Friday, December 21, 2007

Terry Link Survives Petition Challenge in 5-3 Vote

No surprise, the word from the Johnson v. Link hearing is that Terry Link remains on the ballot. It was a 5-3 vote. Jerry Johnson was removed from the ballot. Our report from the field:


A Long Uncomfortable Silence

In a cramped hearing room where there were only 12 seats for spectators, as opposed to the prior large conference rooms that held as many as 50-75 spectators, the Illinois State Board of Elections, following their hearing, voted to certify Terry Link as a candidate for the State Senate (30th District) as a Democrat.

Voting in favor of certifying Link:

Albert S. Porter (D) Chairman
Patrick A. Brady (R)
John R. Keith (D)
William M. McGuffage (D)
Wanda L. Rednour (D)

Voting against certifying Link:

Bryan A. Schneider (R) Vice-Chairman
Jesse Smart (R)
Robert J. Walters (R)

The hearing began with the recommendations of the State Board of Elections staff attorney. His recommendation was to adopt the findings and recommendations of Hearing Officer Goodman. An overview of the case was briefly given by the attorney. A minimum of 1,000 genuine signatures are required to be placed on the ballot for State Senate. Senator Link filed petitions containing 3,378 signatures. Candidate Johnson objected to 2,393 signatures on various grounds. A record examination lead to the sustaining of objections to 1,660 signatures, and overruling 689 objections to signatures.

Following the hearings held before Hearing Officer Goodman, 1,526 "genuine signatures" remain. The 5 death certificates of those 6 "dead" signatures were never formally introduced into evidence and were objected by the Link attorneys. Over 24 affidavits of those who swore on oath that the signatures on the petitions bearing their names were NOT theirs were also never formally introduced into evidence and were objected by the Link attorneys. The Hearing Officer sustained all objections made. The attorney for the Election Board indicated his concurrence of the recommendations of Hearing Officer Goodman.

Attorney LaVelle on behalf objector Johnson summarized the evidence and stressed that the Harmon v. Electoral Board of the Town of Cicero case was controlling for the law. He stressed that patterns of fraud that are not alleged in pleadings cannot be simply not considered (the case law repeatedly states "cast a blind eye to") as patterns of fraud always emerge from evidence that develops at hearings and not from pleadings or allegations.

The State Board Attorney indicated that he agreed with Link's attorney that to argue and consider a pattern of fraud now in the absence of definitive pleadings would be to catch the candidate by surprise and would unduly prejudice his right of due process and a fair hearing. Left out in this argument was the fact that two agents of the candidate committed these patterns of fraud. So how can one surprise oneself under such circumstances?

LaVelle called the testimony of Knight (I was too sick to be an officer of the Oxford House) incredible and unbelievable (he wasn't sick enough to go out and amass 1,650 "signatures").

Attorney Nottage argued on behalf of Link that the hearing officer heard all the evidence and was in the best position to determine their credibility. He stated that it would be inappropriate for a pattern of fraud to be considered by the full Board of Elections absent any clear pleadings alleging fraud. He argued that during the hearing of December 8, 2007 the Link Campaign was surprised by evidence presented by objector Johnson claiming false addresses, false signatures and a pattern of fraud and was pleased that the Hearing Officer sustained those objections to such evidence. (My note: Again, they were surprised by the activities of their own agents who acted on their behalf?) He argued that Knight's testimony should be understood in the light that he did not see eye to eye and had many physical altercations with the President of the Oxford House (i.e. "the landlord") which explained why no paperwork or physical evidence somehow existed that Knight resided there from 9/07 to 11/07. (My note: Physical fights with the landlord might explain why Knight was not around the Oxford House in 2007).

After hearing the evidence, Chairman Porter asked for a motion:

After TEN LONG SECONDS of complete silence, (and yes, I counted) Commissioner McGuffage (D) moved that the candidacy of Link be certified and the recommendations of the hearing officer be adopted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Rednour (D). Rednour was in Springfield on videoconference.

On the other cases I heard being ruled upon, only a second or two of silence existed before someone made a motion.

That long silence followed by a 5-3 vote spoke volumes about this unusual matter.


Louis G. Atsaves

PS- According to the Johnson campaign, the "signature" of one dead man was not stricken from the petitions. This dead man signed twice. His "second signature" was stricken but curiously, not the first. Go figure that one out.

43 comments:

Anonymous said...

Lou and TA,

Have the 5 commissioners who voted in favor of keeping Link on, been confirmed by the Senate? If not, why didn't the Senate confirm these individuals prior to ANY hearings they were about to have.

Also, do you know what these commissoners are being paid, legally, I mean, to serve on the SBOE?

Anonymous said...

Small victory for Terry Link, the real challenge is the criminal investigation that's underway with the State's Attorney's office. Keep an eye on that....

Anonymous said...

What I am unclear about and what I didn't put into my report because I remain unclear about it, is the argument Link made that Knight was "registered to vote" from the Oxford House Address he now claims he lived at during the period of circulating the petitions, "but that this registration is currently inactive."

Can someone explain "inactive" for me? Does it mean simply not voting or does it mean he got bumped from the rolls during an address check by Lake County Clerk a while back?

Louis G. Atsaves

kellyann1293 said...

http://www.ilga.gov/commission/jcar/admincode/026/026002160000200R.html

(scroll down)

"Inactive voter" – An inactive voter is a person who, having once submitted a Voter Registration Application subsequently acknowledged by the election authority having jurisdiction over the voter's place of residence, or a registration card, has not responded to a notice to confirm his or her address, but whose authority to vote has not yet been canceled.

I am Sparticus said...

TA,

Castro lives on.

Sparty

Anonymous said...

Is Couvall also being investigated? Does anyone know?

Anonymous said...

On another subject...if McCain and Clinton don't win the nominations, in my opinion our boy Kirk is toast in the 10th District.

Huckabee will not help Kirk among Jewish voters. Romney will not help among Christians. Giuliani will not help among conservatives.

Clinton will bring out the Republican vote against her and McCain will appeal to Independents. That will help Kirk.

Also, Kirk has been a close McCain protege and tracks closely to his positions. [Unfortunately, Seals could make the point that a McCain White House would most likely appoint Kirk to a Cabinet or other administration position (which Kirk would jump for, as opposed to staying in the minority in Congress), so why vote for Kirk for Congress when there would have to be an inevitable special election to replace him in a few months if McCain wins?

Obama will take some of McCain's Independents and he will get out the Democrats, especially in Illinois. So, our absolute best bet is McCain vs Clinton.

Anonymous said...

So far, the Daily Herald has been the only newspaper to report the story today. Here is their most recent version:

http://dailyherald.com/story/?id=100248

greywolf said...

Has anyone contested the petitions of the 2 State Representative candidates (Parks & Kyle)who had Knight and Davison as circulators? When did Parks get into the 62nd district race - I missed that.

Team America said...

Greywolf- the ship has already sailed on contesting the petitions of any other Dem candidate for whom Knight and Davison also circulated petitions. As we saw from the result in the Link hearing today, it's unlikely it would have made a difference anyway.

However, what we can and will do is continue to monitor the investigation of State's Attorney Michael Waller and see what the findings are with respect to the fraud perpetrated by Knight and Davison. Leaving aside Link for the moment, we as voters can always demand that any candidate with tainted petitions withdraw from the race. At the least, they should be called upon to disavow these illegal methods and the taint upon the electoral process, and to join in the demands that Link withdraw as a candidate and chairman of the LC Dem party.

fibblefester said...

No one has claimed that Link either directed the fraud or even knew of it. It seems like the circulators were trying to pad their bill as it were by returning petitions with false signatures. That is why it is bad to pay anyone to collect signatures for you especially if that person is an unemployed, desperate individual. If the circulators did commit fraud, and by their own admissions in the hearings apparantly did, then they are in trouble. Should Link suffer for their actions, well that is already happening. But calling for him to withdraw is pure political hyperbole and ridiculous. In the end, this is all about a couple of idiots trying to rip off Link and the party. In the future the Dems should refrain from paying people to collect signatures, check the petitions more closely before notarizing them and maybe get the candidates out themselves to collect their own signatures as much as possible.

fibblefester said...

I was wondering about all of the names that were stricken from Jerry Johnson's petitions. Is there any consideration of fraud there? There were an awful lot of them that were not valid. Maybe an investigation into this mess should include a look at both of the candidates petitions.

Team America said...

Fibber- I guess you can look at it two ways. On one hand, maybe you are right, and Link is guilty of no more than extremely poor judgment in leaving his petition campaign to his right-hand man, Pete Couvall, who apparently decided the easier way to get the job done was to hire these two jokers. Couvall then notarized ALL of the petitions. While it is unclear as to whether the State's Attorney's investigation is going to implicate Couvall as complicit in a scheme to perpetrate voter fraud, the fact that he was the man in charge, and he is Terry's #2 goon, doesn't make Link look good, at best. And remember, this is not an isolated incident of a few circulators "cheating" and turning in some bad petition sheets to make some easy money--these two guys were the CENTERPOINT of Link's petition drive, accounting for over 2000 sigs between the two of them (which is ridiculous in and of itself), which was more than 75% of Link's total sigs. You think Couvall might have wanted to do a little checking up on these guys?

On the other hand, Link is the guy at the top. His name is on the petitions. The buck stops with him, etc., etc., You think if Couvall and Link had even glanced at the petitions they might have noticed similarities in handwriting and obvious names like Chuck Fitzgerald, Link's two-time former opponent? And Couvall at least is not clean, according to the testimony of Davison, who stated that Couvall wanted him to change his drivers license to match the petitions after the fact. If you think Link and Couvall did not coordinate on the petitions, and Link was oblivious, then shame on him, and you.

But for me, the biggest criticism against Link is how he's handled the situation. When the story broke, did he say, I will immediately investigate and get to the bottom of this? NO. He made a few ham-handed comments to the media, alternately blaming "republican operatives" or people playing "games." He has not so far taken any responsibility whatsoever. In fact, all he has done is play the system, and thumbed his nose at the State's Attorney's official investigation, essentially saying 'you can't touch me.'

This isn't the guy that I want as my state senator. And yes, he ought to resign, not only as senator, but as head of the Dem party. Let's see how much support he continues to have as the investigation heats up and the other Dem candidates all of a sudden find Link to be a little radioactive. The word is that none of them ever really liked him much anyway, so I can see a mass exodus of rats leaving the sinking Link ship if the investigation starts closing in...

Thanks for stopping by, though, fibber. Maybe there's a job opening for being an apologist for Link. He looks like he's going to need it.

As to Johnson, I assume the reason he hasn't been investigated (who knows either way until it's made public) is that none of the Link telltale signs were on Johnson's petitions. NO obvious similarities in handwriting, no dead people, lots of different people passing petitions (not just two), etc., etc.

Anonymous said...

Dear Fibblefester;

As I witnessed during these hearings, the first part of the objection process is a survey of the petitions by the Illinois State Board of Elections. All objected signatures that belong to those not registered to vote, or belong to addresses that reside outside the district, are sustained.

This happens quite a bit when circulators stand in front of a post office or grocery store and ask people to sign petitions. The best way to circulate petitions is to get voter registration lists and then go to door to get them to sign up. The second best way would be at local fundraisers where local voters and activists attend.

So in Johnson's case and in Link's case, during the "first round" of the process, both candidates had half of their signatures bounced for those reasons. Unfortunately for Johnson, that left him short of the 1,000 needed to stay on the ballot after the first round. Fortunately for Link, he still had an extra 700 to survive.

Johnson also objected that two circulators used false addresses and that many signatures were not genuine. The Hearing Officer removed around 200 or so additional signatures obtained by the Link campaign on that basis, but refused to remove signatures where fraud became apparent during the hearing. When did fraud and criminal activity become apparent during the hearing? When the Hearing Officer began advising Davidson and Knight that they had the right to have their own lawyers present and that they had the right to take the Fifth Amendment during their testimony.

The Hearing Officer ultimately concluded that 18 of 27 signature pages obtained by circulator Davidson should be removed, accounting for those additional removed signatures that survived the first round. And mind you, Davidson testified that he signed other people's names to the petition, or would tell others to sign names of missing individuals. She kept the remaining 9 pages (around 450 signatures) and did not bounce those and admitted when she rendered her ruling on the record that this action "strained logic." So 18 pages were removed on Davidson's admission that he lied about his residency, but 9 pages where he admitted that he lied about his residency were not removed. Now is the time to pause and think about that and go: HUH? Subtract the 450 signatures from the roughly 1500 that the hearing officer recommended certifying, and Link comes very close to being bounced. Knight's "signatures" that survived round one would have still kept Link alive unless the Hearing Officer decided they were obtained by a pattern of fraud.

Does a pattern of fraud exist here with Knight's "signatures"?

Death certificates of five individuals who died well before the period of circulation began were objected to by the Link campaign. The Hearing officer sustained the objection. Sworn affidavits from around 24 individuals whose names are signed to these petitions stating that they never signed the petition and the signature is not theirs were also not allowed into evidence by the hearing officer.

Testimony by the landlord that the Knight of the Roundtable (Mr. Telephone book circulator, Mr. Dead person signature obtainer, Mr. Charles Fitzgerald signature obtainer, Mr. signature obtainer that all those affidavits screamed were forgeries) that he lived at the Oxford House from 9-7-07 to 11-9-07 was directly contradicted by testimony of the landlord stating he was no where near the place. Knight couldn't come up with a rent receipt, a key or any evidence that he lived there other than he shared a room with someone on the second floor someplace. He was arrested in Zion on 11-7-07 and gave the Zion police a far south side Chicago address as his residence. The landlord stated that Knight resided there in early 2006 and was not a resident of the Oxford House since then. Knight testified that he personally witnessed each and every signature he obtained. Including those from the dead signers!

Bounce the remaining Knight signatures, and Link too would have been bounced from the ballot. And his lawyers knew that, the word "objection" was uttered by all THREE of them repeatedly during the hearing before Goodman.

As I've indicated in other postings, i DEMAND that Lake County Sheriff Curran investigate this matter and turn over all the evidence he obtained to Lake County State's Attorney Waller. No one should get away with this behavior.

I am pleased to Waller take the initiative to start the investigation. If a tiny handful of volunteers can uncover 5 dead men, now 40 affidavits of forged signatures, and pages of ALPHABETIZED signatures taken directly out of the telephone book (and yes, one person figured it out and started matching pages up), then Curren with his team of trained investigators can jump in and find out the rest and get this evidence into proper shape for criminal proceedings.

I saw Link's attorney nervously asking Johnson's attorney if there would be an appeal after the hearing yesterday. A 5-3 vote along party lines is not exactly a ringing endorsement of Link's petitions.

Will there be criminal indictments? Based on the sworn testimony of the transcript I reviewed, I would be shocked if these two circulators aren't charged. Will it go up the ladder to Couvall, Link and the Democratic Party of Lake County?

Time will tell if that will happen or not. These two guys said they were paid for their services. One testified that Couvall tried to get him to change his address after the petitions were filed, something Couvall denied during his testimony.

Who paid them? The Democratic Party of Lake County? The Terry Link Campaign? The other campaigns for whom they circulated petitions for Democrats (Keller, Kyle, Hewitt, etc. etc.) in Lake County?

Those D2's that will be filed with the Illinois State Board of Elections shortly should answer a few more of those questions.

Louis G. Atsaves

Anonymous said...

I agree with Sparty. Castro lives.

Anonymous said...

Democrats in Lake County need to know this:

The Link Scandal will be part of your campaign too. We have pictures of Terry Link with Kyle, Seals, Keller and the like.

Get ready Democrats -- you are going to see a lot of Terry Link in your next campaign.

concerned-citizen said...

Please share those pictures SOON !

I can't wait to see them!

Biggus Dickus said...

TA,

Lost in all this shuffle is a campaign email sent by Dan Seals yesterday. It criticizes Congress for passing the recent government funding bill with earmarks -- and specifically criticizes earmarks requested by Congressman Kirk.

This is a HUGE story. I rummaged through the bill on Thomas and came across a couple of amazing Tenth District items. Dan Seals is now on the record opposing veterans health care in Lake County and support for Tenth District schools.

Two of the major earmark items our congressman was able to secure were $99 million for the final North Chicago Navy-VA hospital construction and an Impact Aid fix for Highland Park and Glenview schools (more federal money to compensate for military children).

Dan Seals apparently does not want our VA Hospital completed. He also wants Highland Park and Glenview schools to go bankrupt -- or worse to raise our taxes.

This is a classic case of inexperience -- Dan Seals opposes Tenth District priorities -- probably because he doesn't live here and never has.

BD

I am Sparticus said...

BD,

Further to your point, Kirk released all his earmark requests over the summer to the Chicago Tribune. They were all fully vetted, transparent and voted upon in Committee hearings, in the House and then in the Senate.

Why would Dan Seals oppose health care for veterans and education for military kids right before Christmas? Talk about a Grinch!!!

Sparty

Anonymous said...

I just saw the email!

Dan Seals would have voted AGAINST the bill that has:

-- The Durbin/Kirk legislation to help schools, written by the leaders of Highland Park, Glenview and North Chicago.

-- The $100 million for our Veterns Hospital.

-- The O'Hare security upgrades in the bill.

Wow -- another Seals mistake. He lost the Teachers Endorsement, got outraised by Footlik, creamed at the Trib and can't keep a job.

I wonder if Jay Footlik knows about this...

ProudVet said...

TA,

That's the last straw. I cannot sit by and watch a candidate for Congress try to block access to quality health care for more than 50,000 Lake County veterans.

What other Kirk earmarks were there in this bill that Dan Seals is now opposing? I bet there were some good environment projects...and maybe mass transit?

ProudVet

TreeHugger said...

Anon 7:31,

It's really just an unbelievable mistake. If I was Jay Footlik, I'd send out a mailing and drop phone calls immediately to Highland Park, Glenview and North Chicago letting them know that Dan Seals opposed a bill giving more money to their school districts to offset the cost of military families.

I'd also send a mailing to every senior letting them know Dan Seals opposed the North Chicago Navy-VA Hospital construction.

Wow -- this is insane.

TH

Biggus Dickus said...

TA,

This also means Dan Seals opposes additional funding for the Consumer Product Safety Commission to help keep kids safe from dangerous Chinese toys?

BD

I am Sparticus said...

BD,

Not just that, but he also opposes $5 billion for Global HIV/AIDS, almost a billion dollars for Darfur relief and $60 million for Iranian democracy programs. Not a good day in Seals land.

Sparty

TreeHugger said...

TA,

It gets better. Dan Seals is now opposing the bill containing $2.4 billion in military aid for Israel. Dan Seals has finally shown his true face when it comes to Israel.

TH

Anonymous said...

I just did a search on Senator Durbin's Web site where he takes credit for every earmark in Illinois. Dan Seals is now on the record opposing them all. Here are some highlights:

University of Chicago Hospitals, Chicago: $600,000 to research and develop better detection of breast cancer in African-American women.

Easter Seals Metropolitan Chicago:$536,000 for a therapeutic School and Center for Autism Research.

Are you kidding me, Dan? You oppose money for breast cancer and autism? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU????

Biggus Dickus said...

TH,

Seals is now opposed to Metra's STAR line project to connect the northwest suburbs with O'Hare and downtown. The bill contained a $30 million earmark for the Metra Connects program which is a coordinated plan to address transportation issues and meet the population explosions within Northeast Illinois.

The bill also had earmarks of $7 million for each of the four major Metra extensions (STAR line, UP West Extension, UP Northwest Line, Southeast Service Line).

Dan Seals -- pro-gridlock, anti-economic development, anti-environment.

BD

Anonymous said...

Dan Seals opposes funding for Great Lakes Naval Training Center. This means jobs for Tenth District families!

"Great Lakes Naval Training Center, North Chicago: $26.871 million for infrastructure upgrades ($16.65 million) and a weapons training facility ($10.221 million) at the Great Lakes Naval Training Center."

Anonymous said...

Can someone please post the Seals email?

Anonymous said...

Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007
From: "Dan Seals" info@dansealsforcongress.com
Subject: In Congress, It’s the Time of Year for Taking

Dear Friend,

It's that time of year again. The snow is on the ground, the holiday spirit is in the air, and the gift-giving is underway.



And nowhere is this gift-giving more apparent than Congress' most recent spending bill, which gave billions of dollars in pork to the big special interests and lumps of coal to our children, grandchildren, and future generations to come.



That's right. Just this week, Congress sent a spending bill to the president that contained a side-splitting 9,000 earmarks, pet projects of individual members of Congress that are slipped into legislation at the last minute, financed with taxpayer money, and never debated or scrutinized before being signed into law. Given that we as a nation are already in debt, future taxpayers, like my kids, will pick up the bill.



Some of these earmarks surely go to good projects. But too many of them don't. The problem is that the process of earmarking doesn't give us any way to tell. That's because the decisions about what gets funded and what doesn't get made behind closed doors and without debate. That is an invitation for waste and abuse.



The Democrats that took control of Congress in 2006 point out that they have taken steps to reform this process. They have not gone far enough. The system of earmarks should end. 9000 earmarks isn't a victory for anyone, but it is a definite loss for the taxpayer. I can think of no good reason why we should continue supporting a system that encourages waste and abuse.



Our Congressman, Mark Kirk, can apparently think of 140 million reasons. He asked Congress for a staggering $140 million in pet projects to be funded by taxpayer dollars. Again, I'm sure there are some good projects in there. But if so, why not bring them into the light and have them voted on? The only one who has anything to lose is the project that shouldn't receive any funding in the first place. And that's the way it should be. But this is Congress, where it is better to take than to give. It's one more reason why we need a change in Congress.



Sincerely,


Dan Seals
Democrat for Congress

I am Sparticus said...

Anons:

I don't think it's fair to say Dan Seals is opposing the appropriations bill. I think it IS fair to say he's opposing the earmarks.

For those posters claiming Seals is now against large programs, I don't think that's credible.

For those posters claiming he's against earmarks for the VA Hospital, Highland Park schools, breast cancer/autism funding, Great Lakes and more, you are 100% correct.

Dan Seals will have a lot of explaining to do to the voters. Under the new Congress' earmark reform process, all of these requests were supposed to be fully vetted and transparent -- and I believe all of Kirk's were.

Seals is opposed to Tenth District veterans health care, Chicago-area medical research, job creation, Metra access and funding for local school districts. Wow!

Sparty

Anonymous said...

Thanks for explaining all of this, Sparty. Dan Seals shows his total lack of understanding on every issue that's important not just in the 10th District, but in IL. To oppose the research funds for breast cancer and for autism defies understanding. His "tutors" like Ms. Shrill and her buddy, LB Gash must be mighty proud of their protege. I wonder what Senator Durbin will say when he reads this simplistic email. Dan Seals is a guy who needs a refresher course on the basics of government. What took Mark Kirk, Durbin and Obama a few years to pull off in the Impact Aid funding, this clown would elminate with one vote. What next. Dan Seals is such a light weight.

I am Sparticus said...

Anon 8:41 -- You are on the money. What amazes me is how stupid Dan Seals is to highlight Kirk's legislative successes.

Here's Kirk, a member of the minority party and supposedly high up on the Democratic target list, walking home with more than $100 million of quality, transparent projects to improve life for his constituents. Some of them were joint projects with Durbin and Obama.

So Seals is drawing everyone's attention to the fact that Kirk is a likable moderate Republican who gets along and works closely with Democrat leaders -- and, in the end, can still produce for his district even in the minority.

And we'd vote for Seals, why?

Sparty

Anonymous said...

I worked for Senator Durbin. You are incorrect -- Sen. Durbin didn't just vote for this bill, HE WROTE IT. Our Senator is the Number two Senator, a leader on appropriations for Illinois and just behind the Majority Leader (who also supported this bill).

It worries me when one of our candidates messes up like this. Jay Footlik might be more careful. Senior Democrats do not take to being told by junior candidates that they made a mistake on a bill they authored.

This bill was strongly supported by Democrats including the senior Senator, Sen. Obama, Rep. Emmanuel and the rest of Illinois Democrats.

Anonymous said...

Seals may have really sunk this race for the Democrats. Seals is now against every major local initiative on key issues like health care, education, environment, transportation, etc.

He CANNOT FLIP FLOP either because to do so would endorse Mark Kirk's experience and accomplishments. Will Seals now come out in support of the Kirk-led expansion of the VA Hospital or Highland Park school fix? If he does, he is praising Kirk...so why would we vote for Seals? If Seals doesn't, he's now on the record OPPOSING these things.

Memo to the DCCC -- you have just lost IL 10.

Anonymous said...

I'm shaking my head in disbelief that Seals could have sent that email. Not only is his showing total ignorance of the process, he has just thumbed his nose at some of the most urgent needs of this district and the state. What IS he thinking? Or, more to the point, why DIDN'T he think about what he was saying to the voters out here. He doesn't get it. To say that he'd also strip the funding to defend Israel's security seals the deal on that score. I agree with Anon 9:29 that there's no credible way for him to say, oops, I made a mistake and didn't mean what I sent. Advantage Footlik on this one. Dan is clueless, after all this time, about what a congressman does out there in DC. His email is proof positive. And this guy is a University of Chicago MBA. Are we sure?

Anonymous said...

Dan Seals would opposes funding to prevent breast cancer in African Americans. That's pathetic.

Anonymous said...

What would Dan Seals get the troops for Christmas?

A closed Navy-VA Hospital and no education for their children.

Way to support the troops, Dan.

I am Sparticus said...

TA,

I think this Seals incident is directly related to his comments before the Tribune editorial board. Dan Seals thinks everyone in the Tenth District is a millionaire -- he despises the constituency he seeks to represent.

Now he says, let the millionaires build their own Navy-VA hospital. Let the millionaires provide more Impact Aid funding to schools in Highland Park, North Chicago and Glenview.

Let the millionaires fund expansions to Metra.

Let the millionaires fund breast cancer and autism research.

--Dan Seals doesn't like you. He thinks you're just some millionaire.

--Dan Seals doesn't want your schools to get money

--Dan Seals wants to block access to health care for our veterans

--Dan Seals opposes local efforts to prevent breast cancer and autism.

--Dan Seals opposes Metra expansion.

Maybe Dan's just angry at the world that he can't keep a job down, and this is his way of lashing out?

Sparty

biggus dickus said...

Sparty, I've found another gem earmark that Senator Durbin takes credit for -- looks like Dan Seals is pro-meth.

Illinois Sheriffs Association: $200,000 for law enforcement and clean-up of methamphetamine production and abuse. This builds on FY06 COPS Methamphetamine funding the Sheriffs Association used for public awareness around methamphetamine and equips sheriffs around the state with technical and logistical assistance specific to controlling methamphetamine.

Vote for Dan Seals -- he wants your kids to abuse meth.

BD

TreeHugger said...

Durbin's little Web site seems to be Dan's worst nightmare right now. Here's what I found in the bill that support my key issue -- the environment. It's clear that Dan Seals opposes federal efforts to fight invasive species.


* Chicago Ship and Sanitary Canal Aquatic Nuisance Species Barrier System, Chicago: $9.25 million for the demonstration barrier and Barrier II, including $500,000 to maintain a consistent flow of electricity in order to keep operational the current demonstration barrier and $8 million to make permanent a system to eliminate potential bypasses of non-indigenous aquatic nuisance species such as the Asian Carp. Language was included in the Water Resources Development Act to make permanent the demonstration barrier and complete construction of Barrier II.


* Asian Longhorn Beetle: $353,000 to the City of Chicago and State of Illinois for continued work on removal of the Asian Longhorn Beetle.


* Emerald Ash Borer, Statewide: $1.5 million for the State of Illinois to conduct field research and to mobilize efforts to identify, remove, and dispose of infested trees.


* Shedd Aquarium Center for the Great Lakes, Chicago: $260,000 for Great Lakes conservation education. The Great Lakes initiative will target eight states and two Canadian provinces with awareness and education messages about the value and vulnerability of the Great Lakes and the need to protect against habitat loss, shoreline degradation, water diversion, invasive species and declining water quality.

Dan Seals: Wrong on the environment.

TH

i could be potus said...

I think everyone is being a little hard on our Seal pup. Danno may not support funding for healthcare for our vets and their families, or funding for our schools, or cancer research dollars, or safe toys for our kids.

But, so what. Who cares about that really important stuff.

We need to keep our eye on the ball here folks. We cannot loose sight of the fact that Danno DOES support "peace." Now that's the type of leadership I'm looking for in my Congressman.

(Sorry, batteries and towel to remove dripping sarcasm not included with this post.)

Anonymous said...

"Seals opposes Durbin bill."

Nice job, Dan, for messing up our Democratic message.

Rookie