Breaking News from the cesspool of Illinois politics. This smells funny. Can't put my finger on it, but it stinks. Was Meister a straw man for Giannoulias? Video report from ABC7 Chicago.
RELATED:
Regulators Clamp Down on Giannoulias' Broadway Bank
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts
Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
DIRTY TRICKS: False rumors are circulating about Adam Andrzejewski.
See below, from Lake County Tea Party today:
January 31, 2010 - Adam is in the race to Win - With under 48 hours left until voting begins, it is becoming clear many people do not want Adam to win this race. They are stooping to old political tricks. They are now spreading rumors that Adam has dropped out of the race. This is a lie and a dirty political trick, Adam has NOT dropped out of the race and is IN THE RACE TO WIN. It is spreading mostly in Lake County right now. Please pass along to your friends and neighbors. He has the momentum with the support of the former President of Poland, Lech Walesa, the Tea Party and many other conservative groups in Illinois and across the country. Don’t let political tricks go unpunished.
RELATED: D2s Prove Jim Dodge Dirty Tricks in IL Comptroller Race
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
More tough words from reformer Jim Madigan. He's running against the Machine-backed incumbent, Heather Steans, in the Illinois State Senate 7th District.
Madigan's latest flyer, mailed to residents of late last week, points out that Steans (actually pronounced "stains") is "so desperate to hold onto her Senate seat that she'll do anything. Even lie." (Click on the images to enlarge them.)
Those are strong charges, but Madigan details the lies from Steans and dismantles them with facts. Also see "Campaign Flyer Links Steans to Blago Pay-to-Play" and "Heather Steans Lies About Hubby's Blago Connections."
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
January 30, 2010 - Patrick Hughes is running for the U.S. Senate against Congressman Mark Kirk. Both are Republicans, but only Hughes is a true conservative. Kirk has been widely derided as a RINO, especially for his yes vote on Cap and Trade. Today, with the primary election next Tuesday, February 2, Hughes challenges Kirk to a debate - again. The following is from the Hughes Campaign:
In Early September of 2009 I kicked off my campaign for U.S. Senate in Illinois. I knew that Illinois needed a Conservative option on the ballot and Mark Kirk is no Conservative. So I began to travel the state and go wherever Republican voters had gathered. I went to township meetings, county party meetings, voter education fairs, candidate forums, debates, and whatever else you can think of. I traveled the Chicago suburbs, Rockford, Peoria, Bloomington, Champaign, Springfield, Alton, Effingham, Shelbyville, and anywhere else in the state that I could. I did it all for the voters of Illinois because I understood how important for them to know who the candidates are before they go vote on February 2nd.
Today we are just days away from the primary election and I can't help but wonder, "Where has Mark Kirk been." Of all the events that I have been to, I have only seen him a few times. He has had no problem going to editorial board meetings and running commercials full of deceit, but he has refused to face the voters of Illinois and answer their questions of Illinois? Illinois voters want to know why Mark Kirk voted for Cap and Trade, why he sponsors over $81 million in earmarks for his campaign donors and voted for billions in other earmark projects, why he bailed out the banks that have now contributed nearly $800,000 to his campaign, why he supports partial birth abortion, why he opposed the Iraq troop surge, why he threatens our national security by forcing us to depend on foreign oil and not drill for our own, and on and on. These are questions Mark Kirk has dodged, and the time for dodging has come to an end.
Mark Kirk has ignored the voters of Illinois by refusing to attend candidate forums and debates. He has turned his back to the voters of this state and the democratic process as a whole. That is why I am publicly calling on Mark Kirk to accept an invitation to debate me before the Tuesday primary. I understand the hectic schedule of the finals days of a campaign, but the people of Illinois deserve a chance to hear a debate. So the question is, does Mark Kirk actually respect the voters of Illinois? Will he debate me and show the voters of Illinois that he is ready to stand up for them in the U.S. Senate? How can we trust a guy to stand up for all of Illinois as a Senator if he won't stand up for himself in a debate?
Call Mark Kirk's office today, 847-498-0300, ask him why he won't face Illinois voters and tell him to accept my debate challenge. Help me find Mark Kirk.
Patrick Hughes
RELATED:
RINOs Need Not Apply?
Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham Endorse Patrick Hughes for Senate ...
Illinois Review: Conservative Victory Fund endorses Patrick Hughes
Patrick Hughes calls GOP Senate rival Mark Kirk "Nancy Pelosi Lite ...
YouTube - Patrick Hughes For Senate: Mark Levin Show
Patrick Hughes v. Mark Kirk: Illinois May be a Test Case for the Effectiveness of Tea Parties
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Tonight, January 29, is your best opportunity to Mars up close. Well, relatively.
"About every two years, Mars suddenly becomes much more noticeable," reports EarthSky. "In late January of 2010, Mars will be at its best for this two-year period. The chart below shows Mars on January 29, when it will be near the full moon."
Click image to enlarge it; Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan.
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Trouble is, it's a lie. Well, to be charitable, let's call it an exaggeration. The Obama Administration is bragging about a "5.7 percent growth in gross domestic production (GDP)," but skeptics abound.
The so-called growth wasn't growth at all. Rather, the "improved" growth rate number was due largely to inventory adjustments. In other words, the Obama Administration is playing a slight of hand in a shell game of funny math. The inventory adjustment factor is important, as we will learn in a moment.
As for "growth," employment is still over 10 percent nationwide, in no small part because businesses large and small are worried about the future. The Salt Lake Tribune states the frighteningly obvious in an article today:
"The economy boomed at the end of 2009, growing at the fastest rate in more than six years. Now if only it could keep it up. The economy expanded at an annual rate of 5.7 percent in the fourth quarter, the second straight quarter of growth. But analysts warn it's unsustainable.
Consumer spending, chilled by double-digit unemployment and scant wage gains, remains weak. Also, the benefits of government aid and higher company output to feed stockpiles will dwindle." Full Article...
The numbers are as artificial as Michelle Obama's sudden adulthood pride in her country. Even the mainstream media - believed by many, included myself, to be sympathetic to Obama - is rather skeptical about the GDP growth.
MSNBC is skeptical: "The U.S. economy turned in a surprisingly good performance in the fourth quarter, surging ahead by 5.7 percent on an annual basis, according to a government report released Friday. Or did it?" MSNBC continued: "Obama noted that last years’ massive economic stimulus program had also 'stopped the flood of job losses.' He also repeated his administration’s commitment to spur job growth to re-hire the 8 million workers sidelined by the worst recession in 60 years."
About Those Inventory Adjustments:
Sounds good, doesn't it? Sure does, until you understand that those are lies - excuse me, exaggerations - by Obama. Again, MSNBC (emphasis added):
"But when you look a little more closely at the numbers, it quickly becomes apparent that it’s hardly time to start breaking out the champagne. A big part of the latest GDP gain comes from a statistical adjustment for changes in inventory levels that don’t reflect real growth. Over the past year, businesses cut deeply into those inventories — not wanting to get stuck with unsold goods. Now that they’ve cut them to the bone, the rate of inventory-cutting has slowed. The way the GDP is calculated, that slowdown adds to “growth” — even though it doesn’t reflect increased production or sales. If you back out that inventory adjustment, GDP grew only 2.2 percent."
Wow! Obama is claiming a 5.7 percent GDP growth, but it was really only 2.2 percent? That's one heck of a difference.
The Wall Street Journal's Market Watch offered analysis, too, and it was also skeptical:
"Even with healthy growth in the second half of the year, the economy shrank 2.4% in 2009, the worst year for GDP since the 10.9% drop in 1946, when the United States geared back to a peacetime economy. Business investment fell the most since 1942. Read the full report on the government's website."
What? Obama is saying that the GDP is just great, fantastic, but the experts at the Wall Street Journal - who eat, sleep and make love to these kinds of numbers - tell us that the economy shrank in 2009, and that business investment was the worst since World War Two? Is Obama exaggerating? The Market Watch report continued (emphasis added):
"In the fourth quarter of 2009, about two-thirds of the growth came via the swing in inventories. Excluding the change in inventories, final sales increased at a 2.2% annual rate, a signal that the economy remained weak despite stellar topline numbers. Consumer spending increased at a 2% annual rate, down from 2.9% in the third quarter when the government's so-called cash-for-clunkers program boosted auto sales."
Golly. Why is Obama not bragging about those numbers? Could it be because he knows damned well that they're a bit closer to reality - much too close - than he likes? Or could it be that he's so stupid that he doesn't understand Economics 101? Regardless of my opinion of Obama as a dishonest, socialist, self-hating American, I cannot believe that he's stupid. He's a very bright man, really. His exaggerations about the "growth" of the GDP, however, assume that you and I are not so bright. Fortunately, some of us are bright enough to understand that what may seem like innocent, over-eager exaggerations by Obama are really bald faced lies.
RELATED:
Economy May Be Humming, But Can it Last? CBS News
Editorial: GDP recovers; if only job market would Scripps News
US stocks fall as GDP rises The Press Association
Merchants finally restock, boosting GDP Marketplace (publicradio.org)
Economy likely grew faster in 4Q, but fears remain BusinessWeek
Growth will tail off in second half: CIBC Advisor.ca
Meanwhile: Why Latvia's economic recovery program works Baltic Reports
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
This is a very interesting - and important - press release, presented in full below, from Republican Isaac C. Hayes. He's running for Congress in Illinois' 2nd District - and he is an African-American. His press release speaks volumes about race relations, the bias of the mainstream press toward conservatives (especially Black conservatives), and the prejudicial expectation by liberals and the media that Black people "can be depended on" to vote for Democrat candidates.
GOP’s HAYES APPEALS TO BLACK PRESS:
“WE ARE NOT OUTSIDERS”
CHICAGO – January 29, 2010: The following letter was released today by Rev. Isaac C. Hayes, the GOP nominee for Congress in IL-2, challenging the persistent indifference to Black Republican candidates by Black publications:
“As ‘minorities’ we have always called for diversity and tolerance” said Hayes, “yet within Black press there is no tolerance for Black Republicans and no willingness to embrace Black political diversity. My question is why not? Why are our press releases, letters to the editor, community events, and campaigns ignored? Is it not the responsibility of Black press to keep the Black community informed of what and who is impacting their lives?”
Rev. Hayes has called for Black publications to be more inclusive in their reporting, but became alarmed when this week’s endorsement sections were for Democrats exclusively, with no mention of the Republican primaries or candidates. Hayes said, “Our backgrounds include Reverend, Alderman, Officer, working with youth, and community organizing with President Barack Obama. We are not outsiders. We ask that we not be treated as such.” The letter is as follows:
Dear Editor --
I am the GOP nominee for Congress in IL-2. I am conservative. I also happen to be an African-American, and resident of the Chicagoland area. The reason I am writing to you today is because your publication primarily serves the Black community. I am a faithful reader, but have noticed an intentional/unintentional neglect to Republican members of our community.
Your endorsements this week did not include the Republican Party at all! However, the Chicago Sun-Times and Tribune both endorsed Democratic and Republican primaries. This created grave concern about your commitment to objective reporting, and to the real needs and diversity of opinion among African-Americans. I find it particularly challenging to reconcile how no Republican candidate is worthy of your endorsement. It gives the impression of partisanship.
I know it is assumed that all Blacks are Democrats and to be Black means you have to be a Democrat, but these assumptions are egregiously false. Black history is full of prominent Republicans, including Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., whose birthday we just celebrated. Dr. King's niece, Althea King, is a prominent Republican today, and a conservative activist in New York City.
As “minorities” we have always called for diversity and tolerance, yet within Black press there is no tolerance for Black Republicans and no willingness to embrace Black political diversity. My question is why not? Why are our press releases, letters to the editor, community events, and campaigns ignored? Is it not the responsibility of Black press to keep the Black community informed of what and who is impacting their lives?
I appeal to you to be more inclusive, more objective, and less partial. We have Republican candidates running for U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, and Cook County Sheriff who are members of the Black community. Yet, there has been no mention of any of our candidacies.
Our backgrounds include Reverend, Alderman, Officer, working with youth, and community organizing with President Barack Obama. We are not outsiders. We ask that we not be treated as such.
Very Respectfully,
Rev. Isaac C. Hayes
GOP Nominee for U.S. Congress, IL-2
For more information about Rev. Hayes’ run for Congress, go to:
http://www.isaac4honesty.com/
CONTACT:
Sherri Griffith
Sherri@isaac4honesty.com
312-217-1932
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
by Chris Barkulis
I have many close friends on either side of the political spectrum. One thing I've maintained in private, and even mentioned to those friends of mine on the left, is that I witness more racist comments from my Liberal friends than from my conservative friends. Yes, these liberal friends of mine are White. And, yes, they make these comments in private conversation to me because I am White as well.
However, after Chris Matthews' comments after the State of the Union by President Obama it made me think. Libs try to claim race should not be an issue. I've never seen it as an issue. We're all equal, right? Not in background but in potential. I believe anyone can make anything they want to of themselves in this country. We see it time and time again. At the same time, though, Libs continually think of race and make comments that you would have to apologize for if you were a conservative.
Take a look at Matthews' synopsis of the State of the Union:
I find it ironic that Matthews actually had to "forget" that the President was black. I know that Obama is black. You know he's black. There is nothing to "forget." At the same time though, I don't care what his skin color is. I care that he is socializing our country more and more by pushing failing or lack-luster policies to "correct" his former failed policies.
My point here is that yet again I see a Lib who brings skin color to the forefront, for whatever reason. It's funny because I thought we were all supposed to be color-blind now. Apparently, Chris Matthews is color-blind only for short periods of time when he wants to be the condescending White man in the room. Maybe sometime soon people, regardless of skin color, will see through this Liberal nonsense.
If a conservative or Republican were to make that same comment about "forgetting" President Obama was black "for an hour" it would be spun by the Libs that Republicans are racist to essentially equate a Black man to a "well-spoken" White person. Um, Senator Reid (D-NV)? Any clarification? Democratic Party, any clarification? Of course not. The Black leaders within the Democratic Party are happy to forgive those within their party promptly because they are in power among their community and comfortable while working off the backs of those that put their trust in them.
I wish all people equality in potential. Nothing should limit any citizen of our country. Except for those of us that allow individuals to oppress us through artificial problems propagated by those organizing groups for personal political means.
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Andrzejewski Earns Endorsement From Former Congressional Candidate Jeff Danklefson (press release)
Elmhurst, Illinois – Conservative candidate for Governor, Adam Andrzejewski (And-GEE-EFF-Ski) has received overwhelming support from conservatives both nationally and internationally. Former Congressional candidate in the 14th District, Jeff Danklefson, joins a long list of respected conservative leaders who have endorsed Andrzejewski. In his endorsement letter to Andrzejewski, Danklefson comments:
“Adam Andrzejewski’s message of personal liberty, budget reform, and the willingness to confront political corruption has energized voters in Illinois.
Adam’s experience in the private sector of job creation and fighting for the taxpayer offer voters a candidate for Governor with a unique background.
Adam is not beholden to the political class in Springfield and he has the budgetary solutions to address Illinois’ deficit. The Republican Party has an opportunity to elect a man on February 2nd who can bring integrity back to Illinois.”
"This endorsement means a lot to me. Jeff is a great man. He fought hard to bring reform to the 14th District. We have not seen the last of Jeff in politics. He excited the base and had the support of the tea party. I'm proud to have him stand with me as we fight the establishment in Illinois," says Andrzejewski.
Among the prominent conservatives who have expressed their support for Andrzejewski are former Polish President Lech Walesa; American Radio host, author, and conservative political commentator Laura Ingraham; AOL Political Daily columnist Matt Lewis; and author and Regional Coordinator of the Tea Party Patriots in Illinois Robert Moon.
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Move over birthers. Here's something even bigger to chew on: Allegations that Barack Obama is a KGB mole. This ought to shock a lot of people but, frankly, I've suspected this for a couple of years now. Then again, I still suspect that Gorbachev was a CIA mole and that the United States is still a democracy. Crazy world, eh?
In an interview with Physicist Thomas Fife and Geopolitical Analyst, Jeff Nyquist (jrnyquist.com), it is alleged that the KGB infiltration into American politics goes back many years and it is DEEPER than you all think. More at ConservativeMonster.com...
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Adam Andrzejewski is the best choice for governor that Illinois has had in a long time. A very long time. He's the kind of guy the voters should love... and the type that the RINOs and sell-outs hate.
From RedState.com, Jan. 28, 2010:
Everyone these days calls their candidate a Rubio. Guess what? Andrzejewski is a [Marco] Rubio — well spoken, attractive, conservative to his core, and with a zealous band of conservative supporters. Oh, and he strikes fear and dread into the heart of the old guard Republicans who led Illinois off the cliff into the hands of an even more corrupt Democrat Party. Full Article at RedState...
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Which of the following quotes is more racist?
"You know, I forgot he was Black tonight, for an hour.... I was watching and I said, Wait a minute! He's an African-American guy, in front of a bunch of other White people, and here he is, President of the United States and we've completely forgotten that tonight." ~ Chris Matthews, MSNBC, talking about Barack Obama after the State of the Union speech, January 27, 2010
"The African-American community is probably forty, fifty percent unemployment, among males in particular. This is not, this is not the way to help them. The way to help those folks is to let them keep their money." ~ Tony Peraica, Cook County (IL) Commissioner, discussing the detremental effects of high sales taxes, January 26, 2010
If you're Deborah Sims, Peraica's quote is more offensive. Matthews, a liberal, seems amazed that an African-American guy could be the president and not seem Black. Tony Peraica, on the other hand, wants to help Black people keep their hard earned money. Shame on him.
January 28, 2010 - Cook County Commissioner Deborah Sims pulled the race card at Tuesday's Cook County Board meeting. Sims, a Democrat, did so without provocation, wrongly accusing fellow commissioner Tony Peraica, a Republican, of making a racist remark. The sparks flew as the board was attempting to discuss lowering the Stroger sales tax, which Peraica is in favor of and to which Sims is opposed. The Chicago Tribune's Clout Street reported the bizarre verbal exchange:
Peraica, R-Riverside, said he hoped to help African-Americans in the county, whom he argued have been hit particularly hard by the economic downturn, avoid paying more taxes. "The way to help those folks is to let them keep their money in their pocket," he said.
That prompted Commissioner Deborah Sims, D-Chicago, to accuse Peraica of having made a racist comment.
"'Those folks?' That is just the most racist statement that has ever been made in this board," Sims said.
"To say on this board 'Those people, those folks'? What 'those folks' are you referring to?" Sims asked. "You owe the community and the people of Cook County an apology for that one."
Fox Chicago sums it up [emphasis added]: Peraica was discussing the Cook County sales tax when he used the phrase "those folks" to refer to unemployment in the African-American community. Commissioner Deborah Sims - who is black - took offense. She said it was the most racist statement ever made at a board meeting. Peraica said he meant "all folks" in Cook County who have been affected by the economy. He says Sims pulled the race card and called her response outrageous.
"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."
Rules for Power Tactics, (pps.127-134) ~ Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals
"Those folks?" When did that become a racist slur? Even liberal columnist Eric Zorn thinks that Sims's reaction to Peraica's innocent phrase is absurd, as he wrote on Jan. 27:
Wild, irresponsible charges of racism poison race relations far more even than slips of the tongue. But until someone makes a better argument than Sims did (she, too, was interviewed by Jarrett, above), I wouldn't even put Peraica's statement into that category.
Sims is clearly off the deep end in all of this. She is so hung up on the phrase "those folks" that her brain has turned to politically correct Jell-O. Yesterday, Greg Jarrett had both Sims and Peraica on his show at WGN 720 AM. Jarrett said to Sims that "it doesn't make any sense to bring up racism when somebody just says 'those folks.' with reference to a group."
Sims said this: "Greg, you're absolutely right." Wait, wait, he's right? Soooo, Sims admits she's wrong? Nope, no chance. Jell-O Brain Sims continued:
"I would think in this day and time," Sims said, "that that would not be part of his language. That you would refer to any group of people as 'those folks.'" Jarrett asked Sims when the phrase "those folks" became racist.
Sims: "When, ah, he referenced it as 'those folks' when he was talking about the African-American community."
Jarrett: "So you can refer to a Hispanic community as 'those folks' but you can't refer to a Black community as 'those folks.' That's a new rule?"
Sims: "No, that's not a new rule. He shouldn't refer to them as 'those folks' either."
Let's play Sims's own game here. Did she not just refer to the Hispanic community as "them?" How dare she!
Jarrett: "How about a group of White people who are teachers, 'those folks over there,' you can't do that either?"
Sims: "No! If it's White people, and you refer to them as 'those folks,' it's wrong."
Sims is either insane or is intentionally applying Alinsky's tactics. Would she insist that a group of Caucasian teachers be referred to as "the White people who are teachers community?" This pushes political correctness to the extreme of stupidity.
Jarrett again asked Sims when "those folks" became derogatory.
Sims: "It was in the vein in which the conversation was headed in the beginning." Sims did not answer Jarrett's question of when the phrase became derogatory. "
Jarrett turned to Peraica for comments. Peraica said that he was referring to "I'm mystified by the comments of my fellow commissioner Deborah Sims, who apparently cannot rationally, logically argue against lowering the Stroger sales tax that she has supported continually, and when I referred to 'those folks' I was talking about all people who lost their jobs because of high taxes here, who are unemployed, whose mortgages are in foreclosure, who cannot pay their real estate taxes, who are facing bankruptcy because we are constantly increasing their taxes in this difficult economic time. It had nothing to do with racism whatsoever."
Jarrett asked Peraica if he might not be "back peddling" on his remark. Peraica said, no, go listen to the actual audio from the board meeting on WBEZ. Here's what Peraica said at the meeting:
"The African-American community," Peraica said, using a Sims-approved phrase, "is probably forty, fifty percent unemployment, among males in particular. This is not, this is not the way to help them," he said, meaning high sales taxes. "The way to help those folks is to let them keep their money." You may recall that Sims told Jarrett her problem with Peraica was the way "the conversation was headed in the beginning."
Perhaps Jarrett is audio-challenged, or she just wasn't paying attention when Peraica began his statement with "the African-American community." No matter, as a leftist and a race-baiter, Sims was not paying attention to Peraica's real message or intentions. Rather, she was waiting for the slightest opportunity to call him a racist, and she found just that: The slightest opportunity imaginable.
Good Lord, here's a man - Tony Peraica - who is trying to convince his colleagues that unemployed people need help. He expressed a strong desire in the board meeting to lower taxes, so as to help unemployed people, particularly "those folks" in "the African-American community" who have been hit hardest by high taxation. And Sims, a soldier for Stroger, a politically correct leftist ideologue, cannot counter Peraica's call for lower taxes logically. Her response: Call Peraica a racist.
Peraica is correct to call Sims's response "outrageous." It is sadly typical of liberals and Democrats. Most Black folks are not racist, just as most White folks are not racist. However, there are folks in both groups who, in fits of paranoia, see or hear racism where it simply does not exist. Worse, some pretend to be "offended" by innocent statements simply to make the false accusation of racism against an opponent in the hope of gaining points in an argument.
Rather than give a rational, logical argument to Peraica's points on taxes, Sims chose instead to resort to a typical Liberal trick: Accuse your opponent of being a racist. Sometimes they'll use "Nazi," or "tea bagger," or one of a dozen other slurs. It's meant to distract and diminish the opponent. It's a very Alinskyesque tactic, although Alinksy did not invent it.
I believe the tactic was invented by a young child several thousand years ago, when losing an argument with an opposing young child, by blurting out that her opponent was a "poopy head." The other children laughed and pointed at the alleged poopy head, who became so distracted by the sudden scorn that he forget what he was saying and slouched off. The kid who made the accusation "won" the argument, and the tactic was quickly adopted by actual poopy heads and passed down through generations until it evolved into false accusations such as the one Deborah Sims made on Tuesday.
The irony in all of this is that Peraica would be excused quickly if he was a liberal Democrat named Harry Reid.
RELATED:
Top Democrat defends Reid for remarks - Washington Times
Racist Democrats vs. Colorblind Republicans - HUMAN EVENTS
Tony Peraica Video Conversation, Part 5 of 6 - In this installment, Peraica cites fellow commissioner Deborah Sims as an example of the tax-and-spend mentality in Cook County government
LiveLeak.com - Famous Racist Quotes by Democrats
Hip Hop Republican: Top Racist Democrat Quotes
Democrats in Trouble Over Racist Remarks - uprisingradio.org
Democrats benefit from double standard with racial remarks
Reid apologizes for racial remarks about Obama during campaign ...
Race-baiting Democrats and the media's complicity « Sister Toldjah
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
MUST SEE VIDEO: Heritage Foundation "How Modern Liberals Think" (47:53 play time)
Evan Sayet, writer, lecturer and pundit is known to many as a comedian. But there is a very serious side to him too, as we see in this important, thought-provoking video. Sayet has a column at Breitbart's Big Hollywood, where his bio says this:
Evan calls himself a 9/13 Republican. 9/11 wasn't a big surprise to him. Obviously, he didn't know the date or the specific targets – and the carnage literally sickened him – but he never had any doubt that the same people who were killing the Jews of Israel for no other reason than that they were the closest infidels, would, when they could, come to massacre the biggest infidels....
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Fact Check: How State of Union Compares With Reality: "A look at some of Obama's claims in the State of the Union and how they compare with the facts, from Fox News. Also see the transcript of Obama's State of the Union remarks "as prepared for delivery in Obama's State of the Union address to Congress" on Jan. 27, 2010. (Hat tip to Loyola Republicans)
Click graphic to enlarge
Leave a Comment
Conservative T-Shirts
Follow CNB on Twitter
RSS Feed
January 27, 2010 - Chicago - This is a developing - and long-anticipated - story. It involves Alexi Giannoulias, an Illinois Democrat who is running for U.S. Senate. Giannoulias is currently the Illinois State Treasurer.
UPDATE, 2010-01-31:
Meister Quits, Now Supports Giannoulias for Senate
(Crain’s) — Broadway Bank, the troubled Chicago lender owned by the family of Illinois Treasurer and U.S. Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias, has entered into a consent order with banking regulators requiring it to raise tens of millions in capital, stop paying dividends to the family without regulatory approval, and hire an outside party to evaluate the bank’s senior management. More at Crain's Chicago Business...
The story of the Giannoulias family, Broadway Bank and its deep ties to the Democrat Political Machine is multi-layered and deep. William Ayers, Barack Obama, and Tony Rezko - to name just a few - have all dealt with the Broadway Bank in Chicago, run by the [allegedly] mob-tied Giannoulias family, and it may have been Ayers or a Giannoulias family member who brought Obama's name to the attention of Rezko.) (Source: Mens News Daily, Oct. 2006)
Today's Crain's Chicago Business report also states that the "Jan. 26 consent order with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Illinois Division of Banking comes less than a week before Mr. Giannoulias, Broadway’s chief lender until 2004, must face voters in the Democratic primary for the Senate seat previously held by President Barack Obama."
Mens News Daily noted that around "1993 (possibly later), Obama buys a townhouse in Chicago, with a loan provided by the city's Broadway Bank. His down payment is $110,000. The bank, owned by the politically-connected Giannoulias family, is alleged to have long-standing mob ties, as well as connections with Tony Rezko and William Ayers. Allegedly Obama gets a "sweetheart" deal on the townhouse, ostensibly in exchange for future favors. (Obama later endorses Alexi Giannoulias when he runs for Illinois State Treasurer.)"
As we said, this story is developing and deep.
RELATED NEWS:
Giannoulias Family Bank Looms Larger…
Broadway Bank ordered to raise more capital
Giannoulias bank under federal consent decree
Hoffman Calls on Giannoulias to Report Donors
David Hoffman Attacks Alexi Giannoulias For Rezko Ties (VIDEO)
Related Background:
Marathon Pundit: Will a cover-up sink Alexi Giannoulias?
Marathon Pundit: Alexi Giannoulias: Not so transparent
Marathon Pundit: Articles involving Alexi Giannoulias
Backyard Conservative: Articles involving Alexi Giannoulias
The Obama Timeline: 1961-2008
Barack Obama and campaign contributor Alexi Giannoulias - SourceWatch
Is Alexi Giannoulias Obama's next "not the man I knew"? PoliticsWest
Founder of Broadway Bank dies suddenly Crain's Chicago Business
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
by IOTW Reports - In the Illinois Republican primary, the establishment pick, Mark Kirk, is trying to paint himself as a conservative. [Continued below the graphic...]
Mark Kirk is the very definition of a RINO, and he is trying to trap Conservative Republicans with a box of lies. Despite his votes for Cap and Trade, millions in earmark projects for his campaign donors, and support for the bank bailouts, he is calling himself a “fiscal conservative” and a “budget hawk.” The Washington elite are trying to jam another liberal candidate down the throats of voters. It is time we take our party back and let Washington know we want Conservative candidates and we want to pick them ourselves. Conservatives do have a choice in Illinois with Patrick Hughes. He is a businessman, father, and true fiscal conservative. We have a chance to fix what is broken, stop massive government spending, and put an end to a Washington that is only interested in helping Washington; but we need to make sure Patrick wins the Republican primary on February 2nd. We must act today, stop the RINO Mark Kirk, and make sure Patrick Hughes wins the Republican nomination in Illinois.
Right Klik has the skinny on this Illinois primary.
KL South has a great compilation of quotes which clearly illustrates why Patrick Hughes is the clear choice in Illinois.
ALSO SEE: Rootless RINOS
Hat tip: Cheryl Prater
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
by Warner Todd Huston
Early this month Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady revealed that the state party decided to officially reprimand former GOP Chairman Andy McKenna for misuse of party funds and ethics violations.
Despite his ethics violations as chairman, McKenna went ahead and launched his bid to become our next Illinois Governor anyway. Should McKenna win office we'll have gone from one ethically ignorant Governor (George Ryan), to a second (Rod Blagojevich) to a third (McKenna). Illinois is already a laughing stock of corruption, why vote for McKenna and make it worse?
Anyway, today the State Journal-Register in Springfield (the State Capitol) released some more information about Andy McKenna's ethics violations and the party's reaction to it.
How can any Republican support Andy McKenna? With the regrettable political climate that the Democrats have foisted on us here in Illinois why continue that mess under a Republican administration as McKenna will surely do? With this 2010 election we have a chance for real, substantive change in Illinois. Let's not throw it all away by voting for your Judy Baar Topinkas, Jim Ryans and Andy McKennas. Let's not stay with the good old boy network that destroyed the Illinois GOP, shall we?
“The Chairman’s office never informed the Illinois Republican State Central Committee of intent to commission this poll, nor did Andrew McKenna ever request approval to conduct this poll from the … Committee,” the report by the ethics committee of the state party said of the poll, which was done by The Tarrance Group at a cost of $28,300. “At no point before, during or after this poll was taken did the ... Committee receive disclosure from Andrew McKenna pursuant to provisions of the … Committee’s Code of Ethics concerning potential personal benefit, appearance of potential personal benefit or appearance of impropriety.”
RELATED:
Pollgate: McKenna "compounded one ethical misstep with another" Marathon Pundit
Pollgate update: Andy "Me"Kenna ducking debates Marathon Pundit
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Colleague and friendly rival Big Fur Hat posted this at his home away from home, iOwnTheWorld.com, with a nice assist from Conservative Cowgirl.
I just had to share it witchya.
See more ingenious snarky art at iOwnTheWorld...
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
by Michael Coyne
They were hoping you wouldn’t notice
David Plouffe, President Obama’s campaign manager from 2008, worked in a relatively minor role in the Obama Administration for its first year. Now, he is back on the main stage in the wake of Scott Brown’s Massachusetts win.
While this may seem like a minor story, its significance lies in the fact that it happened this weekend.
Take Out The Trash Day
As political junkies know, politicians and political groups tend to break stories between Friday and about noon Sunday to hide them. These are the stories that they do not want people talking about or reported in the weekday news - on the off chance that America can pull itself away from reality TV long enough to learn something about their government.
The only reason that the Obama Administration would want this story swept into a weekend news cycle is that the promotion actually has major significance. The move is clearly a reaction to recent Republican victories, and an acknowledgement that the political soil is prime for a new Republican Revolution. America knows it, the media knows it, and President Obama knows it.
David Plouffe and Why He Will Fail
Plouffe’s major strategy, which he has already begun to reemploy on ABC’s Good Morning America, was to call for so-called “change” and to blame everything short of paper cuts on former President George W. Bush. Although, perhaps even this is the result of Bush’s failure to regulate the paper industry.
In any case, the strategy is wearing thin. The president has had a solid year to make some sort of progress, and he has failed. Unemployment is still on the rise - save for the three jobs created in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts - and the dollar is plummeting. Meanwhile, the very big-government policies forewarned by our Founding Fathers are looming on the horizon, and Americans rightly fear for their economic and personal liberties.
Plouffe has his work cut out for him. Fortunately, the one-trick-pony that is the Obama political machine has little chance of fooling America twice.
Check out Michael Coyne's blog, "Republican Blue" for more news and conservative commentary.
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
by Warner Todd Huston
(First of all, I want to thank Chicago News Bench for allowing me to be a guest poster on this fine blog.)
I have come to the conclusion that the Palatine Tea Party group (http://www.teapartypalatine.com/) made a hasty decision in picking Joe Walsh for its Illinois 8th Congressional District candidate, hasty and perhaps misguided. In fact, this choice of Joe Walsh sort of shows the pitfalls that the Tea Party movement in general can fall into.
The field of candidates in the 8th District is wide, indeed. There are currently six Republicans running to snag the nomination of the Party and the differences between them are not too great when one looks over their issue statements. On the surface it would seem that throwing a dart would be just as legitimate a way as any other to make an endorsement in the 8th. But surface gloss can be deceiving and in this case, I believe that the gloss of Joe Walsh's current campaign has blinded the good folks of the Palatine Tea Party group to a certain reality.
As I said there are six candidates for the 8th District nomination. Alphabetically they are:
- Dirk Beveridge - http://www.beveridge2010.com/
- John Dawson - johndawsonforcongress.com
- Chris Geissler - chrisgeissler.netboots.net
- Gregory Jacobs - Gregory S. Jacobs
- Maria Rodriguez - http://www.mariarodriguezforcongress.com/
- Joe Walsh - walshforcongress.com
What’s Wrong With the Palatine Endorsement?
From the information that I have been able to ascertain, it seems that one of the reasons that the Palatine Tea Party folks made their late December endorsement is because he won the poll that they hosted on their website. This poll was not scientific nor without controversy, however. The poll had surged overnight at one point with hundreds of votes each for candidates Walsh and rival Dirk Beveridge. This happened because of a technical flaw in the website. Apparently the poll did not record cookies so the same i.p. address could game the poll by hosting repeated votes. It seems that campaign operatives both for Beveridge and Walsh found out about this flaw and flooded the poll with multiple votes for their candidate.
At some point it became impossible to know what votes were legitimate. Still, once a bunch of the votes were simply deleted, Walsh had the most votes and, therefore, got the group's support.
I tried to get in touch with Craig Mijares, one of the principles of the Palatine Tea Party Group, because I had a whole raft of questions for him. Sadly after only a few emails, he evaded my communications and refused to answer any more questions. Next thing I knew I was getting emails from candidate Walsh himself at the behest of Mijares (which was good because I was going to contact Walsh next, anyway). It’s hard to escape the feeling that this refusal to answer questions in and of itself shows that this particular group is not yet ready for primetime, unable to face the glare of the spotlight and the tough questions. I come to this conclusion because the questions I had for Mr. Mijares were more about his group’s process in making the endorsement than they were about Mr. Walsh’s positions -- though I did ask some questions of the later. I am glad Walsh contacted me because he cleared up some facts and took some of my harsh opinion off his candidacy, even as I still have reservations.
Anyway, that regrettable business aside, as I said with the similarity of positions between the candidates, this might not have been such a big deal if the surface extended down to the core. But I don't believe it does. Several red flags strike me when reviewing this candidate's history and actions.
What’s Wrong With Joe Walsh? The “Tea Party Candidate”
The first problem is that candidate Joe Walsh was counseled by his former campaign manager to "become" the "tea party candidate," and his strategy was based on that particular plan. Since the Palatine folks endorsed him in December, he's been happily calling himself the "tea party candidate" all over the place. This can be seen on just about any of his latest mass emailings. In his Jan. 20th email, for instance, he says, "I am a 'tea party' conservative first and a Republican second." He's used the tea party candidate line often since December. It all smells of strategerizing, if you will, and a cynical game plan as opposed to any organic happenstance of a candidate whose support grew naturally from the tea party movement.
For myself, I have a major problem with any candidate calling themselves the tea party candidate. There may be A tea party out there, but there is no the tea party. There are thousands of groups calling themselves the tea party this or that, now, and for a candidate to try to lay claim to all of them as their leader is not only insincere, but it is impossible.
Of course I expect a good Republican candidate to say that they support the tea party movement and believe in their chief principles. But saying they are the tea party candidate is a step too far towards hubris, in my opinion.
It is plain that Walsh formed his strategy on becoming the tea party candidate and heavily courted the Palatine folks on that basis. But the fact is, there is no evidence that Mr. Joe Walsh ever attended a single tea party event prior to the late December endorsement he received from the Palatine folks. No videos of him speaking at one exists and no tea party event lists him as a participant before December of 2009. At least not one I can find.
Now, in my email contact with candidate Walsh I asked him about some of these things. As to the tea parties, in the email exchange he informed me that he never attended any tea party events. “I attended a couple of the healthcare town halls over the summer but no formal tea party events,” he wrote.
So, if he never even attended one before December of 2009 how can he be a “tea party candidate”? He told me it’s because of his positions on the issues. “The reason the tea party movement has endorsed me all over this district is because they see me as one of them: I hit both political parties over the head for all this spending and I view this campaign as much more a revolution to get back to our country's founding principles.”
That is all well and good and Mr. Walsh has said since the beginning of his campaign that he’s always been a fiscal conservative. This can be shown positively because Walsh has run for office several times before. Mr. Walsh ran for Congress as well as the State House but he lost both times. But even then he ran as a fiscal conservative.
As it happens, however, during those unsuccessful runs for office he ran as a moderate or liberal Republican on social issues as media reports of his own words shows. An Evanston Review article published in October of 1996 quoted Walsh as saying, "Fiscally, I've always been conservative, but if I've evolved politically, it's been as a social liberal." (In my email with Walsh he did not dispute this quote)
The Once “Social Liberal” Candidate
Let’s explore some of those “socially liberal” ideas he once espoused. Let's take his past abortion stance, for instance. In 1998 Mr. Walsh ran for Congress for the 10th District saying he would protect a woman's right to choose an abortion. Yet now, only about ten years later, he is suddenly a staunch anti-abortion guy. Walsh claims that his conversion took place about seven years ago and that it is heartfelt. In a recent campaign mailing he addressed this issue.
Yet, in a Jan 14 Daily Herald interview Walsh is reported as having said that the reason he ran as a pro-abortion candidate in 1996 is because "I was running in Evanston, Ill." Apparently location determines Mr. Walsh's principles, not conviction.
I began a five-year religious, intellectual, and scientific journey on the life issue after my race in 1998. It was an incredibly deep, long, personal journey of the heart which returned me to my pro-life roots. From that moment in 2003, when I knew in my head and my heart that life began at conception, the pro-life position without exception was where I wanted to be. It was where I had to be.
Still, it may well be that Walsh changed his mind on abortion. We should all be willing to accept a man's change of heart. After all, Ronald Reagan, one of our most famous Republican heroes, made a mid-life conversion from New Deal voter to arch conservative. Though, Reagan's conversion was a result of decades of thinking and writing on the subject, to be sure. So maybe Walsh really is sincere? And it wouldn't be right to castigate a guy for one issue, right?
And so I am not.
Walsh’s Drifting on Gun Issues
The problem is Walsh didn't just change his opinion on one issue. He also changed his mind on gun control -- several times, apparently -- since his previous runs in the 1990s. He was for the gun banning laws in 1998 run for the state house. He also held these and other more liberal views when he unsuccessfully ran for Congress from the 10th District in 1996.
But his gun stance is particularly vexing to me. In both 1996 and 1998 he said that he supported a concealed carry law and in 1996 was for the 1994 assault weapons ban. Yet in 1998 when he ran for the State House he said he was now against the assault weapons ban. Fast forward to 2009/2010 and he's still against the assault weapons ban.
One of the other more liberal views he was for in the past concerned gay issues. Walsh told me that he’s “always been tolerant of gays regarding their private behavior.” Today he says he doesn’t support civil unions, believes that marriage should be between only one man and one woman, and supports a Constitutional amendment to define marriage as such. He also says that the issue of civil unions never came up in his past races. This is undoubtedly true as the gay marriage issue did not become really heated until this last decade and his last run was in the 1990s.
Still, these are too many abrupt changes for me to feel comfortable with this "tea party candidate." His own statement that he was a “social liberal” is itself enough to raise eyebrows.
Walsh’s “Former Vendor” Lawsuit
Then there is the lawsuit that was just filed against Walsh by his former campaign manager, Keith Lisico. Lisico claims that Walsh didn't pay him for his contracted campaign services. For his part, Walsh dismisses the lawsuit as one from but a mere "former vendor." Walsh dissembles, I believe, with this characterization. Lisico was not just a "former vendor" but was Walsh's chief strategist, decade-long friend, and campaign manager.
Lately a whisper campaign has been mounted trying to cast Lisico as some sort of Democrat operative or an operative from an opposing candidate. I see no evidence of this at all if for no other reason than that Lisico helped Walsh in previous considerations for a run or office. It isn't like Lisico just showed up out of nowhere in 2009 to help Walsh with his campaign.
Final Assessment of Walsh
So, it seems pretty clear that there are some major reasons to distrust Joe Walsh as a proper, down-the-line conservative candidate, the sort of solid, life-long conservative that a tea party group can support without reservations.
My last problem with the Walsh candidacy is that he doesn’t even live in the district in which he’s currently running. He actually lives in the 10th District. This I suppose is a minor consideration, but it adds to the feeling that Walsh is a bit more mercenary than he tries to let on.
Now, as I said, I had an email exchange with the candidate himself over these questions. As to the gun issue, Mr. Walsh told me that he has always been pro gun. “In 1996, I was for the ban on assault weapons,” he wrote, “which I realized shortly thereafter crazy. But I was always pro gun and pro conceal carry and had a number of attacks pieces thrown my way from my Democratic opponent.”
So, it is certainly possible that the news reports of Walsh’s gun positions from the 1996 race that I related above were incorrect (I am the last person to assume the media is perfect, after all). Still the jumping around on the issue is a bit disconcerting. What makes me wonder about the Palatine folks choice is that tolerance for flip flopping is famously low within the tea party movement, yet this candidate has been a known flip flopper and they still went for him. It makes me wonder how much research they did into his past?
Final assessment of Walsh? He’s most certainly a fiscal conservative and small government guy. On that issue he fits well with tea party ideals. But his drifting on social issues is troubling. I also feel he is mischaracterizing this lawsuit situation. On top of all that, his seeming burning desire to achieve elected office with multiple runs seems far too needy and his jumping from one district to another to try and win office seems a tad too mercenary for my tastes. I envision a more proper tea party candidate as one being either a political neophyte such as Mr. Beveridge, or one with a proven track record of being elected whose ideas fit well enough with the tea party movement such as Maria Rodriguez. These are the reasons I did not endorse Mr. Walsh, though I want to clearly state that if he wins the nomination he should be supported by all good Republicans.
What’s Wrong With Tea Party Groups?
Now, I'll address why I think this shows a limitation to the tea party movement itself…
As I said, the Palatine Tea Party folks chose Joe Walsh based on his current stance on the issues as compared to the other candidates coupled with a website poll of their members. This is all well and good on a cursory level. The problem is that these well meaning folks were obviously not aware of Walsh's self-professed more liberal past positions and general statements. And it is obvious they didn't do any research into what Joe Walsh had done and said in the past. These folks are so new to politics that they likely had no idea that Walsh was a losing candidate several times in the past, and a more liberal candidate at that. This is my own surmise, admittedly, since the group reused to engage me in a conversation on these issues.
Anyway, therein lies the problem. Too many tea party folks all across the country are wholly unfamiliar with the political scene upon which they've decided to pass judgment. Many of these groups are filled with newcomers to politics, folks that have no idea what has happened in their area in the past. Their newfound enthusiasm is fantastic and laudable, but limiting in effectiveness on some level.
In fact, I raised this very point with young Zach Oltmanns of the new Illinois Conservatives FaceBook group in a recent interview. He admitted that his BS detector was at first a bit unrefined simply because he was so new to politics. He admitted that a few candidates did fool them in the beginning because they didn’t have enough hard-bitten politicos with them to warn them of this weakness. They are learning to be more skeptical, he told me. This is a perfect example of what I am talking about. Heck, I even had to change an endorsement because I missed as aspect of a candidate that I had initially endorsed.
Now, I support the ideals of the tea party movement. I was there from the beginning and was "in the know" during the planning stages of the big Chicago event when Eric Odom organized the Tax Day Tea Party protest in April of 2009. I attended that event and posted a video report of it. Further, I have been an activist writing on national and local politics since 2001 and have worked with various state policy groups since 2006. I have had my work appear on Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Boortz, and several other radio shows and I've also been a guest on many of the same. I have appeared in many magazines and newspapers with my work and appeared on CNN and Breitbart TV. I am not Johnny-come-lately to this whole thing, in other words.
Naturally I agree with the sentiment of the tea party movement that distrusts the old political hacks of our past. I agree with them that things need to change. But to completely and out of hand reject any connection to past local political history is a major mistake and could easily lead to bad choices. I contend that the Palatine folks had no knowledge of Walsh's past because they had no one with them that had been intimately knowledgeable of Illinois politics from only as far back as 1998. Joe Walsh was an unknown quantity to them and they took all his glossy campaign claims at face value. It was a mistake born of ignorance of the past. This is a mistake not born of stupidity, not born of malice, but born of mere unfamiliarity.
I think this shows a bit of a draw back with tea party groups. Sure they are enthusiastic and that is great. But many of them have a naiveté on the very local political scene in which they want to wield influence and this will surely cause them (collectively) some problems. I think this Joe Walsh situation is a perfect example of this draw back.
Also I have seen many postings railing against one thing or another by tea party folks about their candidates not making the headway that they want to see made but many of these postings show an ignorance of the political rules and regulations that candidates have to live under. Sure some of these rules and regulations need to change, but they are in force and have to be dealt with today despite how bad they may be. Sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling "la,la,la" so that you can't hear about them is not helping anyone get good tea party principles ensconced in government.
It all amounts to a problem when so many tea party groups are wholly unfamiliar with the very system and actors that they want to affect.
Anyway, I hope that this story serves as an object lesson. If tea party groups want to begin to back candidates, they'd better do as much research into their candidates as possible instead of just looking at issue statements, reading a glossy campaign flyer, or sitting in the audience of a candidate's forum. There is far more to this politics game that the surface.
Last Words
I know this has been a long piece, but there is one last thing I need to say here. To vote them all back in or to vote them all out are two sides of the same coin. Both are irresponsible and dispense with having to actually think about and evaluate the incumbents.
It may be cathartic to scream that we should vote every incumbent out. I’ve been known to yell it a time or two myself. But it just isn’t a responsible position to take.
Am I arguing for the status quo? Am I an establishment guy? If you think that you haven’t been paying attention. I’ve been railing against the status quo since before the word “blog” was even widely used. Further am I saying the Palatine Tea Party folks are bad? No, I am only saying that I think through naiveté they made a bad decision. That is all.
In the end, what I am saying is that we need to inculcate some of the established political realities into our efforts to bring political change. We need to weed out the sham candidates from the good incumbents. We need to go forward with an informed effort, not some willy-nilly, slam-wham, shotgun effort that is unfocused and uninformed.
Anyway, I apologize for how darn long this thing is, but there was a lot at issue. And, as always, I need an editor because I am always one to say in ten words what can be said in two. Anyone want the job? Seriously, though, I know that this one just might raise the ire of a few folks and I wanted to take pains to be as clear as I could, hence the length and wordiness.
Editor's Note: Thanks very much to Warner for posting this important article, which he originally posted at Publius' Forum. We strongly recommend that you add Publius' Forum to your reading list.
More from Warner Todd Huston:
Warner's FaceBook Page
On Twitter: warnerthuston
Warner's MySpace Page
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
Chicago - I was walking down the street today and just about jumped out of my boots when I saw the lovely photo (right) of Illinois State Senator Heather Steans (7th District) giving me that evil clown grin. It was so unexpected, and - I swear this is true - I spotted it in a trash can. I was waiting for the light to change, and the can was next to me. (Yes, we'll get into substance, but first indulge me.)
Laying on top of the rest of the trash was the latest Steans flyer, literally staring up at me. I jumped back, stared at it, poked it with a stick, then plucked it out. I took it home, scanned it, then burned it.
Tip: Click on images to enlarge them.
I used to love messing with photos of Steans just to make her look goofy. After looking at this flyer, however, I think I'll give that up. They say truth is stranger than fiction, and the real Heather looks goofier than anything I could come up with in manipulation.
Okay, Some Substantive Criticism...
Yes, yes, the above was childish. All in fun, but this is a serious state senate race. Let's look at the substance of this flyer. Steans is running against a bright young lawyer named Jim Madigan in the Democrat primary, February 2. Madigan is untainted by the political Machine. He has not taken big money, as Steans has. Steans gives us the same old crap in this flyer.
On the cover, just above the evil clown grin, Steans demonstrates that she is completely unaware of current events and of how pissed off most Americans are about the nonsense in Washington. "I support President Obama's efforts to reform health care. But we can't wait for Congress to act." Perhaps she is aware of the national mood and she's simply as stupid as I've always suspected.
The voters of Massachusettes recently elected Scott Brown (R) over Martha Coakley (D) to fill the seat held by the late Ted Kennedy. Why? Because the people do NOT support Obama's efforts to "reform" health care, as did Martha Coakley, as does Heather Steans. Another reason: The people, the voters, were sick of having "reform" shoved down their throats with virtually no transparency. In short, they wanted Congress to wait. Ah, but Heather Steans says hurry up, we can't wait for Congress to act. Newsflash: Massachusetts didn't wait either, having passed their own "reform" under Governor Mitt Romney.
The results of that rushed "reform" in Massachusetts, ironically, contributed heavily to the defeat of Coakley because the "reform" in Massachusetts did not control rising costs. To add irony to irony, the citizens of Massachusetts had what Washington called "Cadillac" quality coverage, which meant that they would have been taxed through their catheter tubes had "Obamacare" passed as written. Massachusetts voters said, in effect, if you don't like our health care mess, you'll hate the version that Congress has in mind. Even in Washington, it was a bipolar situation until the Brown win: The reform bill produced by Pelosi's House did not meld with Reid's Senate version. So Heather Steans lobs mindless platitudes like "we can't wait" without considering the fact that many Democrat leaders, including Howard Dean, are urging just that and more. Scrap both the House and Senate versions, they say, start over, but first concentrate on fixing the economy. Steans seems oblivious to this harsh reality.
The inside spread of the expensive flyer (money is no object to Steans), she continues with her health care chant. "Heather Steans fought to expand health care in Illinois," it says. And how is that working out for you? "She took on the big insurance companies..." blah, blah, blah. Really? How hard did she take on Humana Health Insurance to get that $1,500 contribution via Human PAC? As opponent Jim Madigan asked, "I wonder what reform was left on the table in order to ensure that the campaign cash would keep flowing from insurance companies?" Steans also notes that she has a "100% Pro-Choice Record" but does not qualify that: Does she also support the live-birth abortions that Barack Obama supported during his time in Springfield?
The back page of the flyer shows Steans strolling down a street talking with a constituent. I gotta say, I've never seen Steans walking down the street and I live in the 7th District, but she wants us to believe that she's out patrolling the byways and talking to everyone all day. Uh huh. "Heather Steans is working with police and community leaders," the flyer says, "to keep our families safe from crime and gun violence" and that "Heather believes it's time to move past talking about curbing violence. She's doing something about it." Oh?
Steans has done nothing more than make token gestures and giving a few unconvincing "public safety meetings." The results have been insignificant, if that much. After a July, 2008 meeting, Heather Steans said that her "positive loitering" initiatives had made several areas of Uptown "crime free." Crime "free" means no crime. Not a reduction, but an elimination of crime. "Free," not "reduced." When the audience was allowed to ask questions at another public safety meeting on May 12, 2009, I asked Steans to name the specific areas or corners that she had made "crime free," and to tell us if they are still "crime free today." She hemmed and hawed for a moment, then admitted that she should not have said "crime free." Steans was ready to not specify the locations, however, so I called out to her to do so. She mentioned a strip "near" a park, but couldn't be more specific. She couldn't even name the park. Meanwhile, violent crime continues in Uptown and throughout Chicago. Just get a police scanner and turn it on any day or night, and you'll hear the horrific, bloody non-results of Steans and her self-proclaimed efforts to "do something about it."
Lies, half truths, exaggerations. Taken together, that's the most frightening aspect of this Steans flyer - and all of her flyers. It's even more frightening than her evil clown smile.
RELATED:
Senator Goes Missing: Last Seen Hiding Under Her Desk
More posts about Heather Steans
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
by Sean Vera
After Heather Steans last performance in a debate, we were all itching to see her get whomped once more.
But, alas, our dreams are dashed. Good ol' Sen. Steans is apparently too busy to come and talk to the people who she supposedly represents. What a shame.
But, her Democratic challenger Jim Madigan and Republican Adam Robinson will be at Loyola's Rogers Park campus Monday, January 25th to debate the issues and show the people of the district that there is a better choice than a bank heiress who is a corrupt Blago-crat who allegedly purchased her Senate seat.
The Loyola College Republicans are hosting this event, details of which can be found here (and below). The back-story that led up to this point is particularly of note.
The College Republicans hosted a forum like this in December. We invited all 3 candidates and were co-sponsoring the event with the Loyola College Democrats. However, once Sen. Steans declined our invitation (citing a CTA Red Line meeting which, if you attended, would realize that her presence was not required), the College Dems president (who is a good friend of the Senator), unilaterally withdrew the organization's support of the event and accused the College Republicans of being "unprofessional" and claiming that the event was creating a "climate of bipartisanship."
Although patently false, the College Republicans agreed to host a second forum at the beginning of Loyola's spring semester in order to have the senator attend. Again, the Steans' campaign dragged their feet for weeks until the College Republicans were forced to set a date and time...one that the Senator was, you guessed it, conveniently unavailable.
So, Heather Steans won't be there tomorrow. Her alleged corruption however, will be lingering in the air.
State Senate Candidate Forum #2 (7th District)
Date: Monday, January 25, 2010
Time: 6:00pm - 8:30pm
Life Sciences Building Auditorium
Loyola University Campus
1060 W Sheridan Road
Chicago, Illinois
RELATED:
State Senator Heather Steans is a Coward
New Campaign Flyer from Evil Clown Heather Steans
More posts about Heather Steans
Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed
