Saturday, November 28, 2009

Bird Overdone in IL-10 and Other Thanksgiving Stories

I hope everyone had a truly wonderful Thanksgiving holiday - TA took some time off from politics, but is better for it and is ready to dive in for a rockin' and rollin' primary race, and then on to the general.

There's been some interesting developments here and there over the last couple days, so let's spend some time playing catch-up, and then we'll start hitting hard later this week.

First off, the Daily Herald is reporting that the on-again, off-again campaign of 10th District GOP contender Patricia Bird is finally over - not that it ever really got too far off the ground. As we suggested a while ago, her attitude seemed much more attuned to running for school board, not Congress, and after TA watched her performance at the RJC GOP debate, Bird earned the very first official "Not Recommended" designation from Team America. This doesn't do too much to winnow the GOP field down, since we still have six candidates - but it leaves State Representative Beth Coulson as the only female contender, which should be an advantage for her.

We also saw a major endorsement for U.S Senate for Congressman Mark Kirk coming from fellow Congressman Aaron Schock of the Peoria area. As Rick Pearson at the Chicago Tribune's Clout Street blog opined,

Schock’s endorsement could help Kirk as the socially moderate Chicago-area congressman tries to establish conservative bona fides to win the GOP primary in a crowded field. Kirk’s opponents have questioned his conservative credentials.

Schock, who represents a traditionally conservative central Illinois district, lauded Kirk’s opposition to the federal stimulus program, the Democratic-led House health care reform proposal, and labor-backed “card check” legislation that would make it easier for unions to organize.


Schock joins Congressmen Judy Biggert, John Shimkus and Peter Roskam in endorsing Kirk - each of whom, with the possible exception of Biggert, are all seen as more conservative than Kirk.

It's becoming more and more apparent that the Dems are really concerned about keeping the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Roland Burris in Dem hands - especially if Mark Kirk gets the GOP nomination and IL State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias gets the Dem nod. Some of the best info about Giannoulias is being set forth by his own inter-party competition, as shown an interview of Dem contender (and former Assistant U.S. Attorney and Chicago Inspector General) David Hoffman by Public Affairs host Jeff Berkowitz. (h/t Illinois Review).

Of course, the best result for the GOP is for the Dems to effectively beat up and bloody Alexi in the primary, but that he hangs on to be the Dem nominee for the general.

On the GOP side, Mark Kirk still appears to be the strong front-runner, despite effort from my law school chum Pat Hughes to gain traction. Lately, Hughes has been working hard to win the endorsement of conservative senator Jim DeMint, who heads the Senate Conservatives Fund (SCF). Hughes promoted the fact he went to D.C. last week to beg for the SCF's support, but we've heard nary a word as to whether any such endorsement will issue. Hughes doesn't need an endorsement from a South Carolina senator nearly as much as he needs big money to gain some much-needed name recognition among primary voters. So, even if an endorsement by DeMint/SCF comes eventually, unless there is a gigantic check attached to it, it's not going to get Pat where he needs to be.

If the SCF endorsement was obtained by Hughes already, I would not have announced it over Thanksgiving weekend either, so maybe his trip wasn't for nothing. We'll see. However, according to the SCF website, "SCF only endorses the most rock-solid conservative Senate candidates nationwide. These candidates must also have the potential to win." It's the second sentence that ought to be troubling to the SCF, in terms of whether Hughes is a good investment. So far, no reputable polling shows Hughes anywhere near to striking distance with Kirk - and with millions in campaign funds to Hughes' pittance, Kirk will obviously spend whatever it takes to emerge victorious in February.

I've been thinking about Pat's message lately, and I have a few questions I'm saving for him when he comes to the Libertyville Township endorsement session in a few weeks. But here's one freebie: If Hughes' shtick is that he's an unwavering platform conservative who can be counted never to sway from rock-solid conservative ideals, with no compromise (just check out his talking points set forth at the SCF website), how the heck is Pat going to attract moderate Republicans and independents to enable a win in the general?

In a recent discussion with Pat, it became clear to me that Pat thinks that Illinois is a lot more conservative than anyone else seems to believe. Well, tell that to Alan Keyes (who received only 27% of the vote in his 2004 senate battle against Barack Obama - and, of course, Obama went on to win Illinois in the 2008 presidential election with 61.9% of the vote). Regardless, no Republican can win in Illinois unless a large majority of self-identifying Republicans (both moderate and conservatives) as well as a hefty portion of independents vote for the GOP nominee. Otherwise, the Chicago machine is simply going to roll right over us, as usual. I simply don't think that any candidate besides Mark Kirk has the experience and organization to stand a chance.

We have about two months and some change before the February primary. With Christmas/Hanukkah mixed in, that's not much time for the primary candidates to make their moves. I think the U.S. Senate race on the GOP side is pretty much over with Kirk the inevitable winner, but IL-10, and of course, the governor's race, is still pretty much open, though I predict a front-runner will emerge in both by the first week or two in January. Stay tuned to Team America as we move forward...

37 comments:

Anonymous said...

They are scared of Mark, as long as he gets past the bush thing, which he's had 10 years of experience beating back-and which won't matter with him in crawford letting Rob Salitterman write his press releases,the flip flop thing won't stick in a recession where people want leadership, it's game set match. I think they will come at him really hard really early with perhaps a bombardment of ads in the spring to define him. If they wait until the fall, he'll have won the media, and Dodie McCracken will be asking herself whether she'd have had office space in a senate office building if she hadn't pissed off team MSK.

It's hard to recall a whitehouse ever talking down a candidate as much as Alexi's been talked down. Maybe Lincoln chafee. My best bet on that is that they know just how ugly the blago thing is going to get and want no part of the taint that will be on everything after it.

Locally the only guy that looks good so far besides fightin dan segrue is hamilton chang who google tells me is an accapella guy. I'm sure porter or mark will come in with endorsements for blago beth and cadigan. I've decided the gubernatorial candidates are all junk. Both sides.

FOKLAES

Crazy4glf said...

Bird's ambivalence and lack of committment can be said to be emblematic of some in her party. To advocate for things for the sake of being heard, to say things and even promise things that one could care less about or doesn't really mean, etc. This reminds me of Kirk's purported expertise in military -non-twitter- intelligence (stance on WMD's not- with-standing), and his purported 'preparation' for his vote on the climate/energy bill and his immediate distancing himself from it - of course a few counties over, the man of long-held ideals and fortitude that he is.

That Kirk, a critic of how stimulus funds are spent despite voting against the legislation, is getting attention from a rising Conservative (where many a rising conservative's actual tenure, like Ms. Palin's is limited and tends to be lacking in comprehensiveness, understanding of the real issues (i.e. non-myths or something many people call facts), and objectivity, is not the same thing as BEING a true moderate, hard-working, rhetoric-free public official.
Hence, Kirk has not shown what it takes to represent the progressive state of Illinois. He doesn't seem to have the willingness to represent his own district's priorities much less that of the state, and this is based on his own comments.

As last year's GOP Presidential Primary showed, the number of candidates the GOP has for an office does not imply quality, electability, and having broad (multi-party) support.

Again, it'd be nice to see electoral choice, to not see tests as to who's a real conservative, and to see the interests of Americans in places like Illinois, Ohio, and Kentucky being represented instead of what some of these state's public officials think is best, their ability to quote from the founding documents not-withstanding.

Tell me whom you associate with (Sanford, Keyes and his predecessor Ryan, George Ryan, Bush, and Cheney) and I will tell you about you.

Anonymous said...

you seem to be the only person in illinois still talking about alan keyes. Perhaps you also think rex grossman is still the bears quarterback, that john edwards is the future of the democrat party in the south, that mark mcgwire is headed for the hall of fame, that this facebook thing will never replace friendster, and that blackberries are just a fad.

In case you didn't see the reports, obama's own cbo director predicts employment will be down for half a decade, and repubicans 8-2 are much more inclined to vote next year.

In other words, don't worry about keyes there will be a sh-t ton new gop officeholders in office next year such as senator kirk for you to complain about.

FOKLAES

tikkunolam said...

"Obama's own CBO director?" Try again, FOKLAES.

Anonymous said...

Crazy,

With all due respect, you're really sounding pathetic.

First off, if Illinois is "progressive" then what exactly does "progressive" mean? Corrupt, an inability to be forthright, a poor steward of tax dollars, incompetent in government finance, or WHAT? The Dems control everything and if THEY are Progressive THEN Progressive = failure. Point 1

Point 2 - If you want to start connecting Mark to every GOPer with problems then let's start connecting Sexi Lexi with every DEM with problems; Ready - go - Blago (Rod, Rob & Patti), Rezko & Co., John Harris, Mel Reynolds, Dan Rostenkowski, the Greylord Gang and in 2005, the FBI added a 3rd Public Corruption Sqad, giving Illinois the largest public corruption unit in the COUNTRY. There are so many names I could write but my fingers would fall off!

Stick to the facts for a change and if you like Illinois current reputation, fiscal condition, and reputation, then keep on voting for your "progressives", but many of us believe there is a better future for Illinois - it's just a matter of educating the public that if they keep sending the same old @$#@ to Springfield, they'll get the same government they have today...and it is pathetic!

Blue Wind said...

I agree on something. That Kirk is by far the strongest candidate the GOP could have and if anyone has a real chance to win the seat that would be him. He is clearly a very smart and effective politician.

Having said that, Kirk will lose to Gianoulias (who I believe will be the candidate at the end). In fact, Kirk would have lost his seat in IL10 if it was not for Dan Seals who was a very weak candidate and failed to attack him and properly challenge him. Gianoulias is not like that. He is very tough.

The problem Kirk has is that he was all along a "rubber stamp" for the Bush administration and supported very strongly all major mistakes the Bush administration made in foreign policy. He is also against (real) health care reform that has the overwhelming support of IL voters. The reality is that Illinois is not a state for republican senators. Check the history. It is a deeply blue state and the next new senator will be also democrat.

Again, in my opinion Kirk made a huge error not to run for governor. He would have won easily that race, but he will be defeated decisively in the senate race.

Anonymous said...

Anon 7:26 you are so off base as to almost be funny. Mark Kirk beat Dan Seals, who did come after Kirk in 2 election cycles with both guns blazing, because voters in this district could easily see and hear who was the someone they wanted to represent them in DC. You are way off base on saying that Kirk is not committed to real healthcare reform. Have you read and heard him speak about the reforms that he knows will help not just those of us in this corrupt, Democrat run State, but all over the nation? I'm sure you're clueless. Your side won't be able to pass that pathetic excuse for a reform package without buying off folks like Mary Landreiu and others with bribes for votes. Reform IS needed, but not what your side of the aisle is talking about. As for Mark Kirk and his Senate campaign. Alexi may be tough, but he's part of the same old, same old, and in any kind of debate with Congressman Kirk, it won't even be funny. Mark Kirk will be Senator Kirk next November. Count on it.

Anonymous said...

elmendorf is the cbo director. google it, friend.

foklaes

Anonymous said...

>>>>>>
The problem Kirk has is that he was all along a "rubber stamp" for the Bush administration and supported very strongly all major mistakes the Bush administration made in foreign policy.
<<<<<

Ah, you must be from one of those "alternative universes" found in Star Trek and other sci-fi.

Apparently the President Bush from your universe supported abortion on demand, opposed legislation to protect traditional marriage, wanted to confiscate all guns, was a huge proponent of hate crimes legislation, strongly endorsed the UN "climate change" rules, strongly opposed ANWR drilling, endorsed SCHIP, favoring raising CAFE standards, special Protections for "Transgendered Americans”, and of course was extremely outspoken against the Iraq surge, not to mention he favored dozens of other major pieces of Democrat legislation.

Bush would have to endorse all those things in order for Kirk to be a "rubber stamp" for his agenda.

Over here in the real world and present-day reality, Mark Kirk was indeed a rubber-stamp... for Nancy Pelosi, not Bush. Although he calls himself a "Republican", the American Conservative Union and numerous other GOP watchdog groups reported that he sided with liberal Democrats on the majority of contentious issues, especially since the Dems took power in Jan. 2007.

It is true that the hardcore right-wing and the hardcore left-wing both hate Mark Kirk. That doesn't show that he's "middle of the road", though. It shows that the right wing hates him because his career record proves he votes to the left of many card-carrying Democrat official in Illinois, whereas the left-wing hates him because they live in some delusional fantasy world where any person who ever shook hands with George W. Bush once is a "rubber stamp" for him (they hate Joe Lieberman for the same reason, even though Joe does their bidding 95% of the time)

Anonymous said...

I was in the navy for 21 years, including six months near Baghdad, and I don't think that Bush made any major foreign policy mistakes. While I was in the Triangle of Death, I rarely heard my co-workers, (mostly marines and soldiers) complain about being there. After I returned to the U.S., I've heard many people, who haven't served in the military, complain about it.

Conservative Veteran

Anonymous said...

Conservative Veteran,

Thanks for your service - I wish more folks would listen to our military personnel that served (and continue to serve) overseas. Nearly 75% of our military voted for McCain and those figures speak volumes about Bush' commitment to our servicemen and women and keeping our Country safe.

Funny how the Dems are continuously seeking a "timetable for withdrawal" when it comes to military action abroad but no "timetable for withdrawal" on social services or programs that create the demand for entitlements we are facing today.

At the rate we're going, tax rates for the middle class will hover around 42% to 44% within the next decade, with a new slogan "The American Scheme" instead of "the American Dream".

Anonymous said...

When staff met prior to the "endorsement" meeting with Michael Steele that caused Beth Coulson to lose her voice, it was suggested she might want to stay put in the IL House or risk having that seat go Dem after the HRC has spent hundreds of thousands to defend it and she might lose in the 10th too.

tikkunolam said...

CBO's independent. Elmendorf's not "Obama's own" anything. It's alright, everyone gets CBO and OMB mixed up.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Tikkun,

Elmendorf was a strategist for Gephardt. The same gephardt whose aide quit on lauren beth gash because she was half pit bull half pig in the words of one of his former colleagues-also might have had to do with her near divorce. It's also good to see she's been fired and replaced by some new bum at 10th dems. Perhaps all their losing is finally bringing an end to that bastion of anti-israel sentiment.

Dold needs to do the full jeff berkowitz show before I can get behind him. If he's afraid of 30 minutes of questions he should be able to answer in his sleep by now, I don't have faith in him. I am glad his people are leaking minutes of his staff meeting here though. Leaks worked really well for the kerry campaign.

Tikun isn't it past your bed time?

FOKLAES

Blue Wind said...

Conservative Veteran,
You are simply VERY wrong. Bush made catastrophic mistakes for the interests of the US and the world. That is why he is considered by the majority of this country as one of the very worst (if not THE worst) president in the history of the USA. Not to mention that the whole world agrees with that view as well.

Anonymous said...

Hey, Blue Wind, when it comes to titles I would tell you that WORST belongs to Jimmy Carter who still seems to be a huge bother to our world. Under Bush we didn't have the greatest President, but he made damn sure that we never again had to suffer the loss of 3000 innocent people. You seem to hate Bush. Not everyone shares that feeling. And the jury is WAY OUT on this current team screwing up our nation, but they are, at this time, surely in need of major help in every area they've been trying to help. The Obama guy is a huge disappointment, even to many in your own party. Be careful about your titles, especially now.

Team America said...

Blue Wind, it's time to stop blaming the last guy and have your guy show some real leadership. Interesting article" in the WSJ this morning regarding the failure of Obama's diplomacy to move the meter of the world's view of the U.S.- and in fact, it suggests that by selling out the U.S. on his apology tour, Obama's actually done worse for the U.S., given the Arab critical view of those who backstab their own.

Gold Fish said...

Good pick-up on the article. Obama is proving to be more flash than substance. He speaks well but cannot deliver. When he cannot deliver he blames someone else. THAT is the Chicago/Illinois way of doing things.

Anonymous said...

No way Dold does the Berkowitz show or any other media. They will pounce on the abortion issue and expose his waffling.

Anonymous said...

Team,

This was a good call. What the liberal intelligentsia forgets is that these folks loved us so much during the clinton administration they let al-qaeda target Americans in saudi arabia, the sudan, kenya, tanzania, new york-twice, not to mention all the wto protests that basically blew up seattle. We look weaker.

Also you forget that obama is now liked by approximately 4 in 100 Israelis. It's really really hard for a foreign leader to get liked by only 4 percent of Israelis.

Also good to see over the weekend that obama's chicago style politics-putting his political hacks like desiree rogers in charge of SES jobs almost got him whacked.

FOKLAES

Anonymous said...

As for Dold, perhaps he hasn't been around local politics very long but the first question republicans are always asked is where do you stand on abortion. The guy needs to come out, do the berkowitz show, show us he's not just a suit floating through life and actually can defend himself. Berkowitz isn't exactly Tim Russert, but he asks the sort of questions that need to be done. I don't know him, but it's a good show. Besides he usually talks half the time anyway.

Firing off an nrcc fill in the blanks press release against pelosi isn't that impressive.

FOKLAES

Anonymous said...

Good call on how great the Chicago-style folks are at doing their jobs in the White House. I'm sure that Desiree was having herself one great time at the party and just forgot to assign herself or anyone else the job to double check who really was waltzing into the party. Had those 2 nutjobs been carrying something that the magnatometers can't detect, like anthrax or worse, just imagine what would have happened at the party of the year. Nope, Obama and his Chicago buddies are doing themselves any favors. And did you notice that his best buddies were there, big time. THAT'S the Chicago way, folks. Oh yes, and Andy Stern, head of SEIU made the list. This should make it 23 visits THIS YEAR. I think that's some kind of record. On the serious side, it's the SEIU buddies that have me worried about what they have in mind to skew the Senate election here in our State.

Anonymous said...

"Also you forget that obama is now liked by approximately 4 in 100 Israelis." FOKLAES, we promote the use of real research on this blog, not statistics that are fabricated by Fox 'News' and Rush Limbaugh.

Anonymous said...

"Also you forget that obama is now liked by approximately 4 in 100 Israelis." FOKLAES, we promote the use of real research on this blog, not statistics that are fabricated by Fox 'News' and Rush Limbaugh.

Anonymous said...

Just to set the record straight. What Foklaes has stated about 4% of Israelis liking and having confidence in Obama has been verified many times over in both the Jerusalem Post and other Israeli media. This has nothing to do with Limbaugh or anyone in this country. Why on earth would the average Israeli have any real confidence in Obama or this administration. But Foklaes is giving a very correct figure so apologize for your false attack.

Anonymous said...

For the record, Coulson cancelled her appearance on Berkowitz too.

tikkunolam said...

Wow, FOKLAES, impressive pivot to the LBG slam. Although I'm not sure what you mean by "fired.". You have any evidence for that?

Anonymous said...

4 in 100 israelis approve of the job obama is doing. this is a fact that's been cited in every major publication on the planet. perhaps not at moveon.org israel hatefest you attended where Israel is tied to neocons and major corporations as the source of all that is evil in the world.

next october when a smelly 9th districter comes to your door to tell you how cadigan or dold is the 2nd coming of evil, I bet if you ask them about Israel they'll tell you they kind of think that the beaches would be a lot better if there were more kaffeiyas and fewer yarmulkes.

FOKLAES

Anonymous said...

"smelly 9th districter" Post of the election season so far!

tikkunolam said...

FOKLAES, I've been zooming around on the internet for a while now, and still can't find anything to back up your bizarre claim that Lauren Beth Gash is no longer in charge of Tenth Dems. It's odd that you are the only one talking about this, seeing as you're all the way in DC. Time, to put your cards on the table, mate.

By the way, it's one of life's little ironies that the security word for my post right now is "fibby."

Anonymous said...

tikun,

read their july newsletter at tenthdems.org. page 1.

it was up there in august.

FOKLAES

Anonymous said...

Their December newsletter lists LBG as "Chairman."

Louis G. Atsaves

tikkunolam said...

Swing and a miss, FOKLAES. They hired an executive director, Lauren Beth is still the Chairwoman, which is the same title she's had since the founding. The organization got bigger, they hired more staff.

Easy said...

FOKLBS never lets the truth get in the way of a good post...I'm still waiting for the back-up that says coulson endorsed Blago.

Anonymous said...

If gash is staying on all the better. Bottom line, they brought in a sleazy operative from the city to do what democrats there have done here, which is dirty politics and worse governing. Except the dead person vote to surge and to see lots of labor hacks (former coulson foot soldiers) come into your neighborhoods.

FOKLAES

tikkunolam said...

Sleazy operative from the city? She's a long-time staffer for Kathy Ryg, a suburban rep. All that time in DC has left your Chicagoland geography a little rusty.

Anonymous said...

It says on their website she worked for john cullerton, a hack senator in the city who was BFF with coulson's pal, big blago.

Kathy Ryg is a total joke. She's a tool of the machine like every other fake "progressive" that has been foisted upon the north shore over the last decade.

democrat leaders like ryg, schoenberg, garrett(we miss greg kazarian and even corinne wood), may, gash, have been up here now for parts of 2 decades and the question is are we better off now than we were then.

The answer is heck no.

Team America for Governor.

Thanks

FOKLAES