39 Comments - 47th Ward - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:37 am: ===the PAC counts no Republicans among those publicly supporting its mission.=== That explains as much or more than any map why the Illinois Republican Party finds itself in an almost permanent minority status. It’s why Governor Rauner kept his mouth shut about having a “social agenda.” The fact is, most Illinoisans support abortion rights. Jim Edgar Republicans used to as well. Those were the same Republicans that won elections. I miss those Republicans. - Yiddishcowboy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:40 am: @47th. I so agree! it’s unfortunate how time has changed. - Bored Chairman - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:46 am: Nope. There are plenty of pro choice Republican legislators. Personal PAC has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Illinois Democratic Party. - Denny - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:49 am: It seems like you could say the same thing about guns, right? Twenty years ago, there were a handful of suburban Republicans who were considered gun control advocates. Not now. - Yiddishcowboy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:50 am: @Bored. In all seriousness, then how would you explain the “from 23 down to 0″? - Anon 4 - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:52 am: @Bored Chairman said “There are plenty of pro choice Republican legislators.” I count one, Christine Radogno…and I’m not certain that’s true. Who else is there? - Ducky LaMoore - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:54 am: I understand. The party left me behind too. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 9:55 am: ===Nope. There are plenty of pro choice Republican legislators.=== Plenty? Ok… ===Personal PAC has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Illinois Democratic Party.=== Another victim heard from. Make the case for the “plenty” of Republican legislators being shut out. If I could make the case of “plenty”, I would. Thanks. - Ron Burgundy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:05 am: Given the choices of opposition, which gets you a quarter million dropped on your head, silent support, or public support, which gets you a challenge from the right and probably no money if your Democratic opponent supports also, the choice seems clear if the legislator might otherwise be inclined to support. - Amalia - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:09 am: they may be doing commercials for a candidate. they are also doing oppo. - JoeMaddon - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:20 am: ** There are plenty of pro choice Republican legislators. ** Name them. We only need to look at last year’s contraception bill. No Republican votes in the House. 0 Republican votes in the Senate. And that was an EASY pro-choice bill. So who are these alleged Republican legislators that are pro-choice, but never actually vote yes on pro-choice bills? - Huh? - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:36 am: Terry Cosgrove leads a bipartisan political action committee? Wasn’t he was a Quinn appointee to a state board or commission? - JoeMaddon - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:48 am: **Terry Cosgrove leads a bipartisan political action committee?** Yes. **Wasn’t he was a Quinn appointee to a state board or commission?** Yes. - A guy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:53 am: Self fulfilling prophecy for Personal Pac. Their mail is so disruptively crude, even the more pro-choice legislators of both parties cringe when they see it. Younger women are very smart. They know there are plenty of places you can go for mammograms and other basic health procedures. They’re also very well aware of what PP has built their franchise on. - Team Sleep - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 10:56 am: Mr. Burgundy is correct. Dems may bemoan the fall of the socially moderate Republicans but have they paid attention to what happens when Republicans fall into the “RINO” trap? Kyle McCarter ran against John Shimkus because he wasn’t conservative enough. Think about that for a minute. Mark Kirk is routinely vilified by conservatives because he’s (in their mind) a wet noodle and no different than Senator Durbin (which is something I’ve heard since Senator Durbin was nice enough to help Senator Kirk in his post-stroke return to public service). Dems don’t have that problem. How often has a sitting Dem official had a primary because he or she isn’t liberal enough? Durbin hasn’t. Schakowsky hasn’t. Bustos hasn’t. I know I’m using federal examples but I can’t think of many (or any) state-level Dems who were primaried because they weren’t “liberal” enough. - 47th Ward - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 11:01 am: Guy, I think you’re confusing Personal Pac with Planned Parenthood. Personal Pac is a political action committee and a very effective one at that. Unlike Planned Parenthood, Personal Pac does not provide health services. I don’t know why it is so difficult for Republican legislators and candidates to say they support choice. I guess they are too afraid of right wing primary challengers to stand up for a principle they believe in, and their voters believe it. Gutless is as gutless does. - wordslinger - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 11:18 am: Guy, the spokesman for lawmakers from both parties and smart young women everywhere. Curious that you routinely ascribe your views to others, based on nothing. Do you think that makes your views more credible? - sideline watcher - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 11:18 am: Not by their voting records. - A guy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 11:19 am: 47, seriously here, Is every Pro-Life legislator or person…gutless? Or is it possible that there’s a vast philosophical difference? And, I’m not confusing Personal Pac with Planned Parenthood. Despite our dramatically different views, I don’t consider you daft. - A guy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 11:25 am: Sling, Illinois Right to Life and other Pro life organizations have numbers and surveys too. They see trending among younger women moving in their direction. Hey dude, I’m not trying to change your mind. In fact, I don’t like even getting in to discussions on this issue. It’s just hard to sit by and not see any opposition to a viewpoint here when you know it exists. That’s all. - JoeMaddon - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 12:03 pm: **Is every Pro-Life legislator or person…gutless?** That’s not what 47 said. I’ve talked to numerous legislators who describe themselves as pro-choice, and support some of the legislation that gets introduced, yet they still vote no. That is 47’s point. - A guy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 12:19 pm: Joe, I’m not sure what you just said. Respectfully, can you rephrase this? - Anonymous - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:07 pm: As if there were any Pro-life Democrates They have nothing to complain about I left the Democratic Party over this issue I was born and grew up a left wing liberal Democrate but there is no place in their party for a true Pro-life person. I am not a Republican either but that is besides the point - Rich Miller - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:10 pm: ===but there is no place in their party for a true Pro-life person=== I think Congressman Lipinski, Sen. Forby, and state Reps. Costello, Phelps and Bradley would disagree with you, among others. - crazybleedingheart - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:17 pm: ==I know I’m using federal examples but I can’t think of many (or any) state-level Dems who were primaried because they weren’t “liberal” enough.== Just last time alone: Christian Mitchell Ken Dunkin Both pretty huge, expensive races. - JoeMaddon - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:26 pm: **Joe, I’m not sure what you just said. Respectfully, can you rephrase this?** Bot sure what was unclear. GOP legislators tell me they support pro-choice legislation. But then go on to say that they can’t vote for it. This is the lack of courage that 47 is referring to. - JoeMaddon - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:26 pm: ==I know I’m using federal examples but I can’t think of many (or any) state-level Dems who were primaried because they weren’t “liberal” enough. Just last time alone: Christian Mitchell Ken Dunkin== And then add Toni Berrios. Jaime Andrade. Almost every Chicago alderman. The list goes on and on. ==I know I’m using federal examples but I can’t think of many (or any) state-level Dems who were primaried because they weren’t “liberal” enough. Just last time alone: Christian Mitchell Ken Dunkin== And then add Toni Berrios. Jaime Andrade. Christian Mitchell again. Almost every Chicago alderman. The list goes on and on. - Anonymous - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:34 pm: ” Rich Miller - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:10 pm:” I used to be involved heavily with Democratic politics. I walked away on the night of a victory celebration because they started bashing Pro-lifers. From my own personal experience, I stand by my claim that there is no place in their party for a pro-lifer. Also, they have gone after Lipinski and some Democrates like the Governor of New York have attacked pro-lifers. I stand by my personal experiences. By the way, I walked away quietly. I did not complain or try to defend myself. They did not even know that a Pro-lifer was a supporter until that moment. I just turned, walked off the stage and left the room and the Democratic Party. I did not leave lightly. It was not an easy thing to do. If you are in a room full of Democrates as a Pro-Lifer, your views will be attacked. I have seen it too many times. - 47th Ward - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:36 pm: ===I’m not sure what you just said=== Joe was pretty clear Guy. There are Republican legislators that are pro-choice, but are afraid to stand up and be counted on critical votes. That’s gutless. Maybe you should read slower and try sound out the big words. If you still need help, you should be able to find an on-line dictionary. Let me know and I can send you a link. - 47th Ward - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 1:39 pm: ===I walked away on the night of a victory celebration because they started bashing Pro-lifers.=== Was that the Glenn Poshard victory party after the 1998 primary where he won the Democratic nomination? Or Neil Hartigan’s? - Team Sleep - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 2:03 pm: Crazy & Joe - thanks for that. I guess I should clarified/qualified with social issues (specifically the pro-choice stance). My apologies. - VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 2:07 pm: You people are cracking me up! How long do you think abortion can stay a political issue? It’s been a few generations since Roe v. Wade. Medicine has changed, birth control has changed, societal attitudes towards children born out of wedlock has changed, our economy has changed hanged - but you’re still thinking like it’s 1974!. It’s a ginned-up obsolete issue designed to spook lady voters, just like how the Democrats claim every election that seniors will lose their Social Security, or African Americans their right to vote. The GOP has moved on. - Juvenal - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 2:31 pm: @Vanillaman: You apparently missed the third presidential debate. Donald Trump says he would nominate justices to the Spupreme Court who would overturn Roe v Wade. The issue is very much alive. - VanillaMan - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 2:52 pm: Nonsense. Trump’s trolling you. - walker - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 3:44 pm: Kerry Lester is right on point. The face of the Republican Party has changed over the past twenty years. Cosgrove very highly values pro-choice Republican candidates, if they can be relied upon to vote their stated consciences. He told me once they were “worth 10 pro-choice Democrats” because of their leverage. Unfortunately we have seen them depart the field. Sometimes pushed out by other Republicans. Wedges do separate. - A guy - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 4:18 pm: ===Joe was pretty clear Guy. There are Republican legislators that are pro-choice, but are afraid to stand up and be counted on critical votes. That’s gutless.=== Or maybe they’re not (as) Pro Choice as you think they are 47. V Man is right about how much society has changed since 1974. Pro Life Democrats in heavy Catholic and Evangelical strongholds have been able to maintain their stances and beliefs. I don’t proclaim either viewpoint to be “gutless” if they’re voting their beliefs, their consciences or their districts. I’d prefer Pro Life candidates, but I’ll be voting for a number who are not. PP’s mailers are crude. But, in this cycle and the past few cycles, it’s hard to disseminate crude with so many others joining the ugly fray. You, like usual, aren’t helping. - 47th Ward - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 4:41 pm: Viewpoints aren’t gutless, voting against your beliefs because you fear a political challenge is gutless. I really can’t understand why you aren’t grasping that distinction. Why won’t the pro choice candidates you claim to vote for stand up and say they are pro choice? Why do they say one thing in private and vote the opposite on the floor? And VMan is dead wrong. Mike Pence passed legislation requiring fetal remains to be properly buried. That is an assault on women who are exercising their rights. - Terry Cosgrove - Monday, Oct 24, 16 @ 5:20 pm: Personal PAC remains committed to its bi-partisan mission, despite zero Republican votes for a simple bill to make birth control more accessible. During the debate on the bill, Rep. Dwight Kay referred to women who use birth control as “promiscuous” which would only be 96% of Illinois women. It’s not our fault that zero representatives and senators of the party allegedly of “limited government” is obsessed with putting government (read:themselves) in the middle of the most private and intimate decisions a woman and her family can make. We look forward to the future when the Illinois General Assembly has as many pro-choice Republicans as Democrats. Calling all pro-choice Republicans—please get in touch with me so we can hasten that day. And thank you to all the wonderful pro-choice leaders currently in the Illinois House and Senate and all of those running for office in 2016. We will always be with you and are proud of your work on behalf of access to reproductive health care for ALL women in Illinois. It’s pro-choice or no choice. No exceptions. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 8:36 am: Pense didn’t outlaw abortion. He recognized that abortion takes a human life and this is how we show respect for the passing of a human life. If that makes you squirm - sorry you wanted to pretend it wasn’t a human life. But it was. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.