Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day - Political mailers
Next Post: Obama and Rezko issue heats up; Plus: The National Popular Vote bill
Posted in:
* The Chicago Tribune began rolling out their endorsements today with their picks of Democratic congressional candidiates. After spending much of their piece on the 3rd Congressional District zapping Mark Pera for claiming that incumbent Dan Lipinksi “works too well with Republicans,” they got to the meat of the matter…
We were tempted to wash our hands of this race. But the 3rd District is going to be better served by someone who rolls up his sleeves and gets things done, than by someone who goes to Washington spoiling for a political brawl. Lipinski wins that calculation hands down.
There are two other candidates in the race. We like Jerry Bennett, the longtime mayor of Palos Hills, who has been involved in south suburban development efforts. He may surprise us, but based on fundraising and organization it looks like Pera presents the stiffest challenge to Lipinski, and Pera’s campaign style leaves us cold. James Capparelli, a Chicago attorney, also is running.
So, Lipinksi will “roll up his sleeves,” but they “like” Jerry Bennett and Pera will probably put up the “stiffest challenge” to the incumbent. Looks like all three could do a mailer from that one.
* The massive DailyKos website, along with some others, are pushing for 5,000 new contributors for Pera this week. So far, Kos’ Blue Majority page shows a bit over 1,000 contributions, but that doesn’t appear to be just from this week. Kos has been pushing Pera for quite a while. More here and here.
* Aaron Schock was hammered by his fellow Republican candidates on “family values” at last night’s 18th Congressional District debate…
“I think having those conversations that I’ve had with my wife at our kitchen table about our children’s grades, about worrying about the moral climate, about getting them to church on time, informs me in a different way,” Morris said during a televised debate Monday held at WEEK-TV studios and sponsored by that station, the Journal Star and the League of Women Voters.
Throughout the debate Morris continued to promote his family background as a benefit to the job.
* Jim McConoughey wouldn’t go so far as to criticize the unmarried Schock for being sans family, but got in a dig nonetheless…
“As an experienced family man and a father, my life is richer and I make different types of decisions based on having a family.”
* Schock’s response made sense…
“What I think is important to note is that you can’t be everything to everybody,” Schock said. “You can’t be 60 years old and represent seniors, you don’t have to be a farmer to represent farmers and you certainly don’t have to be married with children to represent families or have family values.”
* WEEK-TV has more on the debate here. The debate will supposedly be posted sometime today on WEEK’s website. It’s not there as I write this.
* The Peoria Pundit thought McConoughey won. C.J. Summers at Peoria Chronicle wrote: “I thought Schock really shined at this debate.”
* Schock was also profiled by The Hill today…
Schock does not run from his age. His campaign plays up his advanced life story, which includes his election to the Peoria School Board at 19 and the state House at 22.
“People want to know, at 26 years old, are you prepared to run for Congress, are you capable of serving in Congress,” Schock said. “In many cases, I think I’ve had to work harder and perform better than my colleagues simply to prove that I’m up to the task.”
* From a press release…
Today the campaign of Bill Foster for Congress announces that NARAL Pro-Choice America endorses his candidacy for the 14th Congressional District seat.
* More congressional stuff…
* Oberweis radio ad [mp3]
* Illinoize, Bill Baar: An email from Tammy Duckworth
* Dr. Strangelove in the 14th: More Bill Foster mailers
* Hare: ‘My job is to get every penny I can back to this district’
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 11:17 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day - Political mailers
Next Post: Obama and Rezko issue heats up; Plus: The National Popular Vote bill
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
When push comes to shove the Tribune shows in the 3rd that it is just another part of the Combine. So much for all their bloviating about the Mayor and Governor. It’s all for show.
Comment by Angry Chicagoan Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 11:37 am
interesting bit of Lipp serivce in that endorsement. Somone needs to cover Schock and report a position or positions he has voiced on the issues. The constant bacl and forth over his age tells me nothing about his decision making abilities. I dont care how hard he works if he lacks judgment. So far I have seen nothing that reflects the ability to excercise good judgment. In Schocks defense, the coverage in this area has been light.
Comment by Ghost Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 11:59 am
I can’t help but think today’s mess has some people (including Trib editorial writers) wishing for the old days when the Combine ran things.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 12:04 pm
The Tribune is once again placing their Republican ideology ahead of the facts.
Congress.org assigns power rankings to members of Congress based on legislation passed, media appearances and the like.
How does Lipinski rank? 324 of 435. Of course seniority and party affiliation account for much of the ranking, so it’s better to look at Democrats first elected in 2004.
How does Lipinski rank among Dems first elected in 2004? 19th of 19.
The Tribune editorial board is living in some sort of make-believe world to claim that Lipinski is a successful deal maker who works across the aisle.
At best Lipinski attaches his name to popular bills that are going to pass and lets other members of Congress do the work of shepherding the bills through the process.
The Congress.org rankings show that even if Lipinski were to percolate up the seniority system, he’d still be ineffective to marginally effective, at best.
Voters should do Dan Lipinski a favor and give him the chance to build seniority in whatever career he ultimately chooses. Because, even if he wins, his level of support is going to drop from the 2006 elections. And he’s gonna get dumped in the next cycle.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 12:11 pm
The Oberweis radio spot is hilarious. Not exactly spot-on, but close enough.
Comment by Lionel Hutz Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 12:58 pm
The Tribune, in a nut shell. He may be corrupt, but he’s not liberal!!!
Comment by jerry 101 Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 1:19 pm
I attended the 3rd District Congressional Debate in LaGrange this past Sunday, and someone from the Trib must have been there, because they hit the nail right on the head with regard to Pera. I was anxious to hear what Pera had to say, as I haven’t heard him speak in over a decade. However, he came across as an angry man (rather than use his time reserved for a personal statement to talk about himself, he immediately attacked Lipinski) who thinks that anyone who doesn’t agree with his ultra-liberal views is plain wrong. What does “the democratic wing of the democratic party” mean anyway? That he will vote with Nancy Pelosi 100% of the time? I’d rather have someone who votes in the best interest of the constituents of the 3rd district of Illinois rather than in the best interest of the east and west coast liberal elites.
Pera lost a lot of votes this past Sunday - there’s no way he will be able to work with Republicans or moderate Democrats in Congress. And with a slim majority in Congress, having the temperment to work with others of differing ideological beliefs is a necessity.
Comment by Radical Moderate Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 1:33 pm
If you want someone other than Lipinski to be your congressman, the only one who can beat him is State Rep. Kevin Joyce. He had a fundraiser this past weekend and it was completely packed. You could not walk it was so crowded. He’s running unopposed, and the fact he can draw that many people is impressive. Easily over 1,000 people there.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 1:53 pm
It seems very apparent to anyone who has had dealt with Dan Lipinski that this was a position that was thrust upon him. Plan and simple, he doesn’t want to be in Congress. I’m sure he’s be a happy camper back in the university setting from which he came.
It is so unfortunate for the people of the 3rd congressional district that once again, back door deals and agreements have given us 3 opposition candidates. Lipinski will will again but I truely believe a very strong candidate will emerge next go around and Danny willl either retire or be bounced out of office.
Comment by anon Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 1:54 pm
Kevin Joyce is that strong candidate I think will knock off Lipinski.
Comment by anon Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 1:56 pm
Get real - who gets married at 26 anymore. and your comment Schock is “sans family” is totally false..doesnt he have a mother, father, brothers and sisters?? why doesnt that count for family values? Further - who is against family values? why is this even a question..weak.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 2:02 pm
Radical Moderate, on what issue is Mark Pera too liberal?
I also attended the forum and wrote it up on Proviso Probe.
I tried to write in a way that allows readers to make their own judgment.
I thought Pera did well on the point Radical Moderate mentioned. Pera forcefully said he is dissatisfied with the Democratic leadership on Iraq and with Lipinski on specific issues, like abortion rights and stem cells. Challengers are supposed to make the case for change, right? How could Pera have contrasted himself with Lipinski and seemed less angry?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 4:22 pm
Carl,
Pera just has that unfortunate Hillary Clinton-like quality of coming across as angry and unlikeable. A few people in the audience commented on it after the debate. For instance, he emphasized very strongly, without being asked, that he is, “pro-choice and proud of it”. I thought that was unnecessary for him to do - it pushed some pro-life leaning people who were considering Pera away from his camp. It is one thing to be pro-choice, but in a district that seems relatively split on the issue, I thought it a bad political move to voluntarily state his vehemenent pro-choice stance. Sure, people in the third CD don’t cast their votes solely on the abortion issue, but even the average Democratic voter in that district doesn’t want a US Rep. who comes across as yearning to be on the Board of NARAL.
He also seemed angry and manipulative trying to debate Lipinski on the energy bill votes. Yes, Lipinski voted for final passage of the energy bill in 2005 - as did a VAST majority of Congress, including liberal icons such as Obama and Durbin - but it is safe to say that just because all three voted for the final bill doesn’t mean they support tax breaks for oil companies. If Pera ever does become a US Rep, I’m sure there will be many times he will vote for final passage of important bills even though there are bitter pills to swallow within the bill (no bill is perfect, but that’s the democratic legislative process). Otherwise, Pera will vote nay on everything in Congress, doing no justice to the constituents in the 3rd CD.
I did see your write-up. I thought it was very fair and balanced (unlike the Fox News Channel.)
Comment by Radical Moderate Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 5:33 pm
Carl - great write-up. I agree with
Radical Moderate. fair and balanced.
Pera’s answers shows his ignorance of the federal government and the legislative process.
Benett at least was articulate and statesman-like.
Maybe we do need someone different in 3rd CD.
But Kevin Joyce? C’mon now.
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jan 15, 08 @ 9:16 pm