* I don’t think the question here is whether the penalty was too stiff. A verbal reprimand to an employee with no record of trouble seems appropriate. What is in question, though, is whether the case warranted being placed on the Executive Ethics Commission’s website. The Commission doesn’t have to publish any case unless an employee discipline results in a suspension…
An investigator for Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn’s human rights agency got a slap on the wrist for forwarding an e-mail before last November’s election that contended the Republican Party had been hijacked by “dangerous, radical hate mongers called the ‘Tea Party.’ “
The e-mail, sent on a state computer, claimed talk show host Glenn Beck and former GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin led the tea party effort to “take down President Obama and the government.”
* The employee is upset about the reprimand, but seems regretful about the forwarded e-mail in question…
Forbes, 56, of Chicago, said in an interview that the case against him was “petty as hell.” He called the reprimand “bogus,” saying he sent the e-mail accidentally to some of his co-workers. He said his sister had sent it to him.
“I didn’t endorse it at all,” Forbes said. “It was just something I inadvertently sent. Had I thought a little more about it and were able to perceive the ramifications that I would have experienced, I would have just eliminated that e-mail altogether.”
That would have been the better course for Forbes. But I still wonder why the Executive Ethics Commission decided to publicly humiliate the guy. Your thoughts?
Polls have been showing a drop in [the tea party’s] approval, and a new AP/GfK poll shows that its unfavorable rating has seen a sharp rise. 46 percent of those surveyed said they have a negative view of the Tea Party movement, versus 28 who say they view it favorably.
The last time the AP conducted a national poll on Americans’ favorability of Tea Partiers was in their pre-governing period: throughout 2010 the conservative movement was viewed slightly unfavorably but the splits were close. In June of 2010 it even earned a positive rating, with 33 percent of over 1,000 adults surveyed finding the movement favorable against 30 percent. In the last AP rating, taken Nov. 3-8, 2010, directly after the 2010 election, the split stood at a slim negative rating of 32 percent favorable against 36 unfavorable.
The jump of ten points in the negative number is all in the “very unfavorable” category. In November of 2010 there were 22 percent who viewed the Tea Party that way, which has risen to 32 percent. The “somewhat unfavorable” number remains unchanged in the last nine months, steady at 14 percent.
The most recent CNN/ORC poll had tea party favorability at 31 percent, with 51 percent viewing it unfavorably. USA Today/Gallup’s poll found that a plurality of 42 percent would be less likely to vote for a congressional candidate with tea party support.
* By the way, remember when I wrote yesterday about what some call the “Cold Civil War” that strengthened during the fight over the debt ceiling? Well, back in March, Republican Illinois Congressman Adam Kinzinger compared the coming battle to an actual shooting war…
Just wait, said Rep. Adam Kinzinger, for the fireworks over next year’s budget, as well as a must-pass bill to allow the government to borrow more money to meet its commitments. Republicans hope to use that measure to force further spending cuts on the president.
“What I tell folks is: This is like Fort Sumter in the Civil War,” the Illinois Republican said Wednesday. “This is the first fight. The big battle is still ahead of us.”
Did he really compare his compatriots to the Confederacy? Perhaps he should check to see which state he represents before making more comments like that.
* Other stuff…
* Job Fair Draws Demonstrators - Congresswoman Judy Biggert hosted a jobs event in Romeoville Monday.
* Schock draws a crowd to Elmwood town hall meeting
* Editorial: Regional primaries make sense