, he started trying to trade away Social Security and Medicare, all in the name of bipartisanship - something Grover Norquist told us long ago was another name for "date rape."

But at some point, bitterly disappointed voters still have to make a decision. Do they hold back support from someone they no longer see as a friend, knowing it will result in the election of someone they do know is their enemy? It's a tough call for many:

In the battle for political cash, President Obama is finding himself in an unaccustomed place during the final months of the 2012 campaign: he is losing.

Mitt Romney and the Republican National Committee easily outraised the formidable Obama money machine for the second month in a row. A nonstop schedule of high-dollar events around the country brought in $106 million during June to Mr. Obama’s $71 million, giving him and his party four times the cash on hand that it had just three months ago.

Mr. Obama’s fund-raising deficit in part reflects how steeply the terrain has shifted since 2008, when many Republican donors embraced the candidate and his campaign raised millions of dollars from Wall Street and other traditionally right-leaning industries. Now those donors are swinging hard back to the Republican Party — and to Mr. Romney, whose promise to curtail regulation and cut taxes has helped draw a torrent of five-figure checks.

In a worrisome development for the Obama campaign, Mr. Romney, who until now has been heavily dependent on donors giving the maximum federal contribution, also showed success in June drawing small donors, a traditional strength of the Obama campaign. Reflecting the intensifying general election matchup with Mr. Obama and conservative anger over the recent Supreme Court decision upholding the president’s signature health care law, Mr. Romney raised about a third of his total in checks of under $250, officials said on Monday. Mr. Romney and the R.N.C. now have about $160 million in cash.

“This month’s fund-raising is a statement from voters that they want a change of direction in Washington,” Spencer Zwick, Mr. Romney’s finance chief, said in a statement.

Well, yes. I think that's true, but not in the way Mr. Zwick says. I believe if more Democrats saw the president acting like he was on our side - indicting bankers, telling the Republicans to go to hell the next time they play debt ceiling games, and announce he will not pursue his Grand Bargain, why, they might be a lot more interested in laying out some cash to support their team.

Call it a hunch.