Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Reform and Renewal keeps marching ahead *** Updated x1 ***
Next Post: Daily Herald fact checks candidates
Posted in:
Supposedly, Peter Roskam used the Tribune editorial board debate to back away from his “cut and run” comments he uttered at the last debate. But that isn’t in the Trib’s story.
Republican Peter Roskam and Democrat Tammy Duckworth disagreed Wednesday about everything from the Iraq war’s effect on national security to airport expansion, highlighting stark differences in their campaigns in the 6th Congressional District. […]The candidates accused each other of overstepping with negative attacks in the hard-fought race for the west suburban congressional seat of retiring Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.). […]
“I have a great deal of respect for her [military] service and I have a great deal of respect for her sacrifice, [but] I don’t sign on to the world view that she’s adopted that somehow it’s the United States that’s causing a jihadist mentality,” said Roskam, a state senator from Wheaton. “I don’t buy it and I don’t think the 6th District does either.”
Meanwhile, Bob Dole is forced to climb down a bit from effusive comments he made about Duckworth.
Former Republican presidential nominee Bob Dole took issue Wednesday with Democratic congressional candidate Tammy Duckworth’s use of his image and statements in a campaign flier.
The ad uses a Dole photo and quote from the March 2006 edition of Glamour magazine in which Dole said Duckworth will be “an excellent candidate for Congress.â€
Dole, however, said he’s actually endorsing Duckworth’s 6th Congressional District foe.
“If Tammy is an excellent candidate, so is Peter Roskam,†Dole said in a statement. “I am supporting Peter Roskam.â€
Bob Dole said “I”? He didn’t say “Bob Dole is supporting Pete Roskam… That’s his name, ‘Pete,’ whether he likes it or not, it’s ‘Pete’”?
And Rahm Emanuel lays out the national Democratic GOTV strategy.
Key to the Dems’ House strategy is picking up a hot political market segment — drop-off voters. They are sought-after micro- targets for Democrats in 2006. They are the voters who turned out in the 2004 presidential year but may well stay home in November.“And the entire focus of our effort, God willing there are no reporters in here to make sure the NRCC [National Republican Congressional Committee] hears about it, and that means that is to focus on those people who do vote presidential but don’t vote in non-presidential years,'’ Emanuel said.
“And our entire resources of mail, telephone, door knocking and person-to-person contact is to that universe. . . . That’s what we are doing.'’
That isn’t gonna be easy.
*** UPDATE *** The video of the debate can be found here. The Tribune being the Tribune, there’s no way to download it.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Roskam said “cut and run” was “admittedly not” Duckworth’s position.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 8:37 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Reform and Renewal keeps marching ahead *** Updated x1 ***
Next Post: Daily Herald fact checks candidates
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I hope the dems don’t thik micro-targeting is as simple as identifying presidential only voters. It is incredibly more complicated than that.
Comment by just watching Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 8:52 am
I know Bob Dole, and Duckworth is no Bob Dole. While I admire her national service, she is still wrong on the important issues facing us.
As to Emanuel’s comments, what’s new? Republicans have always voted more than Democrats during off-presidential election years. So, he’s saying that the key strategy is having Democrats vote during the off year? What is so new about that? Emanuel is running out of ideas, and is spinning his wheels here. He is leaving his post after this election, and Democrats ought to ask what he accomplished. This was their election to lose, and it looks like they did. All the micro-targeting in the world doesn’t make up for a lack of vision for American during wartime. With a month left, Democrats are finding themselves ranting over who is to blame for 9/11. Thanks to the Big Him, we have wasted time discussing how he single-handedly tackled Bin Laden, instead of presenting fresh ideas to win the war on terror.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 8:55 am
Cut and run might not be Duckworth’s position but it is the position of the leadership she will vote to put into place! Polosi, Murtha, Rangle, Conyers all will be in positions of leadership Rangle will control the purse strings as Chairman of Ways and Means. They all want to pull out ASAP.
So it is true that she will cast a vote for the cut and run policy with her vote for Speaker and democratic leadership!!
Comment by RAI Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 9:04 am
RAI: If you arent going to think for yourself and only use cute Republican slogans to try and make a point, you might want to check your RNC talking points again…its spelled Pelosi.
Comment by HANKSTER Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 9:42 am
How scummy is it of Duckworth to use images of a war hero w/o his consent. FIrst McCain, now Dole. And who are you people to lecture BobDole on the use of first vs third person pronouns!
Comment by Wumpus Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 10:27 am
The Democrat position is cut and run, is there anything out there that says otherwise? No…so what’s the big issue here? Is Duckworth against the war because that’s her party’s position, or hers?
The war was a HUGE mistake, there’s no doubt about that. But pulling out now would only make matters worse…just read the NIE that came out this week.
Comment by Wolf Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 1:44 pm
How special of Roskam to not attribute “cut and run ” to Duckworth. These chicken hawks have no shame. I’m tired of being lectured on patriotism by chicken hawks and draft dodgers (5 times) Dick Cheney.
Pete go back to telling us about your paper route and having cookies and milk on Mrs. Miller’s porch.
Comment by Charles Martel Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 5:51 pm
Rich, another “Duck Tales”Email from the ROskam Camp. She will say anything!
Tammy Duckworth has sent a mailer claiming Peter Roskam was complicit in poising our drinking water. Seems that she will say anything to get elected.
While Tammy doesn’t live in the district, she doesn’t get to drink the same water as you. Peter Roskam does. Does she really think that Peter Roskam wants to poison the water that he and his family drink?
FACT:
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency disagrees with Duckworth’s claim. In July 2006 they stated “…approximately 103 private wells down gradient of the landfill have recently been tested by the county, and none of the results show VOC contamination.”
The DuPage County Health Department disagrees with Duckworth’s claim. According to the Daily Herald on June 21, 2006, 87 wells in June were tested by the DuPage County Health Department with no contamination.
DuPage County Forest Preserve District disagrees with Duckworth’s claim. Joe Benedict, Environmental Services Manager for DuPage County Forest Preserve District contends that, based on the EPA results, there is no contamination.
A lawyer suing the owners of the landfill is a major contributor of the Duckworth campaign.
Tammy Duckworth sent this mailing two months after the Illinois EPA and the DuPage County Health Department found no contamination of drinking water after testing over 150 wells.
Duckworth also accused Roskam of voting against a bill to ban landfills near drinking water sources when, in fact, he ACTUALLY voted for it. (SB 348, 1997)
Tammy Duckworth will say and do anything to get elected, a tactic eerily reminiscent of the Chicago Democratic Machine that recruited her to run.
And she wants to represent us in Congress?
Comment by Wumpus Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 7:36 pm
Take a pill Wumpus , with water. Water from the Jardine pumping station . You know the one from that evil city with that evil Lake Michigan water. The city Petey has been vilifying his entire political career. Bring back well water to Dupage !!
Comment by Charles Martel Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 10:45 pm
The national Dems disgraced themselves on Bush’s torture bill.
It’s hard to imagine what more important debate on principles they are keeping their powder dry for.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 11:28 pm
How many people who use the term “cut and run” will acknowledge that President Bush has put the United States in a “no win” situation?
Will they acknowledge that the GOP answer for Iraq is to keep doing the same thing as long as possible to avoid admitting Bush’s decision to invade was a mistake?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Sep 28, 06 @ 11:30 pm
The “insurgents” can be defeated in Iraq, and the current administations program is capable of seeing that accomplished.
Comment by Conservative Republican Friday, Sep 29, 06 @ 12:25 am
Well, we used the cut-and-run approach in Vietnam (my war). And now Vietnam is big-time trading partner. Maybe we should let the Iraqis settle their own affairs, and in a decade Iraq can actually contrbute to the world oil supply. Or course, we won’t care because we will be running on ethanol and wind power. Big benefit for the state.
Comment by Old Jon Saturday, Sep 30, 06 @ 4:23 pm
Roskam tried to BS the Trib Ed Board and their reporters into believing his convoluted positon on Social Security isn’t privatization. They didn’t buy it. When he finished trying to bamboozle them one reporter said, “that is privatization”.
Comment by markg8 Sunday, Oct 1, 06 @ 2:35 pm