Someone brought to my attention a new blog, "Only in Illinois," devoted to Illinois politics. There certainly isn't any lack of raw material to work with, that's for sure.
I like the snarky, edgy tone of this new blog, especially since the post I happened upon dealt with our perennial 10th District carpetbagger from the 9th District, Dan Seals. If you've been following comments here, you know that Seals somehow got the Tribune to give him a few inches of space last week to sound off on the need for campaign contribution reform in Illinois. We could summarize our response to Seals' completely unoriginal rantings on campaign reform by simply saying "Well, Duh!" But this new blog has a more analytical take on Seals' little piece.
Check it out, and welcome to the crazy world of Illinois politics, Only In Illinois!
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Monday, January 12, 2009
Michael Madigan's Latest: Don't Blame Us, a Call for a Special Election Probably Wouldn't Have Worked Anyway
Well, the Illinois/Blago/Burris political landscape once again looks a little different this Monday morning than it did even last Friday afternoon. Over the past 24 hours, it seems that U.S. Senator Dick Durbin is signaling he has reduced his reliance on the technical signature requirements of the U.S. Senate (which previously was an unbroken rule that simply couldn't be overlooked) and may now decide that Secretary of State Jesse White's signature on just about any document will do. Yet another about-face for Durbin, who really must be getting dizzy.
But this spells woe for the Illinois Dems, who will be not only dealing with the political fallout from the disgraced governor for years to come (just as the GOP was saddled with George Ryan), but will also face the generally unwelcome situation of having Roland Burris (who not only hasn't won a public election for years, but will be forever known as "Blago's pick") at the top of the Dems' ticket in 2010. And whose fault is that, you ask? Well, the Illinois GOP is poised to make sure voters don't forget.
So, the latest gambit in the Illinois Dems' desperate attempts to shift and escape blame for allowing Governor Rod Blagojevich to appoint the replacement to Barack Obama's senate seat is Michael Madigan's claim that "had a bill gone to the governor's desk providing for a special election, Blagojevich would have vetoed the bill, made his appointment and then there'd be a matter of a motion to override in the legislature. But the appointment would have been made."
The Chicago Tribune, at least, seems determined not to let the Illinois Dem leadership, especially Durbin, off the hook, and continues its call for a special election. But, we must be fair to Roland Burris, some say! The Tribune thinks being fair to the citizens of Illinois is a bit more important, and I whole-heartedly agree.
But this spells woe for the Illinois Dems, who will be not only dealing with the political fallout from the disgraced governor for years to come (just as the GOP was saddled with George Ryan), but will also face the generally unwelcome situation of having Roland Burris (who not only hasn't won a public election for years, but will be forever known as "Blago's pick") at the top of the Dems' ticket in 2010. And whose fault is that, you ask? Well, the Illinois GOP is poised to make sure voters don't forget.
So, the latest gambit in the Illinois Dems' desperate attempts to shift and escape blame for allowing Governor Rod Blagojevich to appoint the replacement to Barack Obama's senate seat is Michael Madigan's claim that "had a bill gone to the governor's desk providing for a special election, Blagojevich would have vetoed the bill, made his appointment and then there'd be a matter of a motion to override in the legislature. But the appointment would have been made."
The Chicago Tribune, at least, seems determined not to let the Illinois Dem leadership, especially Durbin, off the hook, and continues its call for a special election. But, we must be fair to Roland Burris, some say! The Tribune thinks being fair to the citizens of Illinois is a bit more important, and I whole-heartedly agree.
Friday, January 9, 2009
To Seat Roland Burris, or Not to Seat Him: What's Dick Durbin Up To? (UPDATED: Trib Continues to Pound Quinn on Special Election)
Illinois Senator Dick Durbin said in a press conference this afternoon that Roland Burris, beleaguered Governor Rod Blagojevich's nominee to fill Barack Obama's U.S. Senate seat, should not be seated in the U.S. Senate, despite a ruling today from the Illinois Supreme Court that says Secretary of State Jesse White's signature on the appointment paperwork is not necessary (White has refused, and continues to refuse, to sign). Durbin on one hand said that the U.S. Senate rule that the Secretary of State had to sign the appointment applies (and has never been waived) regardless of what Illinois law mandates. But Durbin also said that the issue of Burris' appointment should not be filled until the impending trial of Rod Blagojevich concluded, at which point Lt. Governor Pat Quinn would then have the authority to make this appointment "in a clean, legal way and make his recommendation and his appointment known to the United States Senate.''
Of course, this presupposes that Blago will be removed from office after trial in the state senate, although that seems very likely.
So, what's Durbin up to? Let's ignore for a moment that the issue of Jesse White's signature has nothing to do with Durbin's suggestion that the appointment must wait until after the impeachment, unless what he's trying to say is that he assumes that White would sign off on whomever Quinn would appoint, which would then make it a proper appointment under the Senate Rules (uh, does the U.S. Senate really want to say that all state secretaries of state have a de facto veto power over their governors' power to appoint a senator to a vacant seat?).
But the real question is, is Durbin anticipating that Quinn would 're-appoint' Burris to make it all 'nice and legal' (and perhaps attempt to remove the taint of the Blago appointment on Burris to give him a better chance for election in 2010)? Or, and this seems more likely, that the Dem leadership realizes that Burris is vulnerable to a solid GOP challenger like 10th District Congressman Mark Kirk, and they do not want to risk having Burris be the Dem incumbent, who they would have to defeat in a primary.
We the public, of course, are also meant to ignore that at the outset of this whole fiasco, it was Dick Durbin who was beating the special election drum the loudest, until someone whispered "Mark Kirk" in his ear.
Thus, despite the glad-handing that occurred between Senators Reid and Durbin, and Roland Burris the other day, it seems to me that nothing is certain yet. TA is glued to watching this fascinating session of "As Illinois Politics Turns," and I'm sure you all are, too.
Saturday Morning Update: Lots of print news coverage of the impeachment this morning, of course, and you can easily find more yourself (indeed, you can't avoid it), but one thing I wanted to point out this morning was that the Tribune has not let up on its call for Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn to commit to a special election.
The Tribune points out that the seat belongs to the people of the State of Illinois, not Quinn, Durbin, Reid or any other politicians. And, interestingly, if it turns out that the scheme here is for Quinn to legitimize the Burris pick after Blago is removed from office (as we speculated above as one possible reason behind these political gymnastics), the Trib appears strongly opposed to that. The Trib wants Quinn to start showing some leadership, now. Will he?
ALSO- found this Politico.com analysis of the inter-party gyrations that went on in Washington among Durbin, Reid, and other Dems as Blago's surprise appointment of Burris not only caught them completely off-guard, but then made several flubs as Burris and his supporters managed to turn the issue from Blago to one of race. A good read.
Of course, this presupposes that Blago will be removed from office after trial in the state senate, although that seems very likely.
So, what's Durbin up to? Let's ignore for a moment that the issue of Jesse White's signature has nothing to do with Durbin's suggestion that the appointment must wait until after the impeachment, unless what he's trying to say is that he assumes that White would sign off on whomever Quinn would appoint, which would then make it a proper appointment under the Senate Rules (uh, does the U.S. Senate really want to say that all state secretaries of state have a de facto veto power over their governors' power to appoint a senator to a vacant seat?).
But the real question is, is Durbin anticipating that Quinn would 're-appoint' Burris to make it all 'nice and legal' (and perhaps attempt to remove the taint of the Blago appointment on Burris to give him a better chance for election in 2010)? Or, and this seems more likely, that the Dem leadership realizes that Burris is vulnerable to a solid GOP challenger like 10th District Congressman Mark Kirk, and they do not want to risk having Burris be the Dem incumbent, who they would have to defeat in a primary.
We the public, of course, are also meant to ignore that at the outset of this whole fiasco, it was Dick Durbin who was beating the special election drum the loudest, until someone whispered "Mark Kirk" in his ear.
Thus, despite the glad-handing that occurred between Senators Reid and Durbin, and Roland Burris the other day, it seems to me that nothing is certain yet. TA is glued to watching this fascinating session of "As Illinois Politics Turns," and I'm sure you all are, too.
Saturday Morning Update: Lots of print news coverage of the impeachment this morning, of course, and you can easily find more yourself (indeed, you can't avoid it), but one thing I wanted to point out this morning was that the Tribune has not let up on its call for Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn to commit to a special election.
The Tribune points out that the seat belongs to the people of the State of Illinois, not Quinn, Durbin, Reid or any other politicians. And, interestingly, if it turns out that the scheme here is for Quinn to legitimize the Burris pick after Blago is removed from office (as we speculated above as one possible reason behind these political gymnastics), the Trib appears strongly opposed to that. The Trib wants Quinn to start showing some leadership, now. Will he?
ALSO- found this Politico.com analysis of the inter-party gyrations that went on in Washington among Durbin, Reid, and other Dems as Blago's surprise appointment of Burris not only caught them completely off-guard, but then made several flubs as Burris and his supporters managed to turn the issue from Blago to one of race. A good read.
WashingtonPost.com: If There Is a GOP Candidate Who Can Win in 2010, It's Mark Kirk (UPDATED)
Now that Roland Burris seems to be the de facto new junior senator from Illinois, the debate is already raging as to Burris' chances in 2010 (if he should run), and the likely GOP contender(s). As we've been following closely, GOP congressmen Mark Kirk and Peter Roskam have been making the list of almost every pundit who has addressed this issue. Today, Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post said on his blog that:
If ever there was a time when Illinois Republicans could reverse their long electoral skid in statewide races, the appointment imbroglio surrounding sort-of-senator Roland Burris is it. And, if ever there was a GOP candidate who can win, it is Kirk, a moderate who has held the Democratic-leaning 10th district despite a serious of tough Democratic challenges.
Cillizza notes that Kirk could face a primary challenge from Roskam, but as Roskam just won a coveted spot on the House Ways and Means Committee, TA's money's says he stays put and focuses on his House job, for now.
We like Peter Roskam here, but we think Kirk has the better chance statewide. What to do about keeping the 10th District has been worrying me of late, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
UPDATED: Here's $0.02 from John Fund, who is a Wall Street Journal editorial writer, weighing in on Mark Kirk's chances. Athough, contrary to the article, I don't think Mark has $5 million left in his campaign funds at the moment, though it won't take long to replenish the war chest.
If ever there was a time when Illinois Republicans could reverse their long electoral skid in statewide races, the appointment imbroglio surrounding sort-of-senator Roland Burris is it. And, if ever there was a GOP candidate who can win, it is Kirk, a moderate who has held the Democratic-leaning 10th district despite a serious of tough Democratic challenges.
Cillizza notes that Kirk could face a primary challenge from Roskam, but as Roskam just won a coveted spot on the House Ways and Means Committee, TA's money's says he stays put and focuses on his House job, for now.
We like Peter Roskam here, but we think Kirk has the better chance statewide. What to do about keeping the 10th District has been worrying me of late, but we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
UPDATED: Here's $0.02 from John Fund, who is a Wall Street Journal editorial writer, weighing in on Mark Kirk's chances. Athough, contrary to the article, I don't think Mark has $5 million left in his campaign funds at the moment, though it won't take long to replenish the war chest.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Well, Illinois, Get Ready for the Fork - The Guv is Just About Done
Yep, it appears that the appointment of Roland Burris was sure an interesting sideshow for a while, but now that the House impeachment committee has voted 21-0, it looks like the train to impeach Governor Blagojevich is pretty much unstoppable. Next stop, the full House, then trial in the Senate. It's sad for the state, but for the revitalization of a viable two-party system in Illinois, perhaps it simply had to come to this.
Frankly, the electorate in Illinois is not blameless. If you keep sending the same corrupt officials back into office (especially, you folks in Cook County listening?), you get what you deserve to some degree.
People have an awfully short memory. How else can politicians like Dick Durbin make a boldfaced lie about what their position on Burris was last week, and then do a complete flip-flop, and pass it off as the truth. Sadly, he'll probably get away with it.
The Governor won't. But look what it had to come to. As my old high school football coach used to say, pitiful, boys, just pitiful.
FROM THE "JUST CURIOUS FILE": Anyone now think that if Lt. Guv Pat Quinn gets in after Blago is impeached, he would appoint another person to 'compete' for the title of rightfully appointed junior senator from Illinois? That sure seemed like a viable, even likely, scenario, just a few days ago. Now, not so much.
Frankly, the electorate in Illinois is not blameless. If you keep sending the same corrupt officials back into office (especially, you folks in Cook County listening?), you get what you deserve to some degree.
People have an awfully short memory. How else can politicians like Dick Durbin make a boldfaced lie about what their position on Burris was last week, and then do a complete flip-flop, and pass it off as the truth. Sadly, he'll probably get away with it.
The Governor won't. But look what it had to come to. As my old high school football coach used to say, pitiful, boys, just pitiful.
FROM THE "JUST CURIOUS FILE": Anyone now think that if Lt. Guv Pat Quinn gets in after Blago is impeached, he would appoint another person to 'compete' for the title of rightfully appointed junior senator from Illinois? That sure seemed like a viable, even likely, scenario, just a few days ago. Now, not so much.
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Don't Let Senators Link and Bond, and the "Blagojevich 26," Off the Hook
According to State Senator Terry Link and some others, it looks like Governor Rod Blagojevich's appointment of former AG and comptroller Roland Burris to Barack Obama's vacant sentate seat may actually stick. Yesterday's defection of U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein from the solid ranks of Dems who oppose seating Mr. Burris may add to Burris' momentum (such as it is), who by many accounts was appointed in a perfectly legal manner, since the Democrat-controlled Illinois General Assembly failed to strip Blago of his appointment power when they had the chance.
Heck, they also muffed their opportunity to push forward an amendment to the state constitution that would have provided for a recall provision like they have in California. As noted recently by the Chicago Tribune, the Burris fiasco is simply the latest daffy stunt pulled by a governor that can't be controlled by his own party (including the president-elect, mind you), and a party that can't be troubled to take charge and stand up for the people of Illinois. The Trib dubbed the state senators who voted against the recall amendment the "Blagojevich 26", and State Senator Michael Bond tops the list (OK, so he's first alphabetically), and includes State Senator Terry Link as well.
Terry Link, for his part, is trying desperately to shift the blame, and whines that he got no support in the state senate for a bill that would have taken the appointment power from Blago and given it to IL Secretary of State Jesse White. Oh, so it's all the fault of those who opposed your brilliant solution, Senator Link? Puh-leeze. You wanted to take the appointment power from a goofy Dem and give it to another insider, because the Dems in the state senate were scared sh*tless that a Republican like 10th District Congressman Mark Kirk would have won a special election, if the power to choose the next U.S. Senator from Illinois was given to the people. Sorry, Senator Link. You get no pity points for offering a crappy solution and then crying when no one supported it.
If Burris' appointment stands, I don't know if he will be a good, bad or mediocre U.S. Senator. What I do know is that the Dem-controlled General Assembly helped get us into this mess, and absolutely refused to give the power of choice to the people by voting to hold a special election. Maybe the impeachment vote will help assuage some voter anger, but it's possible they'll screw that up, too.
Heck, they also muffed their opportunity to push forward an amendment to the state constitution that would have provided for a recall provision like they have in California. As noted recently by the Chicago Tribune, the Burris fiasco is simply the latest daffy stunt pulled by a governor that can't be controlled by his own party (including the president-elect, mind you), and a party that can't be troubled to take charge and stand up for the people of Illinois. The Trib dubbed the state senators who voted against the recall amendment the "Blagojevich 26", and State Senator Michael Bond tops the list (OK, so he's first alphabetically), and includes State Senator Terry Link as well.
Terry Link, for his part, is trying desperately to shift the blame, and whines that he got no support in the state senate for a bill that would have taken the appointment power from Blago and given it to IL Secretary of State Jesse White. Oh, so it's all the fault of those who opposed your brilliant solution, Senator Link? Puh-leeze. You wanted to take the appointment power from a goofy Dem and give it to another insider, because the Dems in the state senate were scared sh*tless that a Republican like 10th District Congressman Mark Kirk would have won a special election, if the power to choose the next U.S. Senator from Illinois was given to the people. Sorry, Senator Link. You get no pity points for offering a crappy solution and then crying when no one supported it.
If Burris' appointment stands, I don't know if he will be a good, bad or mediocre U.S. Senator. What I do know is that the Dem-controlled General Assembly helped get us into this mess, and absolutely refused to give the power of choice to the people by voting to hold a special election. Maybe the impeachment vote will help assuage some voter anger, but it's possible they'll screw that up, too.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Chicago Tribune Names State Senators Terry Link and Michael Bond to the "Blagojevich 26"; Plus, the Saga of Roland Burris; Why Dan Seals, Why Now?
Well, here's a list that no one among Illinois Politicians really wants to be on: the Chicago Tribune's list of the "Blagojevich 26," which is a list of the State Senators who earlier last year voted against a measure to add a recall provision for the governor to the state constitution. Lake County's two Democratic state senators, Terry Link and his 'mini-me,' Michael Bond, both made the Tribune's list of the governor's enablers.
Swell. We're definitely very proud here in Lake County to have these two elected officials to thank, in part, for the current disaster in state government.
The "Blagojevich 26": Now THAT's going to look good on some opposition campaign literature.
THE SAGA OF WOULD-BE SENATOR ROLAND BURRIS: Well, Mr. Burris is headed to Washington, D.C., where most news reports indicate that he will show up on Tuesday and attempt to be seated, and most reports also agree that the Senate Democrats will refuse to seat him. Mr. Burris apparently has said that he does not intend to cause a fuss, but that's clearly what the Senate Dems are preparing for. You can read much more about this whole debacle elsewhere, but for my money, what I want to know is why no one is calling for the impeachment of Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White for refusing to sign the appointment paperwork. It's his duty, after all, and almost everyone seems to agree that the law gives White no discretion in the matter. It's strictly an administerial duty, and is already the subject of a lawsuit by Burris. Thank goodness that White is black, so that White's refusal to perform his duty, thereby temporarily stymieing Burris' entrance to the U.S. Senate, can't be painted as racism by folks like Bobby Rush, who set a new world's record for claiming pre-emptive racism against anyone who dared to oppose Burris' appointment.
Rush was quoted by the AP as saying that the U.S. Senate is the "last bastion of plantation politics" and that "we are just faced with a hard-headed room of people in the Senate who want to keep an African-American out of the Senate." Come on. Does anyone really think those that are opposed to the appointment of Roland Burris are against it because he's black? As we have said before, it's stupid claims like this by African-American leaders that tend to dilute the attention paid to claims of real racism when it happens. Apparently Bobby Rush never got the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" read to him when he was younger.
WHAT'S UP WITH DAN SEALS? YOU LISTENING, SENATOR REID? My silly Google Alerts keep going off lately with the mention of Dan Seals' name in relation to the Obama senate seat.
You remember Dan Seals, right? The guy who has never been elected to so much as dog catcher and was labled a "carpetbagger" by Roll Call, who lost the 10th District Congressional race to Mark Kirk (twice), who ran out of money at the end of his last campaign and was reduced to pitful begging, who used a 9/11 conspiracy theorist in one of his campaign commercials, who couldn't make up his mind on the financial bailout package, who cuddled up to the much-investigated and seemingly destined for indictment Charlie Rangel. Remember now? Yes, the Dan Seals who misleadingly claimed to be a adjunct professor at Northwestern University before he ever got in front of a student (and was chastised by real professors), who took campaign money from convicted felon and disgraced former Congressman Dan Rostenkowski in front of Seals' night class at NU (once Seals finally started as a lecturer), the Dan Seals who caused massive traffic jams and was fined by the Village of Lincolnshire over an ill-conceived gas-for-votes stunt, and who famously said that in the event of an attack on Israel, you come down on the side of "Peace". Yep, that Dan Seals.
Well, his name was mentioned on Politico.com a few days ago, and somehow that has morphed into speculation that Senate Dem Leader Harry Reid is prepping Dan Seals behind the scenes to step into Obama's shoes once the Dem powers-that-be can get rid of that pesky Blagojevich and his star-crossed appointee Burris.
Those that are better informed seem to think this notion is ridiculous, and it's not just me. Most of the serious news articles that discuss the issue of whether Reid pressured Blago behind-the-scenes to make a specific appointment seem to point to him favoring Tammy Duckworth or Lisa Madigan.
So, I'm relatively sure that Seals is thankfully still relegated to the dustbin of Illinois politics, where he belongs, and that the current spate of Google Alerts bearing his name seem to be outgrowths of an errant mention by Politico. Note the Politico appeared to use Seals' name as an example of a type of candidate that might be appealing and successful, not that the Pup was Harry Reid's favored son. They obviously didn't look at Seals' vapid mug as shown here at Team America, or they might have thought twice about suggesting that this guy could ever survive any serious vetting process.
Ugh, what a laugh that would be for us here in the 10th District! I do admit that I got a few yucks tonight in doing this post and strolling down the TA archives regarding the mis-adventures of Dan Seals.
Senator Reid, hope your folks are TA readers before you do something really stupid...
UPDATE: Here's a link to a D.C. blog with some video of Harry Reid discussing the issue. The blog suggests that Reid is far more concerned about positioning the Dems for not losing the seat to a guy like Mark Kirk, than Reid is concerned with following the law. Big shock.
UPDATED x2: Here's a Pioneer Press article that clarifies, as we suspected, that Seals' recent filing as a candidate for the 1oth District race in 2010 (mentioned in comments) was simply a campaign finance paperwork issue, and not a committment to run. He'd be starting from almost zero funds, if the news article is correct about his campaign bank balance only being slightly above $5,000.
Also Randy Blaser at the Pioneer Lake Affect blog takes note of TA's scathing diatribe against the Pup, and makes fun of Seals to boot. Glad someone out there is getting the message.
Swell. We're definitely very proud here in Lake County to have these two elected officials to thank, in part, for the current disaster in state government.
The "Blagojevich 26": Now THAT's going to look good on some opposition campaign literature.
THE SAGA OF WOULD-BE SENATOR ROLAND BURRIS: Well, Mr. Burris is headed to Washington, D.C., where most news reports indicate that he will show up on Tuesday and attempt to be seated, and most reports also agree that the Senate Democrats will refuse to seat him. Mr. Burris apparently has said that he does not intend to cause a fuss, but that's clearly what the Senate Dems are preparing for. You can read much more about this whole debacle elsewhere, but for my money, what I want to know is why no one is calling for the impeachment of Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White for refusing to sign the appointment paperwork. It's his duty, after all, and almost everyone seems to agree that the law gives White no discretion in the matter. It's strictly an administerial duty, and is already the subject of a lawsuit by Burris. Thank goodness that White is black, so that White's refusal to perform his duty, thereby temporarily stymieing Burris' entrance to the U.S. Senate, can't be painted as racism by folks like Bobby Rush, who set a new world's record for claiming pre-emptive racism against anyone who dared to oppose Burris' appointment.
Rush was quoted by the AP as saying that the U.S. Senate is the "last bastion of plantation politics" and that "we are just faced with a hard-headed room of people in the Senate who want to keep an African-American out of the Senate." Come on. Does anyone really think those that are opposed to the appointment of Roland Burris are against it because he's black? As we have said before, it's stupid claims like this by African-American leaders that tend to dilute the attention paid to claims of real racism when it happens. Apparently Bobby Rush never got the "Boy Who Cried Wolf" read to him when he was younger.
WHAT'S UP WITH DAN SEALS? YOU LISTENING, SENATOR REID? My silly Google Alerts keep going off lately with the mention of Dan Seals' name in relation to the Obama senate seat.
You remember Dan Seals, right? The guy who has never been elected to so much as dog catcher and was labled a "carpetbagger" by Roll Call, who lost the 10th District Congressional race to Mark Kirk (twice), who ran out of money at the end of his last campaign and was reduced to pitful begging, who used a 9/11 conspiracy theorist in one of his campaign commercials, who couldn't make up his mind on the financial bailout package, who cuddled up to the much-investigated and seemingly destined for indictment Charlie Rangel. Remember now? Yes, the Dan Seals who misleadingly claimed to be a adjunct professor at Northwestern University before he ever got in front of a student (and was chastised by real professors), who took campaign money from convicted felon and disgraced former Congressman Dan Rostenkowski in front of Seals' night class at NU (once Seals finally started as a lecturer), the Dan Seals who caused massive traffic jams and was fined by the Village of Lincolnshire over an ill-conceived gas-for-votes stunt, and who famously said that in the event of an attack on Israel, you come down on the side of "Peace". Yep, that Dan Seals.
Well, his name was mentioned on Politico.com a few days ago, and somehow that has morphed into speculation that Senate Dem Leader Harry Reid is prepping Dan Seals behind the scenes to step into Obama's shoes once the Dem powers-that-be can get rid of that pesky Blagojevich and his star-crossed appointee Burris.
Those that are better informed seem to think this notion is ridiculous, and it's not just me. Most of the serious news articles that discuss the issue of whether Reid pressured Blago behind-the-scenes to make a specific appointment seem to point to him favoring Tammy Duckworth or Lisa Madigan.
So, I'm relatively sure that Seals is thankfully still relegated to the dustbin of Illinois politics, where he belongs, and that the current spate of Google Alerts bearing his name seem to be outgrowths of an errant mention by Politico. Note the Politico appeared to use Seals' name as an example of a type of candidate that might be appealing and successful, not that the Pup was Harry Reid's favored son. They obviously didn't look at Seals' vapid mug as shown here at Team America, or they might have thought twice about suggesting that this guy could ever survive any serious vetting process.
Ugh, what a laugh that would be for us here in the 10th District! I do admit that I got a few yucks tonight in doing this post and strolling down the TA archives regarding the mis-adventures of Dan Seals.
Senator Reid, hope your folks are TA readers before you do something really stupid...
UPDATE: Here's a link to a D.C. blog with some video of Harry Reid discussing the issue. The blog suggests that Reid is far more concerned about positioning the Dems for not losing the seat to a guy like Mark Kirk, than Reid is concerned with following the law. Big shock.
UPDATED x2: Here's a Pioneer Press article that clarifies, as we suspected, that Seals' recent filing as a candidate for the 1oth District race in 2010 (mentioned in comments) was simply a campaign finance paperwork issue, and not a committment to run. He'd be starting from almost zero funds, if the news article is correct about his campaign bank balance only being slightly above $5,000.
Also Randy Blaser at the Pioneer Lake Affect blog takes note of TA's scathing diatribe against the Pup, and makes fun of Seals to boot. Glad someone out there is getting the message.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
