* An uproar developed earlier this week when Bobby Schilling released a secretly recorded conversation with a Cheri Bustos congressional district office employee. The employee made some racist remarks about Rockfordians, and then resigned when Bustos found out.
It’s probably no surprise, but the person who made the recording once worked for Schilling’s campaign…
Austin Quick, 33, was paid a $3,792 salary in 2009 to work for Schilling’s 2010 congressional campaign, records show. He currently is a seminary student at Mundelein Seminary in the Chicago suburbs. […]
[Schilling campaign spokesman Jon Schweppe] said no one from the campaign asked Quick to make the recording. In a Facebook post dated the same week the recording was made, Quick posted a photo of Schilling and his wife and remarked on having had dinner together.
Contacted by phone Thursday, Quick would not say why he made the secret recording. Asked whether he was denying having covertly recorded Bustos’ district director, Heidi Schultz, he replied, “I’m saying there’s no proof to that.”
Schultz, who resigned her post Monday, said she was provided a photo of Quick and is certain he is the man who appeared in her Rock Island district office late last year, asking about her boss’ position on abortion.
* Now, there’s no defense for what that employee said. Zero.
However, the story also notes that the guy gave the Schilling campaign the recording three months ago.
Let’s revisit Schilling’s press release from earlier this week…
This recording is particularly revealing and Cheri Bustos has a lot to answer for. The views stated on the recording are a window into a cynical operation that does not respect the people she serves.
But it’s in no way “cynical” to sit on this until a week before the election?
C’mon.
- Phenomynous - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 2:47 pm:
This is basically the same as the DCEO announcement except that it isn’t.
- Gooner - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 2:50 pm:
So for three months Schilling was fine with a racist working for Bustos? Didn’t consider it a problem? Saw no need to report it?
- circularfiringsquad - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:00 pm:
Another bungle by Boehner Baby, PizzaBobby. Guessing the wave misses Bustos
- D.P.Gumby - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:02 pm:
I detect an odor from Schilling and it isn’t pizza!
- Jaded - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:03 pm:
You’re right…probably should have released it before early voting started last Monday.
- Stones - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:04 pm:
He went from campaign work to the seminary?
Sounds like one interesting guy!
- Seriously? - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:07 pm:
When did economic status become a race???
- À guy - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:07 pm:
Bad form.
- VanillaMan - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:09 pm:
This is what all politicians do.
- Aldyth - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:17 pm:
A last gasp of a desperate campaign.
- Carroll County - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:18 pm:
Schilling’s “kitchen sink” 12 page color newspaper came in yesterday’s mail in the district. That story is on page 8, takes about the bottom third of the page.
This was obviously well planned, they didn’t print all these this week.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:18 pm:
===This is what all politicians do.===
How would you know?
- lil enchilada - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:20 pm:
This guy allegedly went into Bustos office dressed as a priest, asking the Congresswoman’s stance on abortion.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:22 pm:
==How would you know?==
Pretty sure he knows everything.
=========
To the post:
Are we all supposed to go around recording everything now? Did I miss the memo?
I think what this staffer said was dumb. Not the kind of representation any elected official (or anyone else for that matter) wants in their office.
But it’s equally distasteful what Schilling did in this case. Tagging Bustos as condoning it is just ludicrous. It was handled immediately. Perhaps if he hadn’t sat on it for so long that person could have been taken to task much sooner.
This is slimy politics at it’s best (or worst rather).
- Jaded - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:25 pm:
Page 8 makes sense in Carroll county. Probably should be page one in Winnebago and Peoria county. He lost those two counties by a combined 18,000 votes and lost the election by around 19,000 votes. What else has he got to lose in those two counties?
- Jimmy CrackCorn - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:29 pm:
“Bring me this Quick kid. He’s got upper management written all over him”-Bishop Paprocki, probably
- walker - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:32 pm:
Is Schilling as bad as his campaign makes him appear?
- NW Illinois Dem - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:41 pm:
This is a politics entirely unworthy of the electorate. This secret Schilling taping — using someone dressed as a Catholic Priest — is a new low and a lawsuit is just around the corner.
- Under Further Review - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:41 pm:
“This guy allegedly went into Bustos office dressed as a priest, asking the Congresswoman’s stance on abortion.”
And the response to a purported clergyman was a veiled slur directed against minorities? Unreal.
Nobody in the Bustos campaign office was aware of this exchange?
- Anonymous - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:47 pm:
I fail to see how these comments are racist. Someone help clarify?
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:52 pm:
Walker - I’m going to be brutally honest. I’ve never walked more precincts for anyone in my life than I did for Bobby Schilling in 2010. I would’ve walked through walls for him. He ran a great campaign in 2010 and a pretty good one in 2012. This time, though, the wheels have come off. I think he’ll lose by 5-10 points. I just don’t “feel” the magic.
- Shark Sandwich - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:56 pm:
“I fail to see how these comments are racist. Someone help clarify?”
“Urban” is often a code word for black these days. “Living under a rock” is code for anyone who doesn’t (or pretends not to) know that.
- West Side the Best Side - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:56 pm:
Quick still needs some more seminary time. His response of “there’s no proof of that” is more political than priestly.
- Under Further Review - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 3:58 pm:
“Shark Sandwich” was not one of Spinal Tap’s most favorably reviewed albums. LOL
- OldSmoky2 - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 4:02 pm:
==Nobody in the Bustos campaign office was aware of this exchange?==
Duh, read the full article. She was the only person in the office when he did this. So, no, no one in Bustos’ office was aware of it. Schilling, Rev. Holier-than-thou and others in the Schilling campaign office were aware of it for three months, though. Bustos acted responsibly when she found out about it. Schilling didn’t.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 4:03 pm:
““Urban” is often a code word for black these days. “Living under a rock” is code for anyone who doesn’t (or pretends not to) know that.”
Except the employee was asked if it was an urban area. I’m not saying it definitely wasn’t intended to refer to blacks, but racism is a pretty ugly accusation. Ambiguous cases like this which depend upon a transcript of a recording should be treated with a little more delicacy.
Also there is the fact that Rockford is more urban than rural, is quite poor, and is quite underprivileged.
- Wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 4:16 pm:
I’m pretty sure it’s illegal to impersonate a member of the clergy. I’m not talking about an obvious theater context, or Halloween,but going about in public claiming to be a clergy member for real.
The google shows it is illegal in some states, but didn’t get a quick hit on Illinois.
Schilling crew kind of stepped on their own hit here.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 4:31 pm:
Word - when my brother was in seminary and participated in a school-sponsored internship at a local church, he was allowed to wear vestments in public (i.e. hospital or local event). He was in another state, but he did not need to take his vestments off if he was going to and from events or meetings and stopped at a sandwich shop or a local market.
- Urbanite - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 4:53 pm:
I’ll say it’s funny to see a Democrat hoisted on the “urban” petard. I’m one who thinks trying to discern malicious intent in someone’s words is wrong. Urban is urban. I wonder where this young lady is from. Maybe she isn’t up on all the dog whistles. Same with the guy.
As to the “priest attire”, he had on a collar. Seminarians often where them. So it’s not impersonating a priest. The article explains this.
Rich, I don’t see a link to the article. But maybe I’m missing it.
- OldSmoky2 - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 4:56 pm:
The link to the article is in red near the end of the post - “three months ago.”
- Willie Stark - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 5:03 pm:
Quick inspired by that paragon of virtue and disguises James O’Keefe. Wingnut see, wingnut do. As bad as they need new priests, guessing this fellow eventually gets bounced out.
- VM - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 5:04 pm:
Quoting demoralized:
== Tagging Bustos as condoning it is just ludicrous. It was handled immediately. Perhaps if he hadn’t sat on it for so long that person could have been taken to task much sooner. ==
Because it needs to be said again. Bustos literally fired the staffer within a day. Schilling sat on the information for three months.
Compare and contrast.
- George Washington Plunket - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 5:41 pm:
Schilling is really a delusiol light weight.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 7:12 pm:
Was it also politically incorrect for President Obama to tell an audience at Chicago State that they needed to make sure that “Uncle Pookie” left the couch where he sits watching television everyday to go to the polls and vote.
Using stereotypes can cause problems as to interpretation.
If this recording proves to be the deciding factor in the Bustos/Schilling rematch, the voters in that district must be inattentive to the important issues.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 7:58 pm:
Not to say I told you so, but…
- Odysseus - Thursday, Oct 30, 14 @ 10:00 pm:
Ummm … why isn’t this dude in jail? Eavesdropping is a state offense.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs4.asp?ActID=1876&ChapterID=53&SeqStart=32750000&SeqEnd=34900000
(a) A person commits eavesdropping when he:
(1) Knowingly and intentionally uses an eavesdropping
device for the purpose of hearing or recording all or any part of any conversation or intercepts, retains, or transcribes electronic communication unless he does so (A) with the consent of all of the parties to such conversation or electronic communication
[…]
Sec. 14-4. Sentence.
(a) Eavesdropping, for a first offense, is a Class 4 felony and, for a second or subsequent offense, is a Class 3 felony.