61 Comments - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:19 pm: ===* What we have here is a bunch of purists screaming for the ouster of a heathen and attempting to get a piece of the pie that they cannot get electorally, vs. regulars fending off the barbarians at the gate and protecting their pie. It has always been thus in Illinois. It will likely always be thus, as long as the chairmanship is so overly valued.=== Wow. At some point, maybe those “smart” few will understand that. Well said. - wordslinger - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:21 pm: –The socially conservative Roeser Friday said Brady’s “proposal about two men being in a family, it’s startling. When you look at what he did, he bolted and didn’t talk to anyone around him. He just, boom, went ahead and did it.”– Well, Jack Roeser has always been very scrupulous about being a team player in the Illinois GOP. You’ve never seen him going off on his own. - Chicago Cynic - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:23 pm: Agreed. Well said Rich. I know this is part of the long struggle. But seriously, for years Roeser and his ilk said, “if only we nominate a real conservative, we can elect them governor.”. Does anyone, even Jack Roeser, doubt that Kirk Dillard would be governor today if he had won the primary? - 2nd Generation Wannabe - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:24 pm: I would love to see Roeser himself as the Illinois GOP chairman. Sparks would really fly!! His rants on his Sunday morning radio show are classic! - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:25 pm: Are we going to continue this “undercurrent” about this NOT being about SSM? I keep looking at the Roeser quote and that sounds like this is being SOLD as being about SSM, especially by Roeser when talking to the media. Get those pitchforks ready “Blood Oathers”, Litmus Testers, you get the torches … - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:34 pm: ===Does anyone, even Jack Roeser, doubt that Kirk Dillard would be governor today if he had won the primary?=== To that … ===The Republicans are in too deep of a hole. And there’s little the chairman - any chairman - can do about thinning the field in the upcoming Republican primary. The chairman - any chairman - just has no power.=== First, less than 200 Votes, Brady beat Dillard. Dillard had no field operation to find those votes, Dillard and the GOP got what we deserved, talking about “What if Dillard …” helps nothing. As for the part I took from Rich… We got Veto-Proofed out of two chambers, and the ILGOP brand is considered so awful that Litmus Testers and Blood Oathers think its “their time”. That … is how bad it is. And thinking the “change” of the GOP Chairman, under the guise of SSM especially is going to help right off the bat is folly. Change should have happened in December, based on Election Performance, and if need be, the role “vacant” instead of removing the Chairman, who is useless on a good day, and utterly useless now, …under the stain… of intolerance. Hey Oberweis? You want Roeser speaking for you now? Don’t you do enough damage, now you need Roeser to really destroy the Party’s image to the Moderates? Dopes! - Jon Zahm - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:38 pm: Pat Brady got himself into primaries in major public ways that he should not have as Party Chairman. Lauzen/Burns, Romney versus everyone else and Gerson/Smithburg/Kelly are three examples. His fundraising shell game that Rich wrote about regarding passing Ken and Anne Griffin money thru places like tiny Stark County (population 6000) and then cycling it back to Chicago to the IL GOP violated the intent, if not the letter, of the new campaign finance laws. Taking positions against the party platform on marriage and all GOP state senators except Barickman, and it looks like all GOP state reps besides Sandack, is wrongheaded too. I have publicly called for Brady to go since February 2012. Jim Nalepa would be a good option if he were still interested. Anthony Anderson of Boone County and Sheriff Ed Motley of Edgar County and Rockford’s John Guevara are all good options to consider. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:43 pm: - Jon Zahm -, Pat Brady is being questioned solely on SSM. While all you say may be the case “others” like to make against Brady, (I have other reasons, too many to post AGAIN, but they are out there) but MY party wants to wave the “intolerance” flag proudly, allowing the Party to shrink as the Democcrats wil point out, “You know, the ILGOP voted their Chariman out for supporting SSM, ever wonder what else they will be against?” That … is the “rub”. We in the ILGOP are behind the 8-Ball already in moderate leaning districts, why help the Dems by making the moderate districts more out of reach then we have made them already? - Chicago Cynic - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:45 pm: OW, My point was not that Dillard would have cured all GOP ills. My point was just those yearning for idealogical purity as the key to their future are seriously deluded. Field or no field, Dillard would have won easily. It was Brady’s extremism that cost him the last election (that and the puppies). Even with all the impediments, all the weakness and all the brand problems, he still would have won. These internecine contests are idiotic. Frankly, even though I’m an activist Dem and even I wish we had a sane GOP - locally and nationally. - Oswego Silly - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:50 pm: There isn’t one member of the state central committee who wants Pat Brady out over SSM. They want him out and that’s the excuse. They all have their reasons, the biggest is that Jerry Clarke wants the job right now. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:52 pm: ===There isn’t one member of the state central committee who wants Pat Brady out over SSM.=== Jim Oberweis, Gene Dawson … there is 2. - Send in the Clowns - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:54 pm: A pox on all their houses. Brady has proven inept at best and has certainly exacerbated the division in the party. Neither has he exhibited any talent for fundraising or leadership. But it is understandable that many people like Kirk and Cross are backing him up since the alternative appears to be a thinly-veiled stalking horse for the extreme right crowd led by Roeser, Zahm and the rest of their cadre of social issue zealots. Brady, incompetent as he may be, is all that stands between the ILGOP and the takeover by a group that really, truly believes that if they just self-righteously lecture voters more and take a harder line against immigrants and gays, that the party will rise again. Both sides deserve each other… - Meanderthal - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:56 pm: Roeser and anyone else who thinks that every Republican in Illinois has to adhere to every plank in the state or national GOP platform is delusional. By my count, there are three GOP statewide elected officials. Each has taken positions independent of the platform and probably got elected, in part, because of it. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:56 pm: - Oswego Silly - (Not bad, Dopey, but not bad), If selling the idea to the media, to everyone watching that SSM is the reason, then it IS, and if Jerry Clarke or “others” do not have the “testicular fortitude” to oust Brady without using SSM, then those using SSm are pretty sad and pathetic that they want the Party to seem intolerant for their political ends. Quite embarrassing … like the name of “Oswego Silly” … lol - Ray Midge - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 1:57 pm: Roeser seems determined to brand the ILGOP permanently as the Party of Angry White Men. - OneMan - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:01 pm: Pat Brady got himself into primaries in major public ways that he should not have as Party Chairman. Jon I completely agree, his moves in the Lauzen/Burns primary indicated such a tactical tin ear in his own backyard that I question his instincts on running a two car funeral. All he managed to do was look like a dope and cement the complete changing of the party guard at the county level. He totally set the bozo bit with me on that. The problem is they didn’t go after him right after the general with these issues. They waited until after the phone calls and that ended up setting the narrative. Like it or not that is what everyone is going to focus on. The answer would have been waiting 3 months to go after him and use the primary stuff and how we did in the general. Like it or not the phone calls should have reset the clock from a perception viewpoint. Then again to Rich’s point, if someone wants to be party chair with the lack of power and influence it has vs the headaches that comes with it more power to you I guess. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:02 pm: ===My point was just those yearning for idealogical purity as the key to their future are seriously deluded. Field or no field, Dillard would have won easily=== As a Dem, you know, gotta get through the Primary … can’t do that, the rest is “if, buts, candies and nuts …” NO reason to go back and discuss that, becuase, we in the GOP do too much of looking back and not looking forward, and find ourselves stuck in Neutral. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:05 pm: ===The problem is they didn’t go after him right after the general with these issues. They waited until after the phone calls and that ended up setting the narrative. Like it or not that is what everyone is going to focus on. The answer would have been waiting 3 months to go after him and use the primary stuff and how we did in the general. Like it or not the phone calls should have reset the clock from a perception viewpoint.=== Well said, - OneMan - - LincolnLounger - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:05 pm: This band of zealots has never won anything. It’s a mistake to try and apply logic to how they think and operate. They pretend to be conservatives, but they are really “cafeteria conservatives” picking and choosing when to apply their beliefs. There is nothing remotely “conservative” about wanting to peek in everybody’s bedroom window or tell women how they should operate their bodies. These people would prefer to be “right”, than win. They are perfectly happy having a “crown” and title — even if their position is an embarrassing minority. Their attitude is “Let purity reign in my phone booth.” - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:10 pm: - LincolnLounger -, Well done. If I may, I will credit you, but can I “borrow” that ===“Let purity reign in my phone booth.” ===? That is GOOD stuff there! - Carl Nyberg - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:22 pm: Can I sign the petition to make Jack Roeser chairman of the Illinois GOP? - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:24 pm: ===Can I sign the petition to make Jack Roeser chairman of the Illinois GOP?=== I hope not! Yikes, Chad Coppie might as well come bacl too! - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:24 pm: ===Can I sign the petition to make Jack Roeser chairman of the Illinois GOP?=== I hope not! Yikes, Chad Coppie might as well come back too! - LincolnLounger - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:40 pm: Borrow whatever you like, Willy. No attribution required. You do the Lord’s work. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 2:49 pm: - LincolnLounger -, With much respect, I thank you for the permission. And thank you for understanding my motives as well. What helps is that there are many trying which gives me, and should give us all, hope. Again, with respect, thanks, - LincolnLounger -. - OneMan - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:05 pm: == Can I sign the petition to make Jack Roeser chairman of the Illinois GOP? == Only if I can sign one to make you state Dem chairman Carl - Early Riser - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:16 pm: It’s understandable that liberal Democrats want the Illinois GOP to adopt their “beliefs” and principles. But then the GOP would be the Democrat party. So what would be the point? Conservatives have been calling on Brady to go for a long time - the media only picked up on the disgust with Brady after he announced his opposition to the GOP platform on SSM. Thanks to the media, the bigotry against religious people and institutions is growing. As for Roeser, he just wants his guy in. No one knows who Shaw is. Roeser has given him lots of cash. He’s a DUI attorney but was arrested for DUI. This is all about power - not principles. Brady had power but not principles - the GOP will never win until they give power to someone WITH principles. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:36 pm: - Early Riser -, Sadly, perception IS reality here and the Good Humor-ed Ice Cream Man state Senator Jim Oberweis, along with Gene Dawson, and fueled by the quotes of Jack Roeser have MADE this about SSM, intolerance, and Blood Oaths and Litmus Tests. Further, - Early Riser -, if I agree with you on most, if not 80% of the time, are you saying the 20% I don’t should make me a Democrat? Because I may not agree on School Funding, or any of ONE social agenda items, I am less of a Republican … then …. you? You can go in broom closet and have your Republican meetings, while you are voted down, over and over by Moderates who say, when you as at for their support at the door…”I would vote Republican, but you guys are too extreme, heck you threw out your Chairman on Same Sex Marriage, its right here in this mail piece …” This is the classic example of “cutting off your nose to spite your face.” “We will take out Brady, let Oberweis and Dawson “say” its about SSM, but the deed will be done. There will be no fallout, heck the Dems will just forget about it.” Checkers … “Illinois Democrats today condone the ousting of former ILGOP Chairman Pat Brady. Brady, according to Jim Oberweis a state central committeeman voting in favor of the ouster stated, ‘The Republican platform is clear and wavoring in the SSM issue was the end of the road for Pat Brady.’ Democratic Party officials condone the move, calling the rigid stance by the ILGOP “disappointing and a step backwards the voters will have to think about when their candidates talk about social issues.” Chess … This very specific move, under very specific reason… TOLD TO THE PRESS BY THESE DOPES…will not be replaced by “the real reasons” once the move to oust Brady under Oberweis’ terms is done. This, to me. is like “Fire Madigan” and “Call me. Maybe?” all over again. I see this train wreck unfolding and no one is stopping the train. - Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:37 pm: > As a Republican activist for nearly 30 years and a Township Chairman for the past 5, I have been hearing this nonsense forever and ever. During that time Republicans went from being the dominant party in Illinois, which was actually once a red state, to being the most solid blue state in the USA. The aims of a political party are to win elections. The goals of a political cult is to surround oneself with like individuals who think, talk and walk exactly like you. Political parties win elections by reaching out to all voters. Political cults talk to themselves, lose and then sulk. The cultists like Roeser are at it again. Making us all look the party of stupid. Again. And yes, there are those of us out there that are just sick and tired of that nonsense. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:41 pm: - Louis G. Atsaves -, Well said. - Precinct Captain - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:44 pm: Thanks to the media, the bigotry against religious people and institutions is growing Did you ever stop think that it’s your self-righteous hypocritical bullcrap that’s why people are turned off by religion instead of playing your victim card towards the media? http://www.gallup.com/poll/128276/increasing-number-no-religious-identity.aspx http://www.pewforum.org/unaffiliated/nones-on-the-rise.aspx - Jon Zahm - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:46 pm: Every time the GOP tries to take a step to the left to appease a liberal by casting a vote for driver’s licenses for illegals or gay marriage or taxing satellite to give the money to schools, etc. we lose a vote on the right or the libertarian side. In fact I find we are losing more than 1 for 1. So I stand for the proposition that we need a real conservative party with real principles and values to take back Illinois. If not the IL GOP will go the way of the Whigs. Even folks who disagree on some of the issues will be appreciative of the fact that we are consistent and not wishy washy. - OneMan - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:46 pm: Louis, Right on, without winning elections you just end up being a group of people who agree with each other and a small group at that. - walkinfool - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 3:59 pm: If Jack just wants rich, righteous party leaders with few demonstrated political skills, why not just hold an open auction for the post? The one with the most money gathered/donated wins. - CircularFiringSquad - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:07 pm: Gosh this is so hard to say, BUT we must agree with Carol Marin —- Gags Brady must be saved. WhackyJack Roeser and Chopper Jim cannot seize the helm of the good ship IL GOPie. Who is Mark Shaw? which wing nut issue is he best known? 2A? HoMosexuals? legal dope? Prayer in school? Right to Work? - Endangered Moderate Species - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:09 pm: -Thanks to the media, the bigotry against religious people and institutions is growing. - Riser, I am not sure we share the same definition of bigotry. - Jim - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:22 pm: somebody should tell Carol Marin that Illinois already has a one-party General Assembly. - ironman - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:23 pm: Illinois republicans are tired and worn out. Brady, cross and senate leader must go. They all think they know whats good for the party. Bill brady needs to go, dillard must go. And move forward to advance the party.. this is what i am hearing…. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:27 pm: - ironman -, Ok, sounds good, I wanted Cross, Radogno, and even Bill Brady gone. Tell me, who should replace them, and what is the goal of your ILGOP, and how do you see the ILGOP getting from where we all are now, to where we need to be, which is relevent. No snark, asking … so here is your chance to tell us. - Demoralized - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:40 pm: No matter that the Republicans are somewhere between non-existent and irrelevant in Illinois government. That’s apparently not an important issue. Gotta clear up that gay thing. Can’t have that in the Republican Party. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 4:43 pm: ===and even Bill Brady gone.=== “and even PAT Brady gone.” Apologies. - Early Riser - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:07 pm: Oswego Willy - you have totally missed the point. Pat Brady is the CHAIRMAN of the Illinois GOP. Whatever that means, powerful or not, in that capacity, he represents Illinois GOP voters and the party platform. Just in terms of the SSM issue, Brady misused his position to grandstand on the issue and lobby GOP officials. If your argument is that the GOP is cutting off his nose to spite his face on this issue, I respectfully disagree. The GOP’s based of voters also disagrees with you on this issue. The Chick-Fil-A incident reveals this as well. But, regardless of this, Brady has proven to be a clown unable to win elections. That should be enough for him to retire. - Early Riser - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:16 pm: Precinct Captain - yes, anti-religious bigotry is on the rise and it is sanctioned by the media and entertainment industries. It is so sad to see it. Even in your words, the hate seems to be there. I have a lot of sympathy for all people, regardless of what they do or say. No one is perfect. But mocking people for having religious beliefs and values - that is not what this country is supposed to be about. Polls are the result of how successful the media is about pushing people to believe one thing or another. So Gallup doesn’t exactly persuade me that you are right on principle. But this isn’t a battle of principle - this is a PR battle - which right now is not the GOP’s strong suit. But that could change with the right leadership. Getting rid of Brady is step one. Making sure that the Illinois GOP doesn’t pull a bait-and-switch insider game and crown a new clown prince that nobody knows is step two. - Formerly Known As... - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:20 pm: This is about a great deal more than gay marriage. That narrative is convenient and may hold a grain of truth, but it barely scratches the surface. Brady’s opponents blundered in the beginning by jumping on gay marriage as a vehicle to drum up the base. Had those individuals been thinking ahead, they would have realized it is better to confront one directly instead of hiding behind gay marriage to try pushing the man out. Instead, they pandered and got the pitchforks. Now the fire is burning out of control. Brady made a lot of enemies in recent years with his treatment of others, short temper, involvement in losing primary races, and so on. Those personal power struggles are now coming home to roost. They will never see the light of day, however, as long as gay marriage is front and center. This has been the story for 3 months now. If they try to remove him 3 months from now? It will still be covered as being about gay marriage. 6 months from now? Same thing. A year from now? Does not matter since there will be new elections. Brady played this well and his opponents played right into it. A bunch of zealots got the ball rolling back in December and some of Brady’s short-sighted enemies jumped on the bandwagon. Dumb. dUmB. DuMb. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:22 pm: ===…you have totally missed the point.=== Nope, I understand completely. The issue, in case YOU missed it, is about SSM, and the Chairman being ousted on the intolerance. Oberweis and his cronies waited and CHOSE the SSM to oust Brady, I didn’t. ===The GOP’s based of voters also disagrees with you on this issue. The Chick-Fil-A incident reveals this as well.=== There are polls that show the “base” is on the wrong side of many social issues, (campaign/election wise) and the fact you want to use … Chick-Fil-A issue to defend yourself is not the best idea, since all it proved was no one cared. Not caring is not a position. The “Base” can not drive the bus, if driving the bus means shrinking our numbers, making all us seem intolerant, and that 100% of the time we have to agree with the “Base” to be a Republcan. If you want to disagree on SSM with another Republican, that does NOT make you more of a Republican than whom you disagree with. If you believe that someone disagreeing with you makes them less of a Republican, than your “Litmus Test” is shrinking my Party. Purity of Faith is one thing, and I respect all faiths and their beliefs. Purity of Party is destroying all you think you are preserving by alienating EVERYONE who can not agree with you 100% Read - Louis G. Atsaves - above. THAT was what we should be striving for to allow the Party to grow and be relevent. Anything less of the Reagan Rule of 80% is just Blood Oaths and Litmus Tests and you should ““Let purity reign in YOUR phone booth.” as - LincolnLounger - has so eloquently described where you WILL be with Putity and Litmus Tests and blood Oaths. ===But, regardless of this, Brady has proven to be a clown unable to win elections. That should be enough for him to retire.=== “Other than THAT, Mrs. Lincoln …” lol This we agree … One HUNDRED …percent. Just, not at the pitchforks and torches …of the Purity. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:23 pm: ===But this isn’t a battle of principle - this is a PR battle - which right now is not the GOP’s strong suit. But that could change with the right leadership. Getting rid of Brady is step one. Making sure that the Illinois GOP doesn’t pull a bait-and-switch insider game and crown a new clown prince that nobody knows is step two.=== So I am quite clear … Are you saying, a shift to the “Right” is needed in the ILGOP to get back on track? I will …wait … for your response. - Rich Miller - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:28 pm: ===we lose a vote on the right or the libertarian side== And they are being lost to… what? Which party are they flocking to? I’d really like to know. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:36 pm: ===So I stand for the proposition that we need a real conservative party with real principles and values to take back Illinois.=== There will be alot of room in that Phone Booth for you! Whee does YOUR GOP leave me? I agree with you, I am sure 80% of the time, but if I don’t agree with you all the time, am I not worthy enough to be a mamber of your New Conservate GOP? ===Even folks who disagree on some of the issues will be appreciative of the fact that we are consistent and not wishy washy.=== lol I spit out my coffee! “I respect their ideals. I am going to vote against them every time, but I respect it.” - Small Town Liberal - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:44 pm: - But mocking people for having religious beliefs and values - that is not what this country is supposed to be about. - You’re right, that’s much worse than denying people rights for not sharing the same beliefs as you. - Conservative Veteran - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 6:09 pm: Mark Shaw is my member of the IL GOP SCC, and I agree with him about many issues. However, I think that the IL GOP chairman should be a conservative who has held an elective office and has been a county party chairman. Shaw is a conservative, but he’s never been elected to an elective office or been a county party chairman. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 6:17 pm: - Formerly Known As… - Very well said. Thanks for making things clearer. Well done. - Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 7:21 pm: ===who is Mark Shaw?=== Mark is actually a pretty decent guy who also loves the Republican party. Hopefully the cultists in and around our party won’t use and abuse him and later spit him out for the next victim to chew on. But they will. It’s part of how they operate. I’m sure his telephone has been smoking red hot these past few days. And as to votes on drivers licenses for illegals and for same sex marriages that are cast by Republicans in Springfield, and other things that go bump in the night, what difference does it make now as to how they vote, for, against, abstain? With veto proof majorities in the House and Senate, our GOP elected officials have no real voice in how the State is being run, or the agenda in the legislature. The cultish group DEMANDS purity of soul amongst the remaining elected Republican officials, even though it makes not a bit of difference at this point in time. They never attack Democrats and their positions on social issues. Just Republicans. The cults within the GOP have reaped what they sowed. Democratic dominated government in Illinois that conflicts with their values. Well, what did they expect? The rest of us just want to rebuild the Illinois Republican Party. My county chair prefers to cancel meetings on that topic, so it has been tough sledding. The Republican cult groups don’t want to rebuild. They want to finish burning it down to the ground so they can rebuild from scratch. That is what is so damn frustrating for the rest of us Republicans. Too many of them believe in that stupidity. - VanillaMan - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 8:36 pm: There is really no reason to listen to anyone with as poor a campaign record as these guys have. If they were baseball players, they would have been driven off the field twenty years ago and told to return when they figure out how to play the game. These guys are such losers, no one should be paying any attention to them. - Jon Zahm - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 10:44 pm: - Rich Miller - Monday, Mar 4, 13 @ 5:28 pm: ===we lose a vote on the right or the libertarian side== And they are being lost to… what? Which party are they flocking to? I’d really like to know. Rich, I do a lot of door to door and I campaign in a lot of parts of this state. What I am finding is that conservative and libertarian voters are turning off and tuning out. They are choosing not to vote and many are leaving the state. I heard one stat that we lose an Illinois resident every 7 minutes. Why shouldn’t we all move to Florida? No income tax. School choice, including special needs vouchers. Better weather. Plenty of sports and recreation. - just sayin' - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 6:12 am: You’re wrong on this one Rich. This may be one of the very rare times when IL repubs stand up and remove a failed official. Don’t know why you feel the need to poo poo that. You’re bigger than that. This is not about “purists” and its not about gay marriage. Simple fact is Pat Brady has no idea what he’s doing and he’s long overstayed his welcome. And you don’t convincingly argue that the top official of the party isn’t a big deal. Of course it is. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 7:53 am: ===This is not about “purists” and its not about gay marriage.=== You may not think its about the “purists” or SSM, but come election time, it WILL be about “purity” and it WILL be about SSM… THAT … is the point. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 7:55 am: ===This is not about “purists” and its not about gay marriage.=== You may be right about that, but come election time, it WILL be about “purity” and it WILL BE about SSM, and the Democrats are going to hang that on all us in the GOP. Sometimes, the political move, is the better move, and if this goes down like this, it will come back to haunt the ILGOP. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 7:57 am: Hey, - Jon Zahm - Tell me, in your New Conservative GOP, how do you get to 30/60/Mansion? Are your cookie-cutter conservatives going to be able to win in Moderate districts, running on “Principal and all”? How does your New Conservative GOP here in Illinois …Grow? Where are these conservatives sitting on their hands? You consult all the time about politics, how about you answer those questions??? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 9:45 am: I’ll bet 7:53 is OW who always discloses fully. Sure. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 9:54 am: And I can’t even imagine what OW is planning or claiming as far as “but come election time, it will be about PURITY.” Are the Democrats planning to run ads against the entire GOP itself and if so, OW believes that’s going to stick? Begin the ads with the “ominous music”…., I guess. It’s OW who’s pushing the “purity” buzzwords and twisting everyone’s words to make all Rs look bad, and the only objective seems to be to keep Brady in office. More of the same, and it’s beginning to sound more and more like a form of extortion and some are beginning to believe that Brady’s behind this. And it’s starting to make him look really, really bad for selling out Rs through calls of “purity” to stay in. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 5, 13 @ 10:08 am: As a matter of fact, I’m predicting that Willy’s claims of purity are going to have a “unifying” effect on the GOP because of how such “name-calling” is perceived among Rs. Moderates will empathize with Conservatives who believe that Brady isn’t an effective leader because of his track record v. the SSM issue (or if the SSM issue, the approach that he took more than the issue itself. And, Conservatives will see that Moderates who believe Brady isn’t an effectie leader because of his track record are being labeled in a way that could potentially be perceived as negative. Bottom line: bashing every individual in the party is just fine when it comes to trying to keep Brady in his office. Much to OW’s chagrin, I’m sure, I have not and will not state my personal position on this issue. The foregoing are merely observations about how transparent and flawed OW’s logic is. Like I said, more of the same. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.