* Former Illinois governor Jim Edgar had some not-so-kind words for his party’s Republican nominee on Chicago Public Radio yesterday. Edgar called Brady’s ten percent across-the-board budget cut plan “naïve“…
“I don’t agree with across the board. I think that’s a naïve approach,” Edgar said. “There are some more essential [programs] than others. It’s a difference of life and death… we don’t want to make a cut that will result in somebody dying. There are some programs in state government that [can mean] the difference between life and death. Those programs you can’t cut.”
And he’s not planning to campaign for Brady, either…
“I was hoping that Kirk [Dillard] would be the [Republican] nominee,” Edgar said. “He was my chief of staff and I think he had a good understanding of what it took to get the problems…I’m at the University of Illinois and I think I’ll take a professorial role in this campaign and just sit on the sidelines.”
* As I already told you, several pro-choice groups held a presser yesterday to blast Brady…
Beth Kanter with Illinois Planned Parenthood’s politcal action committee and several other activist groups gathered in Chicago to declare Brady “anti-woman,” vowing to support Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn.
“Over 17 years in Springfield, Bill Brady has amassed quite a scary record,” Kanter said. “And in his run for governor, Bill Brady is not backing down in his extreme positions against women.”
Kanter was joined onstage by representatives from the National Organization of Women, Personal PAC, Citizen Action, and a supporter of stem-cell research. She said she and other activists scrutinized Brady’s Senate record and campaign questionnaires in formulating their opinion of him as a gubernatorial candidate.
Kanter cited Brady’s opposition to abortion rights, noting his response to an Illinois Federation for Right to Life questionnaire.
“Sen. Brady has said he would sign a law banning abortion except to save the life of a woman,” she said. “That means if a woman is raped or the victim of incest, she would not be allowed to get an abortion.”
Cosgrove and the other speakers admitted they would probably be launching the same campaign if any of the other five Republicans had won the nomination for governor.
All the GOP candidates were anti-abortion except for DuPage County Board Chairman Bob Schillerstrom, who dropped out a week before Election Day. The other six agreed with 26 out of 26 positions supported by the Illinois Federation for Right to Life on the group’s questionnaire, except for Andy McKenna, who agreed with 25 out of 26.
But Cosgrove said surveys of Republican primary election voters showed 70 percent of them supported a right to abortion in cases of rape and incest, unlike the candidates.
Jim Edgar has not correctly picked or stomped for a winning candidate in the past decade. I feel better about Brady’s chances now that we know that he is not with him.
From a politician like Edgar, calling your party’s nominee for your old job “naive” is about as strong as it gets.
Edgar is smart enough to know that his words will definitely be featured in Quinn’s negative Brady spots.
He won’t campaign for Brady (slam), but it sounds like he won’t campaign for anyone. I wonder if that includes Kirk. Edgar was out front for him in the primary, and I imagine Kirk was counting on him for the general.
- He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:45 am:
Dear Gov. Edgar,
You are no longer running the state, nor are you wanting to run for office. While you come across as squeeky clean many still have not forgotten MSI.
As far as Mr Brady is concerned, He won, Dillard lost, as a Republican ether support him or shut up, we can’t put up for 4 more years of the Quinn Circus.
Based on Quinn’s OMB presentation, it looks an awful lot like the Brady plan.
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:46 am:
- I feel better about Brady’s chances now that we know that he is not with him. -
Thats some logic. You think a bunch of Democrats are going to vote for Brady because Edgar says he’s naive? To quote Rich the other day, I want what you’re drinking.
- Former Card Carrying Repub - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:46 am:
Go, you may be right on point, however, it’d be nice if the party would find a way to come together…just for one election.
Having said that, I realize Brady’s far reaching positions and big mouth make that difficult.
“Sen. Brady has said he would sign a law banning abortion except to save the life of a woman,” she said. “That means if a woman is raped or the victim of incest, she would not be allowed to get an abortion.”
A major campaign rule is broken here. You do not allow special interest groups to put words into your mouth if you are a candidate. It gives the appearance of having something to hide. The special interest group never intends to make an opponent look good, so chooses not to use words, images or statements that could show impartiality, balance or endorsement.
Brady should have been on the forefront regarding his support of human life for all Illinoisans, and have made it a point to demonstrate empathy and support for those who find themselves facing an unwanted preganancy.
Polls show that his support of human life opposing abortions is not considered an extreme, but his views regarding pregnancies due to situations involving a criminal act are. Senator Brady needs to refuse this enough to return to a campaign highlighting our state’s bankrupsy and fiscal mismanagement.
Edgar’s effect has dwindled. He has not backed a winner in quite some time. I think people are sick of him taking pop shots at both parties while standing on the sidelines.
Brady’s general plan of 10% accross the board is good in theory. Cut 10% from IDOT, DHS, ect as a whole. But this will mean individual programs will have to be cut in whole to properly fund others. Will he leave it to department heads to find where to make the cut in their departmetns or do it as an executive? This is something he needs to outline this summer.
FYI, if you are a one issue voter and are pro-choice, don’t vote for Bill Brady. However, if you are really worried about rape and incest, do you want to vote for the guy who wants to open another prison to ensure criminals are securely behind bars, or the guy who lets them out early to help facilitate his buddy in Washington?
“Engaging in a bit of hyperbole, Cosgrove said Brady’s “jobs program” would be “Building more prisons to house the thousands of women he’ll put in prison for having illegal abortions.”
Comments that score as high as that on the ridiculous scale usually draw more of a rebuke on this site; they’re not just written off as “a bit of hyperbole”.
Crosgrove’s blustery nonsense works thinking womens’ nerves. A year or two ago he claimed that half the hospital beds in were occupied by women who had endured botched abortions.
My opinion of Edgar just dropped considerably. Yes, I can understand Edgar’s disagreements and perhaps even dislike for Brady, but if he refuses to endorse Brady and insists on undercutting his campaign right from the start… well, then Edgar is doing exactly the same thing I believe he’s accused conservatives of doing: destroying his party in order to “save” it.
If Edgar wants to offer Brady constructive criticism about his campaign style, do it privately — don’t run around badmouthing him in public like this.
The more feminists whack, the better it goes for Brady. There is a groundswell of anti-abortion sentiment running thru minority communities in this country. Blacks and Latinos are looking more carefully at rich white women/men who would tell them that abortion(in THEIR minority communities) is a great good. More ethnic folk are taking the view that these ‘feminists’ are running on the Maggie Sanger platform. Genocide, with a white woman’s smile and pat on the back.
Another point to be made is that Governors don’t create law, they sign or veto bills. While Ms Kanter is right that Brady says he would sign a bill to limit abortions, how likely is it that the GA would pass such legislation? Brady has said that he has these conservative views but has also been saying that the budget and the economy is what is important.
I think people can realize this and will vote for someone who will tackle the big issues that we face now. Issues that the gov can address and influence. Brady would do well to acknowledge his personal views as what they are, personal, and guide the discussion back to the important issues of the day. Jobs, budget, economy, taxes, spending, ethics. Those issues are the ones people are keen on right now.
PQ can play his shell games and use “look, a kitty”, tactics but his star is dimming with every stumble. His avoidance of the big picture view of Illinois while trying to appease various perceived voting/power blocs makes him look more like the machine pol people curretnly despise.
More polls will be useful in clearing up the picture - don’t put much stock in them at this point.
As a Brady supporter, I have to say to Governor Edgar, thanks, but no thanks. I don’t think Brady “needs” him, but considering Edgar’s track record, I wouldn’t be surprised by a knife-in-the-back in October - Edgar endorsing Quinn in an ironic replay of his acolyte Dillard’s past endorsement of Obama.
No surprise, Edgar was NEVER a conservative nor cared much for them…if you’ve noticed the last few campaigns he pushed people pretending to be Democrats who in turn LOST to actual Democarts. Really why do people still care what Edgar thinks about anything?
I don’t know if Mary,Sterling’s analysis will pan out, but where she is spot on is the point that the louder the left-wing feminists and their fellow travelers caterwaul, the more they will stimulate a pro-Brady reaction in other communities. The liberal calculus in the past in Illinois is that this can’t hurt, because there is a limited conservative constituency, and feminism/gay rights/etc has an infinite upside. I don’t think that dynamic plays anymore. And Quinn, who has not endorsed gay marriage or public funding of abortions in IL (to my knowledge) may not jump on that bandwagon so eagerly, if at all.
Moreover, conservatives outside of Chicago have some cards to play in this race, and conservatives motivated to support Brady statewide can offset the militant feminists of Chicago LakeShore and oak Park.
By the way, according to Thomas Frank of Hyde Park and “Kansas” fame, I thought that only the right played on the politics of fear?
The voters are not going to go to the polls this cycle voting social issues. The voters are going to decide who will be more likely to put Illinois back on solid economic footing. So far, big advantage Brady. {see Rasmussen poll}. As Quinn and the DEMs have little to brag about in the way they have run this state in the last 8 years, look for them to continue to try and change the subject and to throw some red meat to their base to nourish them though an otherwise tough cycle. This is Brady’s race to lose.
- Cousin Ralph - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:00 am:
As far as Edgar is concerned, I know him and like him. He was a good Governor. Yet, the people of Illinois have moved on and so has the Republican base. Edgar is still respected, but he is not seen as current. Illinoians are looking for a new generation of leadership in both parties. And, they are looking to break decisively from Illinois’ past. Those two factor will continue to weigh down Quinn and both will continue to bolster Brady. I just dont think Edgar will prove to be a force that can move votes one way or another. He certainly was’nt in 2006.
[…] It’s too bad the gentleman that mentored Sen. Brady, former Gov. Jim Edgar, can’t follow the statesman’s lead. Rich Miller has Edgar today expressing his sour grapes: Former Illinois governor Jim Edgar had some not-so-kind words for his party’s Republican nominee on Chicago Public Radio yesterday. Edgar called Brady’s ten percent across-the-board budget cut plan “naïve“… […]
she is spot on is the point that the louder the left-wing feminists and their fellow travelers caterwaul, the more they will stimulate a pro-Brady reaction in other communities.
That is wishful thinking not based on similar events. Mr. Brady is not a moderate, everyone knows that. He is asking Illinoisans to consider him as governor knowing he isn’t. So, he needs to define himself in an unfrightening manner - not to appease special interest groups, but to demonstrate to voters that voting for him isn’t as extreme as they feel it is.
But most of all, Brady isn’t steering a conversation he has to defuse, so he will lose.
- JonShibleyFan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:13 am:
Political campaigns typically look for third-party validation of their campaign’s points.
A newspaper article/editorial = good.
A member of your opponent’s party = much, much better.
With the state on the verge of a financial collapse, why are we even discussing social issues?
If people want to get all worked up about the stances of a particular candidate for something as inconsequential as abortion, gay-marriage, etc., go ahead. But you are being niave if you think those are the biggest issues we as Illinois residents face.
First, it is a strike against Edgar that his own chief of staff, for whom Edgar cut campaign commercials and possibly even cold-called potential donors, did not win. Sour grapes? Definitely. Professional response? Certainly not. Governor Edgar, a man I greatly respect, just went down a notch in my mind. The GOP has a much better overall chance than in 2006 to win back the governor’s mansion and a former two-term governor will sit out this election. Sheesh.
Second, the rhetoric from “women’s rights” groups is already beyond the pale and it’s not even St. Patrick’s Day. It’s apparent that these groups are scared. But are these groups hoping voters take them seriously? They sound silly. The term “funny farm” comes to mind.
Edgar’s 15 mins. as an ex-Gov. need to be over. His selfish campaign to stay relevant isn’t helping the GOP. He couldn’t get Govs. JRyan or Topinka over the line. What about Sen. Didrickson, or Cong. Coulson, etc.? Maybe if his protege Kirk Dillard had run a decent campaign, we wouldn’t be having this discussion, but instead he ran a bloated, wasteful, messageless effort. Too bad Edgar didn’t save his counsel for telling Dillard how to win an election. But of course, the media flocks to him like moths to a flame, and Edgar soaks up the attention. What a disappointment all around.
“It (abortion) ain’t inconsequential for a whole lot of people.”
You’re right. However, among those who regard it as very consequential or even paramount, they are just as likely, if not more likely, to be pro-life than pro-choice.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:57 am:
=== Polls show that his support of human life opposing abortions is not considered an extreme ===
@Vanillaman
You couldn’t be more wrong there. Brady takes an extreme position regarding abortion: Human life begins at conception, ergo all abortions are murder, except when the life of the woman is at risk, in which case it is self-defense.
Most Illinoisans have a much more nuanced view of abortion, rooted in practicality.
Ask a Republican suburbanite mom or dad if they think that their daughter should be forced to have a rapist’s child, and tell me what their answer is.
And keep in mind, 1 in 4 women are sexually-assaulted in their lifetime.
Regarding Edgar:
Unless you are naive enough to believe that Big Jim Thompson is going to be out there campaigning for Brady, Edgar’s statements are highly consequential and a kick-in-the-teeth.
Yes, as a moderate Republican, Edgar’s influence on GOP primaries is limited by the fact that the GOP primary electorate is lopsidedly conservative.
But in the General Election, you have a radio and t.v. ad already in the can of a former Governor — someone who did the job — discrediting the qualifications of his party’s nominee.
Sour grapes? I think most voters are going to see it as a lightning strike of truth. Unless the Brady campaign wants to attack Edgar’s creds, which I would not advise.
BTW, its not unprecedented either. In 1998, Secretary of State George Ryan, campaigning for Governor, told the Sun-Times that Jesse White would do a better job as his replacement than Republican Al Salvi. Salvi’s campaign never recovered.
Jim Edgar’s comments vis a vis Brady were entirely predictable.
Ever since he decided to exit politics, at the same time the MSI scandal was simmering, Jim Edgar has adopted as a mantra “Republican conservatives cannot win statewide in Illinois”. If you googled this, you can see this kind of comment from Edgar regularly appearing in the press in every election cycle since his administration. (It seems as if he has a stock press release at the ready — with only the date to change.)
For whatever reason (ideology, personal emnity, whatever), Edgar embraces this as political gospel — there must be something in it for him at the end of the day/ surely, a Governor Dillard would have handsomely rewarded his old mentor if he became Governor. At the very minimum, by working to ensure his “prediction” has validity, i.e. conservatives lose, Edgar has the satisfaction of saying “I told you so,” an achievement not insignificant for large political egos.
So Edgar has adopted this as his brand and talking point since 1998, both when it seemed to sound correct when the Dems won overwhelmingly in 2002 and when Peter Fitzgerald, certifiable conservative, won for U.S. Senate.
Because Edgar has embraced this mantra, and since he has some not insubstantial residual power and clout as a former Governor, there is no question that it is in Edgar’s interest to render his claim a self-fulfilling prophecy, i.e. personally do what it takes to ensure the “prediction” comes true and sabotage conservatives on the statewide ticket. Edgar’s critical remarks yesterday — actually, fearmongering — were of a piece with this strategy.
If you are a Brady fan or just a loyal Republican who cares about growth and unity for the Republican Party (which is contrary to the Edgar philosophy which by definition excludes conservative leadership), the only antidote to this Edgar poison is to simply call it for what it is — Edgar’s peculiar approach to advancing his philosophy on state government, regardless of its impact on Republican candidates, the Republican Party, and state elections, in service of which he will slyly undercut his fellow Republicans to render his “prediction” (conservatives can’t win) self-fulfilling. If Republicans and friendly independents can marginalize Edgar by making this observation widely known, then his opinions will carry less weight.
And as someone said, as time goes on and Edgar ages and becomes less relevant, the toxic nature of his “contribution” to the public discussion will become less potent. By marginalizing him through outing his agenda as stated, perhaps this process can be significantly accelerated.
So VanillaMan, Edgar and company are at war with conservatives within the Republican Party? Thank you for the elucidation. Then war it will be. Don’t be so smug as to predicting who the winner of that war will be.
Glad you are an Edgar admirer. I merely observe he was one of the lousiest public speakers we had in state government leadership, much less in the Governor’s Mansion.
Uhhh Vanilla, you do know Brady is running against Pat Quinn right? I think we can all have different views on whether a particular move is good or bad at this point, but Pat Quinn in his own words may lay off as many as 17k school teachers and face the fight of his life with the budget with his own party. To think one protest, picture, or presser in March is going to decide this reace is a jumping the gun a bit.
For my money, I think it does help Brady that these leftest groups go on the attack. First, the people who agree with them were never voting for Brady. Two, it gives him a chance to tell the voters in the middle he needs to reach that we can’t get bogged down with these issues. Does it really help a woman’s group if we go and lay off another 5,000 teachers? Does it help them if unemployment climbs to plus 15%. No, it hurts them the same as the rest of us. This is not the 90’s where we have surpluses the the luxury to expand social awareness.
After the recent Rasmussen poll numbers, I am less smug than I was, (which wasn’t very smug, btw).
Remember I am also a conservative, but recognize that being one can scare a lot of Illinoisans. It is smart politically in this state to ensure you bridge differences with voters first. Brady’s approach so far has been divisive - as has yours. Historically, that approach seems to work in states outside Illinois that are more culturally conservative.
Maybe it is because I respect the people I grew up with in Chicagoland. It is a different world from Downstate. It would be nice if Brady recognized that too.
You couldn’t be more wrong there.
Then you must be wrong too, because we agree that the public perception of Brady’s abortion politics is too extreme. I am suggesting that he get in front of this and defang himself. Brady will lose when he lets opponents do his political defining.
As others have said, this is pretty clear case of folks trying to distract the voters from the most pressing issues of this election: jobs/economy, the state budget, and corruption. Pat Quinn isn’t very strong on any of those counts and so they’re employing a “oh look, a kitty” tactic as somebody else has observed.
Unless Quinn can change the subject to less pressing issues, he’s doomed and he knows it.
Thus, the distraction tactic. He’s hoping that Illinois voters are fools and will fall for it.
- The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:18 am:
===
Unless you are naive enough to believe that Big Jim Thompson is going to be out there campaigning for Brady, Edgar’s statements are highly consequential and a kick-in-the-teeth.
===
I respect Edgar, but one can only hope that Big Jim intervenes in all the 2010 races at some point–even from the shadows.
Jim Edgar, good riddance. What has the guy done for the party the last 15 years? He hasn’t rebuilt it, he intervened to help losers like coulson and dillard who did nothing for the future of the party and now he wants to bash our candidate.
Brady is leading in the polls, but that isn’t likely to continue as more voters learn about his legislative history and public stands. It’s sad that the choice we are given for our next governor is between a marginally competent incumbent and a right wingnut.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 12:54 pm:
=Human life begins at conception. That isn’t extreme. That is a scientific fact.=
Yeah. If you believe an acorn is a tree.
In truth, “human life begins at conception” wasn’t even Catholic doctrine until relatively recently…and until the 1970’s, even the Southern Baptists allowed for abortion in cases of “rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother”.
Conception creates human life. Not plant life, not poultry, not chimp, human. If you wish to have a serious conversation regarding protecting human life, then let’s have it.
But don’t pretend otherwise.
Have any kids recently? We can tell from the first ultrasounds how many days old they are. When Rowe v. Wade created this “right”, our medical knowledge regarding human life were about as backwards as your views on abortion.
It is time to get up to date, it is 2010, not 1970. Try a little modern medicine and science for a change.
One of the things that just about drove me over the edge about Dillard was that every time he opened his mouth he said “I was Jim Edgar’s chief of staff.” Edgar keeps bringing it up too - get over it already & move on.
- The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 7:40 pm:
None of this should be a surprise to anyone. Edgar and most in his camp have never been “warm and fuzzy”. Don’t you remember the interviews from–when was it last year?–asking Edgar and Thompson whether they “hug” (or it’s OK to hug) supporters? Edgar said no, and Thompson said he hugged supporters across the state a few times while campaigning.
That’s always been a major difference between the two camps.
Jim Edgar is all hat, no cattle. He can’t carry any of his endorsements. He came into one of my races to do a fundraiser/endorsement for Jan Carlson, a 44 year incumbent Circuit Clerk/County Board member from Kane. We sent him back home with a 96 vote victory for a first time candidate. We made the Edgar endorsement an issue, calling him a “liberal RINO.”
LIVE session coverage...
- Anon - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:36 am:
Wow, Edgar is taking shots at Brady’s plan? That cant be good for his campaign. Ouch.
- Go Away - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:40 am:
Jim Edgar has not correctly picked or stomped for a winning candidate in the past decade. I feel better about Brady’s chances now that we know that he is not with him.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:45 am:
From a politician like Edgar, calling your party’s nominee for your old job “naive” is about as strong as it gets.
Edgar is smart enough to know that his words will definitely be featured in Quinn’s negative Brady spots.
He won’t campaign for Brady (slam), but it sounds like he won’t campaign for anyone. I wonder if that includes Kirk. Edgar was out front for him in the primary, and I imagine Kirk was counting on him for the general.
- He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:45 am:
Dear Gov. Edgar,
You are no longer running the state, nor are you wanting to run for office. While you come across as squeeky clean many still have not forgotten MSI.
As far as Mr Brady is concerned, He won, Dillard lost, as a Republican ether support him or shut up, we can’t put up for 4 more years of the Quinn Circus.
- Brennan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:46 am:
Based on Quinn’s OMB presentation, it looks an awful lot like the Brady plan.
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:46 am:
- I feel better about Brady’s chances now that we know that he is not with him. -
Thats some logic. You think a bunch of Democrats are going to vote for Brady because Edgar says he’s naive? To quote Rich the other day, I want what you’re drinking.
- Former Card Carrying Repub - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:46 am:
Go, you may be right on point, however, it’d be nice if the party would find a way to come together…just for one election.
Having said that, I realize Brady’s far reaching positions and big mouth make that difficult.
It’s going to be an agonizing few months.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:51 am:
“Sen. Brady has said he would sign a law banning abortion except to save the life of a woman,” she said. “That means if a woman is raped or the victim of incest, she would not be allowed to get an abortion.”
A major campaign rule is broken here. You do not allow special interest groups to put words into your mouth if you are a candidate. It gives the appearance of having something to hide. The special interest group never intends to make an opponent look good, so chooses not to use words, images or statements that could show impartiality, balance or endorsement.
Brady should have been on the forefront regarding his support of human life for all Illinoisans, and have made it a point to demonstrate empathy and support for those who find themselves facing an unwanted preganancy.
Polls show that his support of human life opposing abortions is not considered an extreme, but his views regarding pregnancies due to situations involving a criminal act are. Senator Brady needs to refuse this enough to return to a campaign highlighting our state’s bankrupsy and fiscal mismanagement.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:52 am:
Brady isn’t over Dillard’s loss. Big Woo.
- the Patriot - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:52 am:
Edgar’s effect has dwindled. He has not backed a winner in quite some time. I think people are sick of him taking pop shots at both parties while standing on the sidelines.
Brady’s general plan of 10% accross the board is good in theory. Cut 10% from IDOT, DHS, ect as a whole. But this will mean individual programs will have to be cut in whole to properly fund others. Will he leave it to department heads to find where to make the cut in their departmetns or do it as an executive? This is something he needs to outline this summer.
FYI, if you are a one issue voter and are pro-choice, don’t vote for Bill Brady. However, if you are really worried about rape and incest, do you want to vote for the guy who wants to open another prison to ensure criminals are securely behind bars, or the guy who lets them out early to help facilitate his buddy in Washington?
Think it through.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:53 am:
Did I say Brady? I meant Edgar.
COFFEE!
- Sewanee - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 8:57 am:
“Engaging in a bit of hyperbole, Cosgrove said Brady’s “jobs program” would be “Building more prisons to house the thousands of women he’ll put in prison for having illegal abortions.”
Comments that score as high as that on the ridiculous scale usually draw more of a rebuke on this site; they’re not just written off as “a bit of hyperbole”.
- Indeedy - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:02 am:
Crosgrove’s blustery nonsense works thinking womens’ nerves. A year or two ago he claimed that half the hospital beds in were occupied by women who had endured botched abortions.
- Secret Square - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:03 am:
My opinion of Edgar just dropped considerably. Yes, I can understand Edgar’s disagreements and perhaps even dislike for Brady, but if he refuses to endorse Brady and insists on undercutting his campaign right from the start… well, then Edgar is doing exactly the same thing I believe he’s accused conservatives of doing: destroying his party in order to “save” it.
If Edgar wants to offer Brady constructive criticism about his campaign style, do it privately — don’t run around badmouthing him in public like this.
- Amuzing Myself - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:04 am:
Edgar: “WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!!!!!”
“I’m taking my ball and going home!!”
Real class, that guy.
- Indeedy - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:04 am:
Oops, should have read “half the hospital beds in Brazil or Argentina, somewhere in S.A. …”
- Downstate GOP Faithless - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:13 am:
what the heck is Edgar doing? your guy lost…get over it…in fact all your guy’s lost for the most part.
- T.J. - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:14 am:
“Real class, that guy.”
About as classy as campaigning against Dawn Clark Netsch by calling her ugly. But he doesn’t drink, so he’s morally superior to everyone else.
- Mary, Sterling - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:14 am:
The more feminists whack, the better it goes for Brady. There is a groundswell of anti-abortion sentiment running thru minority communities in this country. Blacks and Latinos are looking more carefully at rich white women/men who would tell them that abortion(in THEIR minority communities) is a great good. More ethnic folk are taking the view that these ‘feminists’ are running on the Maggie Sanger platform. Genocide, with a white woman’s smile and pat on the back.
- dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:15 am:
Another point to be made is that Governors don’t create law, they sign or veto bills. While Ms Kanter is right that Brady says he would sign a bill to limit abortions, how likely is it that the GA would pass such legislation? Brady has said that he has these conservative views but has also been saying that the budget and the economy is what is important.
I think people can realize this and will vote for someone who will tackle the big issues that we face now. Issues that the gov can address and influence. Brady would do well to acknowledge his personal views as what they are, personal, and guide the discussion back to the important issues of the day. Jobs, budget, economy, taxes, spending, ethics. Those issues are the ones people are keen on right now.
PQ can play his shell games and use “look, a kitty”, tactics but his star is dimming with every stumble. His avoidance of the big picture view of Illinois while trying to appease various perceived voting/power blocs makes him look more like the machine pol people curretnly despise.
More polls will be useful in clearing up the picture - don’t put much stock in them at this point.
- Mr. Ethics - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:30 am:
This means no more robo calls from Edgar - Amen
- Joe from Joliet - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:43 am:
Yo, Ryan -
What, again, was Edgar’s role in MSI? Oh, that’s right, he did not have one.
- Conservative Republican - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:44 am:
As a Brady supporter, I have to say to Governor Edgar, thanks, but no thanks. I don’t think Brady “needs” him, but considering Edgar’s track record, I wouldn’t be surprised by a knife-in-the-back in October - Edgar endorsing Quinn in an ironic replay of his acolyte Dillard’s past endorsement of Obama.
Brady would win anyway.
- Segatari - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:53 am:
No surprise, Edgar was NEVER a conservative nor cared much for them…if you’ve noticed the last few campaigns he pushed people pretending to be Democrats who in turn LOST to actual Democarts. Really why do people still care what Edgar thinks about anything?
- Niles Township - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:53 am:
Thanks Governor Edgar for the superbly worded quote for Quinn’s negative ads.
- Conservative Republican - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:53 am:
I don’t know if Mary,Sterling’s analysis will pan out, but where she is spot on is the point that the louder the left-wing feminists and their fellow travelers caterwaul, the more they will stimulate a pro-Brady reaction in other communities. The liberal calculus in the past in Illinois is that this can’t hurt, because there is a limited conservative constituency, and feminism/gay rights/etc has an infinite upside. I don’t think that dynamic plays anymore. And Quinn, who has not endorsed gay marriage or public funding of abortions in IL (to my knowledge) may not jump on that bandwagon so eagerly, if at all.
Moreover, conservatives outside of Chicago have some cards to play in this race, and conservatives motivated to support Brady statewide can offset the militant feminists of Chicago LakeShore and oak Park.
By the way, according to Thomas Frank of Hyde Park and “Kansas” fame, I thought that only the right played on the politics of fear?
- Cousin Ralph - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 9:53 am:
The voters are not going to go to the polls this cycle voting social issues. The voters are going to decide who will be more likely to put Illinois back on solid economic footing. So far, big advantage Brady. {see Rasmussen poll}. As Quinn and the DEMs have little to brag about in the way they have run this state in the last 8 years, look for them to continue to try and change the subject and to throw some red meat to their base to nourish them though an otherwise tough cycle. This is Brady’s race to lose.
- Cousin Ralph - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:00 am:
As far as Edgar is concerned, I know him and like him. He was a good Governor. Yet, the people of Illinois have moved on and so has the Republican base. Edgar is still respected, but he is not seen as current. Illinoians are looking for a new generation of leadership in both parties. And, they are looking to break decisively from Illinois’ past. Those two factor will continue to weigh down Quinn and both will continue to bolster Brady. I just dont think Edgar will prove to be a force that can move votes one way or another. He certainly was’nt in 2006.
Pingback You Stay Classy Jim Edgar; Former Gov. Shows Sour Grapes & Hypocrisy to GOP Gov. Nominee | Illinois Alliance For Growth - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:07 am:
[…] It’s too bad the gentleman that mentored Sen. Brady, former Gov. Jim Edgar, can’t follow the statesman’s lead. Rich Miller has Edgar today expressing his sour grapes: Former Illinois governor Jim Edgar had some not-so-kind words for his party’s Republican nominee on Chicago Public Radio yesterday. Edgar called Brady’s ten percent across-the-board budget cut plan “naïve“… […]
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:13 am:
she is spot on is the point that the louder the left-wing feminists and their fellow travelers caterwaul, the more they will stimulate a pro-Brady reaction in other communities.
That is wishful thinking not based on similar events. Mr. Brady is not a moderate, everyone knows that. He is asking Illinoisans to consider him as governor knowing he isn’t. So, he needs to define himself in an unfrightening manner - not to appease special interest groups, but to demonstrate to voters that voting for him isn’t as extreme as they feel it is.
But most of all, Brady isn’t steering a conversation he has to defuse, so he will lose.
- JonShibleyFan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:13 am:
Political campaigns typically look for third-party validation of their campaign’s points.
A newspaper article/editorial = good.
A member of your opponent’s party = much, much better.
- Logical Thinker - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:22 am:
With the state on the verge of a financial collapse, why are we even discussing social issues?
If people want to get all worked up about the stances of a particular candidate for something as inconsequential as abortion, gay-marriage, etc., go ahead. But you are being niave if you think those are the biggest issues we as Illinois residents face.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:25 am:
===for something as inconsequential as abortion===
It ain’t inconsequential for a whole lot of people.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:25 am:
JonShibleyFan is correct. This is a tailor-made TV ad.
- Team Sleep - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:27 am:
Two points to be made here.
First, it is a strike against Edgar that his own chief of staff, for whom Edgar cut campaign commercials and possibly even cold-called potential donors, did not win. Sour grapes? Definitely. Professional response? Certainly not. Governor Edgar, a man I greatly respect, just went down a notch in my mind. The GOP has a much better overall chance than in 2006 to win back the governor’s mansion and a former two-term governor will sit out this election. Sheesh.
Second, the rhetoric from “women’s rights” groups is already beyond the pale and it’s not even St. Patrick’s Day. It’s apparent that these groups are scared. But are these groups hoping voters take them seriously? They sound silly. The term “funny farm” comes to mind.
- Whatever - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:31 am:
Edgar’s 15 mins. as an ex-Gov. need to be over. His selfish campaign to stay relevant isn’t helping the GOP. He couldn’t get Govs. JRyan or Topinka over the line. What about Sen. Didrickson, or Cong. Coulson, etc.? Maybe if his protege Kirk Dillard had run a decent campaign, we wouldn’t be having this discussion, but instead he ran a bloated, wasteful, messageless effort. Too bad Edgar didn’t save his counsel for telling Dillard how to win an election. But of course, the media flocks to him like moths to a flame, and Edgar soaks up the attention. What a disappointment all around.
- Secret Square - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:37 am:
“It (abortion) ain’t inconsequential for a whole lot of people.”
You’re right. However, among those who regard it as very consequential or even paramount, they are just as likely, if not more likely, to be pro-life than pro-choice.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:57 am:
=== Polls show that his support of human life opposing abortions is not considered an extreme ===
@Vanillaman
You couldn’t be more wrong there. Brady takes an extreme position regarding abortion: Human life begins at conception, ergo all abortions are murder, except when the life of the woman is at risk, in which case it is self-defense.
Most Illinoisans have a much more nuanced view of abortion, rooted in practicality.
Ask a Republican suburbanite mom or dad if they think that their daughter should be forced to have a rapist’s child, and tell me what their answer is.
And keep in mind, 1 in 4 women are sexually-assaulted in their lifetime.
Regarding Edgar:
Unless you are naive enough to believe that Big Jim Thompson is going to be out there campaigning for Brady, Edgar’s statements are highly consequential and a kick-in-the-teeth.
Yes, as a moderate Republican, Edgar’s influence on GOP primaries is limited by the fact that the GOP primary electorate is lopsidedly conservative.
But in the General Election, you have a radio and t.v. ad already in the can of a former Governor — someone who did the job — discrediting the qualifications of his party’s nominee.
Sour grapes? I think most voters are going to see it as a lightning strike of truth. Unless the Brady campaign wants to attack Edgar’s creds, which I would not advise.
BTW, its not unprecedented either. In 1998, Secretary of State George Ryan, campaigning for Governor, told the Sun-Times that Jesse White would do a better job as his replacement than Republican Al Salvi. Salvi’s campaign never recovered.
- Conservative Republican - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:59 am:
To Team Sleep, Whatever, and others:
Jim Edgar’s comments vis a vis Brady were entirely predictable.
Ever since he decided to exit politics, at the same time the MSI scandal was simmering, Jim Edgar has adopted as a mantra “Republican conservatives cannot win statewide in Illinois”. If you googled this, you can see this kind of comment from Edgar regularly appearing in the press in every election cycle since his administration. (It seems as if he has a stock press release at the ready — with only the date to change.)
For whatever reason (ideology, personal emnity, whatever), Edgar embraces this as political gospel — there must be something in it for him at the end of the day/ surely, a Governor Dillard would have handsomely rewarded his old mentor if he became Governor. At the very minimum, by working to ensure his “prediction” has validity, i.e. conservatives lose, Edgar has the satisfaction of saying “I told you so,” an achievement not insignificant for large political egos.
So Edgar has adopted this as his brand and talking point since 1998, both when it seemed to sound correct when the Dems won overwhelmingly in 2002 and when Peter Fitzgerald, certifiable conservative, won for U.S. Senate.
Because Edgar has embraced this mantra, and since he has some not insubstantial residual power and clout as a former Governor, there is no question that it is in Edgar’s interest to render his claim a self-fulfilling prophecy, i.e. personally do what it takes to ensure the “prediction” comes true and sabotage conservatives on the statewide ticket. Edgar’s critical remarks yesterday — actually, fearmongering — were of a piece with this strategy.
If you are a Brady fan or just a loyal Republican who cares about growth and unity for the Republican Party (which is contrary to the Edgar philosophy which by definition excludes conservative leadership), the only antidote to this Edgar poison is to simply call it for what it is — Edgar’s peculiar approach to advancing his philosophy on state government, regardless of its impact on Republican candidates, the Republican Party, and state elections, in service of which he will slyly undercut his fellow Republicans to render his “prediction” (conservatives can’t win) self-fulfilling. If Republicans and friendly independents can marginalize Edgar by making this observation widely known, then his opinions will carry less weight.
And as someone said, as time goes on and Edgar ages and becomes less relevant, the toxic nature of his “contribution” to the public discussion will become less potent. By marginalizing him through outing his agenda as stated, perhaps this process can be significantly accelerated.
- Brennan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:03 am:
=Human life begins at conception=
That isn’t extreme. That is a scientific fact.
Brady’s exclusion for unplanned pregnancies in cases of rape and incest are over the top.
- Conservative Republican - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:05 am:
So VanillaMan, Edgar and company are at war with conservatives within the Republican Party? Thank you for the elucidation. Then war it will be. Don’t be so smug as to predicting who the winner of that war will be.
Glad you are an Edgar admirer. I merely observe he was one of the lousiest public speakers we had in state government leadership, much less in the Governor’s Mansion.
- the Patriot - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:05 am:
Uhhh Vanilla, you do know Brady is running against Pat Quinn right? I think we can all have different views on whether a particular move is good or bad at this point, but Pat Quinn in his own words may lay off as many as 17k school teachers and face the fight of his life with the budget with his own party. To think one protest, picture, or presser in March is going to decide this reace is a jumping the gun a bit.
For my money, I think it does help Brady that these leftest groups go on the attack. First, the people who agree with them were never voting for Brady. Two, it gives him a chance to tell the voters in the middle he needs to reach that we can’t get bogged down with these issues. Does it really help a woman’s group if we go and lay off another 5,000 teachers? Does it help them if unemployment climbs to plus 15%. No, it hurts them the same as the rest of us. This is not the 90’s where we have surpluses the the luxury to expand social awareness.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:16 am:
After the recent Rasmussen poll numbers, I am less smug than I was, (which wasn’t very smug, btw).
Remember I am also a conservative, but recognize that being one can scare a lot of Illinoisans. It is smart politically in this state to ensure you bridge differences with voters first. Brady’s approach so far has been divisive - as has yours. Historically, that approach seems to work in states outside Illinois that are more culturally conservative.
Maybe it is because I respect the people I grew up with in Chicagoland. It is a different world from Downstate. It would be nice if Brady recognized that too.
You couldn’t be more wrong there.
Then you must be wrong too, because we agree that the public perception of Brady’s abortion politics is too extreme. I am suggesting that he get in front of this and defang himself. Brady will lose when he lets opponents do his political defining.
- ABCBoy - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:17 am:
As others have said, this is pretty clear case of folks trying to distract the voters from the most pressing issues of this election: jobs/economy, the state budget, and corruption. Pat Quinn isn’t very strong on any of those counts and so they’re employing a “oh look, a kitty” tactic as somebody else has observed.
Unless Quinn can change the subject to less pressing issues, he’s doomed and he knows it.
Thus, the distraction tactic. He’s hoping that Illinois voters are fools and will fall for it.
- The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 11:18 am:
===
Unless you are naive enough to believe that Big Jim Thompson is going to be out there campaigning for Brady, Edgar’s statements are highly consequential and a kick-in-the-teeth.
===
I respect Edgar, but one can only hope that Big Jim intervenes in all the 2010 races at some point–even from the shadows.
- shore - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 12:34 pm:
Jim Edgar, good riddance. What has the guy done for the party the last 15 years? He hasn’t rebuilt it, he intervened to help losers like coulson and dillard who did nothing for the future of the party and now he wants to bash our candidate.
Thanks for nothing.
- Aldyth - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 12:53 pm:
Brady is leading in the polls, but that isn’t likely to continue as more voters learn about his legislative history and public stands. It’s sad that the choice we are given for our next governor is between a marginally competent incumbent and a right wingnut.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 12:54 pm:
=Human life begins at conception. That isn’t extreme. That is a scientific fact.=
Yeah. If you believe an acorn is a tree.
In truth, “human life begins at conception” wasn’t even Catholic doctrine until relatively recently…and until the 1970’s, even the Southern Baptists allowed for abortion in cases of “rape, incest, clear evidence of severe fetal deformity, and carefully ascertained evidence of the likelihood of damage to the emotional, mental, and physical health of the mother”.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 2:28 pm:
Conception creates human life. Not plant life, not poultry, not chimp, human. If you wish to have a serious conversation regarding protecting human life, then let’s have it.
But don’t pretend otherwise.
Have any kids recently? We can tell from the first ultrasounds how many days old they are. When Rowe v. Wade created this “right”, our medical knowledge regarding human life were about as backwards as your views on abortion.
It is time to get up to date, it is 2010, not 1970. Try a little modern medicine and science for a change.
- Brennan - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 2:35 pm:
YDD: Are you using the Catholic Church to try to refute Science?
- really? - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 2:39 pm:
Dillard came out for Brady and in the spirt of unity did not ask for a recount, why can’t Edgar do the same?
- Southern Illinois Voter - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 5:16 pm:
One of the things that just about drove me over the edge about Dillard was that every time he opened his mouth he said “I was Jim Edgar’s chief of staff.” Edgar keeps bringing it up too - get over it already & move on.
- really? - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 6:31 pm:
@conservative republican=ever had the opportunity to shake Edgar’s hand? If so, perhaps you noticed he does not look you in the eye, quite a tell.
- T.J. - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 7:09 pm:
Interesting. Neither does Jim Ryan.
- The REAL Anonymous fka Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 7:40 pm:
None of this should be a surprise to anyone. Edgar and most in his camp have never been “warm and fuzzy”. Don’t you remember the interviews from–when was it last year?–asking Edgar and Thompson whether they “hug” (or it’s OK to hug) supporters? Edgar said no, and Thompson said he hugged supporters across the state a few times while campaigning.
That’s always been a major difference between the two camps.
- Jon Zahm - Wednesday, Mar 10, 10 @ 10:23 pm:
Jim Edgar is all hat, no cattle. He can’t carry any of his endorsements. He came into one of my races to do a fundraiser/endorsement for Jan Carlson, a 44 year incumbent Circuit Clerk/County Board member from Kane. We sent him back home with a 96 vote victory for a first time candidate. We made the Edgar endorsement an issue, calling him a “liberal RINO.”