Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Should Cullerton step aside and allow a vote?
Next Post: Don’t hold your breath
Posted in:
* State Sen. Jim Oberweis has been one of the strongest, most public critics of former Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady for running afoul of the party platform by supporting a gay marriage bill.
As you probably already know, Oberweis voted for the medical marijuana bill on Friday…
State Senator Jim Oberweis (R-Aurora) surprised Capitol observers Friday when he, along with two other Republicans, voted to legalize medical marijuana in Illinois. HB 1, which passed the House earlier this year, will now proceed to Governor Quinn, who has not committed to sign it yet, but said he’s “open-minded” about it.
That “open-mindedness” is the same position held by Oberweis as he went into the HB 1 vote discussion Friday.
“I’m honestly undecided about this,” Oberweis told his Democrat colleague and bill sponsor State Senator Bill Haine of Alton. Oberweis told Illinois Review Friday evening that his final decision came down to the overwhelming majority of people in his district who supported legalizing medical marijuana.
Oberweis, who asserted that he’s never tried marijuana or any illegal drug in his life, said a recent telephone townhall helped him decide in favor of medical marijuana.
“[It was a] difficult vote, but during a recent Tele Townhall in my district, we asked a question about medical marijuana and a strong majority said yes,” Oberweis said in an email.
* From the Illinois Republican Party Platform…
To the citizens of Illinois, we commit ourselves to the following: […]
To make our communities safer through reducing crime and drug use
* From the Senate debate…
In one of the debate’s most moving moments, state Sen. Kyle McCarter (R-Lebanon) choked up noting that the pain of an ill patient who might benefit from marijuana is miniscule compared to the pain of a parent who loses a child from drug abuse. McCarter’s 21-year-old daughter died from an accidental drug overdose.
“For every touching story we’ve heard about the benefits to those in pain, I remind you today that there are a thousand times more parents who’ll never be relieved from the pain of losing a child due to addiction, which in many cases started with the very illegal, FDA-unapproved, addiction-forming drug that you are asking us to make a normal part of our communities,” McCarter told his colleagues, his voice breaking. “As one of those dads, I ask you to vote no.”
* Now, I happen to agree with Oberweis on this particular issue…
“Look, if people are going to be mad at me for a vote on that bill, so be it. I didn’t feel strongly,” he said. “I don’t think there’s a significant amount of harm that will come to the state because of it.”
But Oberweis is a member of the state central committee. And while the platform doesn’t explicitly mention medical marijuana, it is clear that the platform pledges less drug use.
So, did Oberweis the central committeeman violate the platform? Did he “do the right thing” despite what his party (and some of his party fellows like Sen. McCarter) stands for? And isn’t that what Brady did?
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:27 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Should Cullerton step aside and allow a vote?
Next Post: Don’t hold your breath
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Marijuana and gay marriage and backbencher state senator and state party chief are on different levels. He’s a hypocrite but the differences are the magnitude of who he is vs brady and how important the two issues are within the party right now.
There’s a milk pun in here, it’s just too early on a monday for me to find it.
Comment by shore Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:30 am
ChopperJim does no wrong
Wonder what mixing a little Dope with one of those Chocolate Shake?
Comment by CircularFiringSquad Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:37 am
Hypocrite. But, that wasn’t unexpected was it?
Comment by Vanilla Ice Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:38 am
This is why (and Senator Obie’s district is right adj. to me) I look at the guy and shake my head. Not over the Platform stuff - that’s just noise to me.
Obie is a very successful businessman. But he doesn’t seem to always carry over those business processes over into the political area, to his loss. When you are in business, it’s largely about customer service and expanding your market. And he’s good at doing that.
And his position he took on medical marijuana represents that philosophy perfectly. But on other areas, not so much.
Oh well, it’s a start.
Comment by Judgment Day Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:38 am
I’m not an Obie fan, but come on. Clearly the platform is about illegal drug use, and not drug use for medicinal purposes.
Comment by come on Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:40 am
People who smoke eat a lot of ice cream.
Comment by Belle Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:46 am
I am no fan of Oberweis, but this is thin. The party is much more clear on gay marriage. Saying support of medical marijuana is support of illegal drugs is like saying supporting hunting is supporting gun violence in Chicago.
Must have been a slow weekend.
Comment by the Patriot Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:50 am
Jim Oberweis–As one of your constituents, in no way did I support or vote for you in the past election. However, you thinking through this issue instead of parroting out the latest right wing talking points is worthy of a heartfelt ‘thank you’
train111
Comment by train111 Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:50 am
I agree with Come On. Somehow, some people can’t separate the medicinal use of marijuana by chronic sufferers and from those who use it for recreational purposes.
We’re not talking about people getting stoned for kicks here, but MS and chemo patients who would like a legal path to get off hard, dangerous prescription drugs.
Accidental fatal overdoses from legal prescription drugs is a serious problem. No one has ever fatally overdosed on marijuana.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:51 am
Very sorry for mccarters loss. But this minute “flow” of drugs to patients is highly unlikely to reach an experimenting youngster. That kid will share joints w the fry cook, not the cancer patient.
Comment by Langhorne Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:53 am
==Clearly the platform is about illegal drug use, and not drug use for medicinal purposes. ==
It’s not that clear to me. It says drug use. Period. Is there a footnote in the platform? This is the height of hypocrisy on Oberweis’ part and further indicates to me the “special” status people give to the SSM issue. Gotta go after those gays at all costs.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:54 am
Maybe Oberweis can draw a chart for us showing which planks of the Republican platform must be honored over those you can be “open-minded” about.
Comment by Wensicia Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:57 am
===Saying support of medical marijuana is support of illegal drugs is like saying supporting hunting is supporting gun violence in Chicago. ===
Apparently, you skipped over Sen. McCarter’s comments.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 20, 13 @ 9:58 am
–It’s not that clear to me. It says drug use. Period. –
C’mon. You can’t believe the platform is against people going to the doctor and getting prescriptions.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:00 am
Tobacco is legal and its use has declined dramatically through regulation and education, while it is still legal. It isn’t safe to assume use will increase just because it is now legal for a few people with illnesses. And those people who might now use cannabis for what ails them, might also stop or reduce their use of much heavier narcotics and prescription drugs.
Oberweis didn’t violate his oath with that yes vote, the no votes were the ones who violated their oath. Prohibition of cannabis increases crime, it doesn’t reduce it. The Coors family isn’t shooting at the Budweiser family these days. Prohibition also makes it harder to reduce drug use, as the tobacco example shows. Prohibition is not a “conservative” position, it is a progressive, government control position.
If parents can’t handle teaching their kids about the responsible use of drugs and the government must take over that role from families, how in the world can they be trusted to teach their kids about the responsible use of guns? Makes no sense to me how some think guns are great for everyone, but with cannabis, including industrial hemp, we should go to war with our own citizens trying to ban it.
Comment by Jeff Trigg Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:01 am
No, he didn’t the violate the platform. Voting for medical marijuana isn’t voting to increase crime and drug use, unless you happen to think it was a gateway bill. There is nothing wrong with representing your constituents.
Comment by Anon Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:02 am
Well using that same logic, are you arguing that the state party platform calls for a reduction in the use of all drugs? Including aspirin?
It is not that clear to me, perhaps the Illinois GOP is looking to reduce general pharmaceutics use?
Come on, have to agree. I think this one is a bit thin on Jim..
Comment by OneMan Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:02 am
I missed the full debate so I’m confused about McCarter making the connection of his daughters death from an overdose of fentanyl, per an old post-dispatch article, (a prescription painkiller from big pharma) with the medical marijuana debate.
Interestingly fentanyl is apparently prescribed to help sufferers of chronic pain and cancer pain similar to the patients to be treated under the med mj pilot program. But unlike mj, hundreds of people have died from fentanyl and patients have fallen into comas from fentanyl overdoses, per the post-dispatch.
So why isn’t kyle mccarter seeking to make fentanyl illegal as medicine rather than standing in the way of safer medication for chronic pain sufferers.
I’m not trying to be insensitive to his horrific tragedy here but when he explains his opposition to this bill is what happened to his daughter I take him at his word but feel prompted to respond to the argument.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:05 am
==Well using that same logic, are you arguing that the state party platform calls for a reduction in the use of all drugs? Including aspirin?==
Give me a break. If you want to get silly so be it.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:27 am
“Well using that same logic, are you arguing that the state party platform calls for a reduction in the use of all drugs?”
One way to reduce the use of ‘illegal’ drugs to zero: legalize them all.
Also, if the fear is about the misuse of prescription drugs, where’s the proposal to ban Oxy in Illinois? Oxy is many times worse than pot–it’s not a *gateway* to hard drugs it *IS* hard drugs. The anti-MM set needs to get square on Oxy to have *any* credibility with me (not that they care, obviously).
Comment by Chris Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:33 am
As a conservative I see no problem with the medical MJ vote from Oberweis. I think most of the GOP are using the camel’s nose under the tent scenario as a reason to vote against. I for one think people who are in critical condition should be allowed to ease their pain any way they want to. I have read studies where patients say the pill form doesn’t give them the same effect as real MJ making them be able to eat and relieving pain, if thats the case for some and not others i say offer what works for the person.
Comment by votecounter Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:35 am
Regarding McCarter’s comments, I think it’s relevant that she died of a fentanyl overdose (which also killed Jay Bennett): a prescription opioid. Drug use is drug use; overdoses from prescription opiates are driving the increase in drug overdoses. That came up in the Senate debate.
I don’t know that legalizing marijuana as a pain treatment will make a big dent in opioid prescriptions. But there’s a good argument to be made that it would make people safer.
Comment by whetstone Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:37 am
“To make our communities safer through reducing crime and drug use.”
That line doesn’t apply to drugs prescribed by a Doctor. Maybe that plank isn’t clear enough, but Oberweis was there at the convention.
Comment by Allen Skillicorn Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:40 am
Demoralized..
== Give me a break. If you want to get silly so be it. ==
Get silly? Dude you already visited that neighborhood. After all you are the one who said…
==
==Clearly the platform is about illegal drug use, and not drug use for medicinal purposes. ==
It’s not that clear to me. It says drug use. Period ==
Again, your response to the statement that is was clearly about illegal drug use was..
== It’s not that clear to me. It says drug use. Period ==
So if it is not clear to you (your comment not mine) that the implication was illegal drug use, then logically you are implying that is was the use of drugs, be they legal or illegal (not sure if there is another spot there).
I am sorry if expressing your thought takes us to silly…
Comment by OneMan Monday, May 20, 13 @ 10:49 am
I really enjoyed going to “another” site and reading how Oberweis “let down” conservatives, and how it is that Oberweis is “less pure” and all that goes along with Litmus Tests and Blood Oaths. I guess Oberweis wanted to be a “Good Republican” as he calls GOP members he wants to give a “Seal of Approval” on when THEY go against the platform?
To that,
If Oberweis and the “Political Director” understand that being 80% an ally is not 20% a foe, and if it takes Medical … MEDICAL … marijuana for Oberweis to learn this lesson, I am all for it.
Let me be quite clear, however. I already stated when Jim Oberweis expressed his hopes for the next Chairman, and how being inclusive is important, and “big tent” was so important … remember Jim Oberweis and “Political Director”, when you are holding off the pitchforks and torches with “political” ice cream, ptichforks and torches Jim Oberweis ginned up, people are going to be skeptical when you vote like you did on MM.
Check out how some of the Slytherin House Republicans feel about you, and that vote, now…on one vote, mind you, and you were/are being thoughtful to the point.
Read THOSE comments, and listen to the Slytherin House GOP members who “praised” you and brought signs and picketed … for your quote and cause … and what they THINK… on one vote.
Sen. Oberweis. I give you at least 20% to be different than me. You think those Slytherins are given you that SAME deal?
Whose “losing the arguement” about being inclusive now?
If they are asking you, Senator Oberweis to be 100% “Pure”, than how can even…I…thank you for being thoughtful?
Maybe, just maybe … if you take all my criticism, and look at it in the view as those “Pure” GOP members take you to task, … who is trying to better My Party, those holding your feet to the flames for “Purity” or those, like me, who are holding your feet to the flames … for inclusion, thoughtfulness… and the Reagan Rule? I ding you for being non-inclusive, THEY ding you for a lack of “Purity”, so which is a better thing to get that “hit” for when building My Party?
That is up to you… and your “Political Director”.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 12:55 pm
@OneMan:
You included a comment in your little diatribe that I didn’t say. At least get the quotes right.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 20, 13 @ 2:02 pm
Willy,
If you are so interested in helping “your party”, why not come out to the Kendall GOP meeting tonight at the Old Kendall Courthouse in Yorkville at 7pm. You do occasionally make some good points. Your may find out that your reality of blog posts and newspaper reports is much different than the reality on the ground. Why not come on out and get involved? We have an exciting new County Chairman in Scott Gryder and your party is in a transitional mode right now. People with all ideas are welcome. As a resident of Bristol, and a Kendall GOP committeemen, I would be happy to pick you up if needed. Heck, I might even treat you to a milkshake at Oberweis Dairy on Bypass 30.
Comment by Ben Marc*m Monday, May 20, 13 @ 2:40 pm
Demoralized,
Ummm no, I also included what you quote from another post as well so I will make it clearer for you…
From your comment at 9:54 AM
This is what you quoted from a previous post by someone else
This was your response (in part) to what you quoted
So I hope that is clearer now…
So back to my question which you ignored, I will phrase it differently for you.
Are you saying that since it doesn’t explicitly say illegal drugs that the platform of the party includes legal drugs?
Comment by OneMan Monday, May 20, 13 @ 2:45 pm
“Political Director”,
For all you know, I have been sitting next to you all along(?)
When comparing my “some good points” you also lump me in with newspaper reports, I don’t get the connection and why in the same sentence you need both me, and the newspaper reports. Confusing. What do you mean by that?
Bristol is a fine place, and I am sure you do a fine job.
But to be fair, you may not have been the 1st or even the 5th to offer me invitations to places and events that I might already be attending.
Lastly,
“your party”…really?
You just don’t get “it”…and you posting, “your party”, reinforces just about everything I think may be wrong with “political” ice cream and “governmental” ice cream.
It’s a bit disappointing that a lack of understanding of the use of “My Party” is being seen.
No snark, look around, I may be already there.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 2:55 pm
Anyway…
But the bigger question is
Unless you think that drug use part of this
To make our communities safer through reducing crime and drug use
Does not mean illegal drug use, that is where the use of a given drug is a crime. Understanding that the use of a given drug may be a crime for one party (someone who is prescribed a painkiller legitimately) vs another (someone who buys said painkiller from a dealer on the street).
By making a drug ‘legal’ for use (under the prescriptive authority of a medical professional) makes it no longer a crime.
However if you feel the implication in the platform is not illegal drugs, but drugs in general… Well, I got nothing for that…
Comment by OneMan Monday, May 20, 13 @ 2:56 pm
===For all you know, I have been sitting next to you all along(?)===
OW speaks truth.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 20, 13 @ 2:57 pm
@OneMan:
I didn’t ignore your question. I believe I said it was silly. It doesn’t matter how you phrase it. But if you want to play this game I assume that they mean illegal drugs, which is what Oberweis voted on. It turns an illegal drug (at least partially) into a legal drug. Besides, my larger point was the Oberweis is a hypocrite for going bananas over the SSM issue and the party platform while at the same time voting to at least partially legalize marijuana. Even though I think his vote was the right one I think a little consistency would be nice.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:01 pm
Willy,
My point is that reporters and blog posters paint a picture that isn’t always accurate. Your obsession with “blood oathers and litmus testers” is one example. If you were sitting in at official GOP meetings and events you would understand that the people you are referencing hold little to no power within OUR party. (Is that better)? I know the people you are referencing and they make up a very small percentage of the GOP. Both parties have extremists and I think you give them waaaay to much blame for damaging the GOP. I hope you can make it tonight, and if so, I hope you say hello. I would very much like to work with you to better our party and our state.
Comment by Ben Marc*m Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:18 pm
=== If you were sitting in at official GOP meetings and events===
Little do you know…
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:21 pm
Because of the loss of his daughter, it is difficult to address McCarter’s quotes. My sympathies go out to his family.
Addiction is complicated and can have severe effects on those unable to manage the chemistry of their bodies.
The argument that marijuana as a gateway drug is to often over-used by well-meaning supporters of the War on Drugs. Tobacco and alcohol are often the gateway drug to all illegal drugs.
It seems that prescription drug abuse is a much larger problem than marijuana abuse. Are we willing to tighten the rules on prescription drugs? No, because we know these prescription drugs help many people address a number of ailments on a daily basis.
Kudos to Oberweis on this vote.
Comment by Endangered Moderate Species Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:30 pm
Maybe Oswego Willy is Pat Brady??? That would explain his Oberweis disdain.
Comment by Ben Marc*m Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:40 pm
Ben,
With Respect.
First, I complimented your Boss and posed the question about who is helping, those who are not happy with your Boss’ votes, or those who are understanding of the vote.
Further, are YOU then “Marginalizing” the “Blood Oathers” by posting …
===Your obsession with “blood oathers and litmus testers” is one example. If you were sitting in at official GOP meetings and events you would understand that the people you are referencing hold little to no power…===
Yet…
They were pandered to when SSM was used as the fulcrum to oust Pat Brady, and the beliefs of those Republicans and their stance on the Platform WAS referenced time and time again … and now …they have no power?
===Both parties have extremists and I think you give them waaaay to much blame for damaging the GOP.===
“Must”, “Always”, Never”, and “Only” damages ANY political party, including My Party.
To that point, your reference to Our Party is nice, but in reference to the use of “My Party”, you seem to have missed why I use those words specifically, from when you posted “your party”, then thinking it was correct when using “our party” and especially in that sentence in using Our Party.
Ben, I am more than willing to work with anyone. there are loads of people that want to help. They are out there, and they don’t need meetings or titles or even the promise of a perfect candidate.
They want a Party that is more welcoming, and less rigid. Your Boss’ vote is a strong step I applaud, but his thoughtfulness is even more critical.
However, you can’t say you are on the right side with a group, and then Marginalize who they are so offhandedly. That is what “Litmus Testers and Blood Oathers” point to when calling Republicans … RINOs. Remember that.
The Reagan Rule embraces the 80%, just don’t dismiss those with our 20% we are not in agreement on as not Good Republicans.
Ben, its tough being a Freshman, be it in high school, college, or even the General Assembly. Showing growth is huge, especially for My Party.
We need to build, not marginalize to score debating points, and requiring “purity” is also marginalizing…. food for thought.
With Respect.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:52 pm
===Maybe Oswego Willy is Pat Brady??? That would explain his Oberweis disdain.===
“Political Director”,
If you ain’t helping, you’re hurting….
Disappointing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 3:53 pm
How exactly was anyone pandered to during the effort to oust Brady? The only ones that had a say are the members of the State Central Committee. As it turns out, they agreed with Jim that Brady had to go. His results as chairman were crap. It’s a great thing that he’s gone and I’m thrilled that Jim led the effort. Even before the SSM incident there were loud voices calling for his ouster. Even then Jim stood by and supported Brady. Brady’s lobbying for a bill contrary to the party platform was just the last straw.
I think we agree on more than you think. I just wish you would concentrate more of your ire on the liberals who have turned Illinois into a laughing stock, not each other. Conservatives like Jim are not the people who did this to Illinois. I apologize if you were offended by the Pat Brady comment. A little snark never hurts on this site. I’ll be away from my computer for the rest of the day so please don’t mistake my lack of response for disinterest.
Your pal,
Ben
Comment by Ben Marc*m Monday, May 20, 13 @ 4:30 pm
–Maybe Oswego Willy is Pat Brady??? That would explain his Oberweis disdain.–
Probably wouldn’t explain his comments regarding Pat Brady over the last couple of years, unless he’s a double-nought spy engaged in an elaborate game of deception.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 20, 13 @ 4:41 pm
Oberweis clearly departed from the right-wing consensus on medical marijuana. Good for him. As far as his criticism of Brady, “hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue.”
Comment by reformer Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:03 pm
I think Oberweis just wanted to “go along to get along” with others on the legalization of medical marijuana issue. I don’t believe Jim Oberweis really had a strong personal bias one way or the other on this particular issue. He may also have gone along with it to counter-balance or lessen his appearance as a “right-winger’s right-winger” stance on the issue of same sex marriage. The conservative GOP supporters in his district that like Oberweis will forgive him for his vote on the marijuana issue. He won’t make any “new conservative friends” though because of his vote on medical marijuana. From a political career standpoint, Jim would have been wiser to have just abstained from voting on this issue because it will “ruffle conservative feathers” of GOP voters outside his district. If he had future statewide or national political career aspirations, this vote will hurt him in the future.
Comment by Twilighter Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:04 pm
If Oswego Willy is Tom Cross, I take back my urging him to run for AG.
Just sayin.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:12 pm
===How exactly was anyone pandered to during the effort to oust Brady?===
Jim Oberweis pandered to those wanting Brady ousted for SSM. You can’t unring that bell. Jim Oberweis did just that. There are posts after posts on the internet with very SPECIFIC quotes, and if you use the “search” key to remind yourself, you will read the pandering.
===As it turns out, they agreed with Jim that Brady had to go. His results as chairman were crap. It’s a great thing that he’s gone and I’m thrilled that Jim led the effort.===
I am embarraseed for your idea of what really happened. Jim Oberweis tried and tried, and whined and whined about “votes”, and “meetings” that never happened, and members of the SCC marginalized Jim Oberweis and THAT was the best thing that happened during the ouster under SSM …led … by Jim Oberweis.
===Even before the SSM incident there were loud voices calling for his ouster. Even then Jim stood by and supported Brady. Brady’s lobbying for a bill contrary to the party platform was just the last straw.===
I am going to let that simmer for a sec …
So, Jim led the charge on SSM, but was behind Pat Brady … but it wasn’t really SSM … but it was what LED … and still Jim Oberweis couldn’t get a vote to oust Pat Brady. It is quite embarrassing and sad as you recall one universe you think had happened, and what really happened, and the complete lack of politcal acumen is seeping as you are trying to re-write what really happened!
===I just wish you would concentrate more of your ire on the liberals who have turned Illinois into a laughing stock, not each other. Conservatives like Jim are not the people who did this to Illinois.===
Do not confuse what is happening in My Party, to shift the blame to “Illinois”. The next thing you will say is “Madigan is to blame and we need to do all we can to fire him!”
Jim Oberweis needs to own it. The more you try to explain it away, the more others, like me, will point out what did happen, and what lever Jim Oberweis used … SSM.
“Own it” and move on.
the fantasy of what youposted, and the truth … of Marginalizing Jim Oberweis, as Senator Oberweis pandered to the “right”, calling meeting upon meeting, then calling on vote after vote … that never happened… puts in clear focus what DID happen, and you can’t change it.
If you ain’t helping, you’re hurting … your last posts is part of the narrative that ain’t helping.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:13 pm
BTW, Pat Brady wasn’t removed by Jim Oberweis…
Pat Brady resigned, leaving Oberweis to hold the “bag” as the Money Arm of the ILGOP bankrupted the Party, and refused to give to the ILGOP because…. Jim Oberweis… led the way … and there was no mechanism to complete a replacement search.
Just to finish the thought and all….
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:18 pm
One … last …thought…
“Political Director”,
I gave kudos to your Boss, Jim Oberweis, and because you needed to “poke bears” and ask about taking me to meetings and I …TRY… to respond respectfully, you keep poking … till finally, you can’t help yourself and you have to blame me and the media for Oberweis’ role in the SSM fiasco and went about a Fairy Tale I have to go and take your Boss, Jim Oberweis to task!!
Who turns someone from “turning the corner” on a person, to again, have to take Jim Oberweis to task.
You. Did. That.
Why? So you can score points by “calling me out” as to not attending this, or not doing that, and yet you have no idea who I am or what I am doing or not doing.
Read how this all got to where it is. Move on, you can’t change the SSM issue, but the manner by which Jim Oberweis attacked the MM issue made me congratulate him on that issue and gave those kudos.
Making it about me, is not going to help, its only going to keep the wound festering.\\
Food for thought.
Can’t that be enough?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:27 pm
“He’s a double-nought spy engaged in an elaborate game of deception”
Willy, my man!
Comment by Arthur Andersen Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:35 pm
And you believe this is all helping the GOP, our leadership, and elected officials how, AA?
Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:36 pm
===“He’s a double-nought spy engaged in an elaborate game of deception”===
I actually hosted “The Gong Show” for a bit, while perputrating my elaborate game of deception.
Code Name: “4-Iron”
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 20, 13 @ 5:50 pm
Great Post and fine food for thought….However, I would only note that MM and ssm are 2 VERY DIFferent issues with different CONsequences as well, the former being far more limited in scope, although both admittedly do have far-ranging societal implications. But the bottom line is that this just goes to show that those really in power, in this case Oberweis throwing his weight aroung in helping oust Brady–because he COULD–and THEN having the power, and RIGHT as an Elected state Senator, to not only espouse a position, as Brady did on ssm, but actually utilize his power and right to VOTE to actually CHANGE Public Policy…!
Comment by Just The Way It Is One Monday, May 20, 13 @ 8:06 pm