Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Caption contest!
Next Post: Get it together, man
Posted in:
* The Tribune editorializes against electing Rep. Raymond Poe as House Republican Leader…
In recent years, Poe has voted against several signature cost-cutting initiatives that would reduce the size of state government and the demands on taxpayers. He voted against every pension reform bill that came to the House floor this year — there were at least four. He voted against closing half-empty state buildings. He voted to protect free health insurance coverage for state retirees, an enormous cost. He voted against giving public school children in Chicago the freedom to choose their schools.
If you want to know where he stands on issues, ask the lobbyists for teacher and state employee unions. Poe has accepted more than $100,000 in union money for his campaigns during his tenure in Springfield. Sure, he represents a district with many public employees. But based on his fiscal voting record, he might as well move his desk to the Democrats’ side of the chamber.
* The paper’s political cartoonist piles on…
Poe represents his district and he does it well. To suggest that somehow makes him a Democrat is as ludicrous as calling his chief rival Rep. Jim Durkin a Democrat because he has voted with the trial lawyers in the past.
* On the other hand, as mentioned yesterday, the social conservatives believe that Rep. Jim Durkin is far too liberal to be the GOP Leader…
Illinois is in desperate need of leadership that is both principled and courageous. Every day/week/month/year that passes without such leadership results in the degrading progression of conditions that we’ve seen over the past many years. Without moral and enlightened leaders our state’s continued decline is guaranteed. Rep. Jim Durkin possesses neither the wisdom nor skills necessary to provide the kind of bold political leadership families across our state are demanding. […]
As with anyone who has held public office as long as Durkin has there are many questionable, even disappointing, votes. For example, Durkin has voted for tax increases and a massive expansion of gambling and against virtual schools.
The problem with the Republican Party is that too many of its factions believe they possess the sole authority to declare who is and who is not a “true” party member. That wrong-headed thinking has resulted in a long string of losses in this state.
Ray Poe is a Republican.
Jim Durkin is a Republican.
That should go without saying.
Sheesh.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:19 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Caption contest!
Next Post: Get it together, man
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
We must protect our precious Republican fluids Mandrake…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY
Comment by OneMan Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:22 am
If the Republicans continue to force everyone to toe line on social issues, they will be the party of the perpetual minority.
Comment by MM Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:22 am
I am so dissapointed!
Isn’t Raymond Poe a RINO, not a donkey?
C’mon Trib, at least make this sporting …
To be continued …
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:24 am
Excellent, OneMan!
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:24 am
State GOP: This is why I find it impossible for vote for any of you. These purity tests are maddening. Shape up or I will continue to vote Dem. And believe me, that frustrates me–just not as much as your purity tests.
Comment by vise77 Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:25 am
Poe voted against every pension reform bill because they have been illegal and components of those bills (changes to retiree benifits) have been shameful. He also voted against ending premium free health care for retirees with 20 years or more because it was a contract the state made with its employees. Thousands of people retired counting on that 20 year free health care premium promise. How does following the law and keeping your promises somehow make you not a Republican.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:30 am
What has been the Chicago Tribune contribution to public discourse in the last twenty years?
When the pension crisis was being created, did the Trib cover it?
How many of the Trib endorsed candidates participated in borrowing from the pension fund?
Which Trib endorsed candidates had specific plans to cut spending or raise revenue to make it unnecessary to borrow from the pension fund?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:30 am
It is about time we get another downstater in leadership. Poe represents his district well….I suppose you would want someone who did not.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:31 am
A simple “Durkin is better suited to lead the party at this time” would have done. But no, the Trib, per usual needs to explain the unexplainable. Ugh.
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:33 am
Conservatives aren’t the only one with purity tests too. Pretty much every faction of the Republican party is seeking to kick out the other ones. Moderates try to eliminate the conservatives. Conservatives try to eliminate the moderates. It splits more than just that but you get the idea.
Champaign County wants to own a congressman so they sponsor Erika Harold to primary Rodney Davis (because they couldn’t rig the appointment last time). Walsh may challenge Kinzinger (assuming AK doesn’t run for Gov). The second coming of Jim Edgar (D.Lard) has people threatening ever conservative they can find to be on board just so they can get dumped the day D.Lard wins (just like Jim Edgar did).
The Republican party problems aren’t about ideology, that’s just the excuse. The problems are that they are more interested in fighting each other and having primaries than winning general elections.
The result is more Republicans stay home on election day.
Comment by purity tests Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:34 am
I don’t think it is as simple as Rich seems to make it.
Does simply applying the party label to yourself mean that you really are part of the party?
I agree with Oswego Willy’s contention that a big problem facing the ILGOP is that they demand some sort of purity.
However, are there some core values that a person needs to be part of the party? Is there any issue where it is correct to say “if you don’t agree with x, then you are not one of us”?
Or should it be “if, when we total it all up, you agree with us on x% or more, you can be one of us.”
Or should it be “if you win a primary for our party, we will support you no matter what you support.”
Are there certain things you need to believe to be a member of either party?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:35 am
I guess the Tribune is the only one who holds the DNA code for a Republican. God forbid a Republican stand up for the constitution and defend people who have something that was promised to them by the State of Illinois.
Comment by Obama's New Puppy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:35 am
Raymond Poe = Paul Froehlich??
Comment by Pete Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:38 am
It seems distinctly ironic for the Trib to attack Poe for voting against every pension reform bill. You’d think it would endear him to them.
Comment by Angel's Sword Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:40 am
I find it amusing the Tribune now believes they have the right to define the Republican Party and who best represents this definition. They take the definition of hubris to a new level.
Comment by Wensicia Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:40 am
Poe votes his conscience because he represents his constituates that include large numbers of state employees and retirees. Because he represents his people instead of a party, Ray Poe is a gem. The problem with Illinois politics is that there are too many party animals. I have as much respect for party animals as I did when going to college. Quit partying and get to work!
Comment by BMAN Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:47 am
I will get to all this on my own, but since you brought it up…
===However, are there some core values that a person needs to be part of the party? Is there any issue where it is correct to say “if you don’t agree with x, then you are not one of us”?===
A political party is NOT a religion, based on exacting MUSTS.
“How is that, that makes NO sense, Willy!”
If there is a core of Limited Government, let’s say, and you can point to what the other party says about government, and you disagree, then you may need to re-think your party affiliation.
Further …
===Or should it be “if, when we total it all up, you agree with us on x% or more, you can be one of us.”===
If My Party decides that Pro-Life is 51%, or is anti-SSM is 16% or whatever, that you, whoever is placing “a value” on each is passively “buying into” Litmus Tests!
The second, the mili-second, anyone refutes Blood Oaths and Litmus Teasts, and then asks what are the weights of these tests, then they failed to discredit those Tests and Oaths …
===Or should it be “if you win a primary for our party, we will support you no matter what you support.”===
Seems to work for the Dems.
“What does that mean? You want us to be ‘Dem-Lite’?”
Um, no… I wnat the problem of having a diverse Caucus and Party where we in the ILGOP need to work on trying to move the Agenda forward the best we can, through the Reagan Rule of 80%, and moving what we can as a Party, even if it means herding cats. Boy, i would like that problem!
===Are there certain things you need to believe to be a member of either party?===
That is what campaigns are for, and for example, if you think of even that mili-second I stated above that Bruce Rauner has portrayed himself as a Republican, than you need to re-think. However, this PAC to help the HGOP he is involved with, will the PAC have Litmus Tests and Blood Oaths, or be as “welcoming” as Rauner hopes the Primary voters will be to him?
That …mili-second… you buy into MUST, Have to, etc., then My Party … is doomed before we begin.
Thought I would answer - Skeeter -, but I will revist this ….
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:48 am
===Is there any issue where it is correct to say “if you don’t agree with x, then you are not one of us”?===
I’m a dem and there are issues that I disagree with many or most other regular dems. There are those on the far left who try to get the party to have litmus tests. So far, at least most of the time, the party puts aside their differences and coalesce around their candidates. But one of the best tools to keep everyone in line is to point to the GOP and say ’see what happens when you try to use only your narrow issues as the litmus test”?
Comment by Not Always In Agreement Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:49 am
It probably is a rhetorical question, but if Rich didn’t put up his take on whatever garbage the Trib is spouting (”tune in next week- we WILL contradict ourselves once again!”), would any downstaters even know how hard they are pushing for “their guys” to break contracts and damage retirees? I had a subscription for almost 30 years with that rag (live in central Illinois, so it was costly to have home delivered, and almost always after I left for work in the morninng) , mainly for the sports coverage and the arts sections, but had to drop it once this all-out war started. They have been (as Rich has very eloquently pointed out)a paper version of Sybil for quite some time now, with their ever changing litmus tests and demands for breaking the constitution. What a sad excuse for “civic responsibility” they have become.
Oh yeah- Raymond Poe might be too far to the left 9those pesky un ions again!), but he would be a good choice if the party ever wants to be relevant again. Durkin won’t pass the far right’s purity tests either, so a downstate rep with a belief that a contract is something that can’t be broken (once a foundation belief in the business community, but no more when it comes to workers and retirees) could bring the party closer to the center where most of us real folks live…
Comment by Roadiepig Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:49 am
The marginalization of the GOP in IL is having its effect on the other party, too. If you don’t have to work for it, you become imperial, lazy, more prone to crony capitalism, and probably more conservative and status quo.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:50 am
Durkin represents his area well enough to get re-elected repeatedly. So he does not vote straight party line every time. He does not match the current true blue (red?) Republican thinking model. He does not match the Dem side either. Good for him. The GA needs more people like him.
Comment by zatoichi Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:51 am
Should have said “self-marginalization”.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:51 am
Am i wrong or wasn’t he agreeing with the trib by voting against 3 of those pension proposals. Add to that the Madigan Proposal the Trib supported seems at first blush to be the one most likely to be ruled Unconstitutional. Voting against an unconstitutional law seems to be a wise decision. Further more voting against Michael Madigan Seems to be a very Republican thing to do. Maybe i am missing their point.
As for the Health insurance for retiree’s there is a very good argument to be made that that was unconstitutional. Until the Maag decision that was a wise choice and may still prove to be.
A legislator that follows the State Constitution is exactly the type of Legislator we should want as a leader.
As for consolidating state agency’s to avoid having empty space i agree that vote needs explianing. I can’t even see where that hurts AFSCME.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:55 am
I agree with Skeeter that Rich’s take is rather simplistic. Just because a politician calls him/herself a member of a particular party doesn’t necessarily make it so.
How many of these party identifications are just for convenience sake? Mike Bloomberg was a Dem, then a GOP and now he’s an independent—or something. Same for Arlen Specter, Charlie Crist, etc. etc.
And really, is Rich Miller the best qualified person in Illinois to determine who is or isn’t a GOPer? Is that really his call to make?
Comment by qcexaminer Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:55 am
==Without moral and enlightened leaders our state’s continued decline is guaranteed.==
Why is it that these people assume that if you don’t agree with them you are immoral? Stop with the holier-than-thou routine. You have every right to believe what you want to believe. But just because somebody disagrees with you doesn’t make them somehow less of a person. If you want a purity party then go form one. You are killing the Republican Party with your demand that everybody agree with you 100% of the time.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:58 am
I cannot stand the morally bankrupt, honesty bankrupt, , and fiscally bankrupt Chicago tribune!!!!!
Comment by Hinky dink and bathhouse John... Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:59 am
Oswego,
From your answer, it seems like you view party labels as fluid, moving with whoever happens to win primaries (and realize that I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you. I’m singling you out only because of the way Rich posed the topic above and I know you’ve commented on it over time). Is that right? Would you reject the idea that a party has core values and instead argue that a party’s function is based on who can win primaries?
Then would you agree that working for a political party is sort of a waste of time for anybody who does not make money from elections?
If you have core values and if you have real positions as to policy, working for a party is not in your interest as working for a party would seem to mean abandoning any core positions in favor of simply winning?
What is the function of a party, other than winning?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:59 am
“If the Republicans continue to force everyone to toe line on social issues, they will be the party of the perpetual minority.”
Glad that the abolitionists and the suffragettes did not bow to your reasoning too! Their positions represent minority points of view, but eventually they carried the day and the USA is better for it.
Comment by None of the Above Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:03 am
It has been my experience in the Republican Party that the loudest people on the issues (especially family values) are the least likely to run. those who do are financially beholden to the loud folks.
The purity issue makes me sick. There is no perfect candidate out there by any standards. Personally, I can’t support every plank in the Republican party, although I work hard for our candidates, many of who do. Does that make me a RINO? To some, yes, it does. I am a big guy with big shoulders. I will carry on because I beleive in the overall party principles. If you want to pull a leaf from a tree to describe a forest, (and therefore its “purity”, that is what is happening and we will never get a candidate who can/will win.
Politics used to be a game of compromise. that is apparently over and every one is playing Texas hold’em and goes “all in” with weak hands (candidates) I’m tired of the same tactics but expecting different results. We are acting stupid. Oswego Willy said it best: give us a candidate with whom 80% of the voters can agree with and we might start winning again
Comment by LisleMike Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:03 am
I might be wrong, but what I think what OW is trying to point out is that a party is made up of a group of people with overlapping sets of values and positions related to those values. Doing a percentage calculation or making a certain value or set of values required only limits the party and its potential for success.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:04 am
The problem isn’t tests, it’s the people that call themselves Republican. Here we have a tent being pulled to the right by, well, the extreme right, and that pull is being resisted by others trying to make the party appear to be more, ummm, populist, and most of the people under the tent are running in whatever direction the tent is moving trying to stay in the shade.
Somebody’s going to have to get there own party sooner, or later, or the tent’s going to tear, and the rats are all going to have to scurry for the nearest sewer grate…metaphorically speaking that is. Me? I hope it continues. Y’all deserve it.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:06 am
===s Rich Miller the best qualified person in Illinois to determine who is or isn’t a GOPer? Is that really his call to make?===
LOL
Poe and Durkin have been Republican legislators for decades. I think it’s pretty safe to say they’re Republicans. Who are you to say they’re not?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:09 am
===Does simply applying the party label to yourself mean that you really are part of the party?===
Yes, unless you are saying so in a dishonest way.
Do the Democrats agree on anything?
Here are three names: Jack, Franks, John Cullerton, Brandon Phelps.
There’s overlap, but no real consistency. Do any of those guys ever talk about kicking the others out? No.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:12 am
So the Tribune editorial cartoon makes it clear. Their pension reform position isn’t about concern for state finances. Its about hating and wanting to punish unions for existing.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:15 am
This is going to sound wonkish, but political parties are really nothing more than aggregations of individuals who perceive a common interest(s) to pursue. Successful parties have broad common interests, and not narrow,absolute “principles”. The hard right over the past 30 years followed the strategy of gradually forcing adoption of detailed platforms and other statements that have had the effect of shaving off more and more participants who don’t “qualify” for lack of 100% compliance. The current GOP state platform is a Christmas tree of very specific purity tests. The problem with these platforms is that, like criminal sex crime statutes, they have proven impossible to shake or even slightly amend. “You are not worthy of my political consideration unless you are with me 100% of the time.”
Comment by chad Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:18 am
- Pot calling kettle -,
Spot on! Well said.
- Skeeter -,
Here is the crux.
When you look at a Chicago Dem in the GA, and you look at the Downstate Dems in the GA, do you see either saying the other is not a Democrat?
No.
Why?
For their districts, some being a strong leaning left district, and the other being quite conservative, but refusing to buy into Litmus Tests a “Right” candidate may try to sell, even in downstate districts.
It is about understanding not how fluid a whole party label is, it is understanding that, many districts, parts of the state, parts of counties, for that matter … everywhere …the ideals of what is important to those voters to be a Republican are different, given the variables of the voters residing there, or the candidates running there.
I keep going back, and I think it is the best case study.
The genius of the 1996 HDems runnning to get Madigan his majority back.
Those Dem candidatates, recruited for those targeted districts, had a staff understanding what Democratic ideals ran best in those districts, tailored a message to those strengths, had the diversity that made the tag of cookie-cutting those candidates as “unacceptable” meaningless, and they all … were ‘Democrats”.
Period.
MJM has the “horrible” (snark) taks of herding a majority of members … diverse … and finding the Agenda that they can get to agree to to move, that MJM also thinks is important to move too.
That … is a party …
That is also why you have Caucuses, and after elections, getting the diverse group of legislators on One Page, moving the Agenda forward, while assisting the Principles of the Democrats forward, or as forward as the diversity can carry it.
It has nothing … nothing… to do with “selling out”, not being Republican enought, none of these tools that are used to divide a party. My Party.
A suburban GOP Nominee for the IL House should not …NOT … have to be questioned as to how Republiucan they are, if that Nominee follows the Reagan Rule, mirrors the district best they can and STILL follow the Reagan Rule, and is going to be about moving a GOP agenda forward, as best they can without “selling out” themselves, their ideals, or what they beieve the Party needs to do.
That is how you get a Majority.
We forgot that. We are paying for it. The Tribune feeds the opposite of it. We in My Party … need to live it.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:19 am
A representative has to represent his/her district first, and there is nothing wrong or shameful with that.
Comment by Just Me Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:19 am
@NoneOfTheAbove:
Funny how you leave out the teetotalers from your political history lesson.
Sometimes education and persuasion is a lot better at putting people on the “moral” path than mandated/coerced morality via legislative prohibtions.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:20 am
Does the Tribune, or anyone in the Chicago news media for that matter, know how to read a roll call? A majority of House Republicans voted against pension reform! How does that put Poe out of the mainstream of his party?
Comment by Frank Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:21 am
Thanks for your comment at the end of your piece Rich. As a long time Republican I am sick and tired of fringe far right Republicans screaming the loudest and being quoted first on whatever issue rankles them. And they have the audacity to proclaim who is a “real” Republican and who isn’t, all the while not having any awareness of the principles of being a Republican. And then commentators and others say “The Republican Party believes . . . ” further distorting the GOP message. The Tribune is also guilty of those practices with their editorial today. What position in the party does Rush Limbaugh hold is but one example.
Purity tests? Those administering purity tests want to reduce the party to a single member, themselves. Try to reason with them? Forget about it.
It’s time real Republicans take back or take control of the Republican Party in Illinois. The fringe groups have run it into the ground, and continue to blame everyone else for their failures. The results are as plain as could be, a veto proof Illinois House and Senate, and Democratic Governor.
Ironically, the fringe groups want the party to act like the Eastern European or Cuban Communist parties, where you toe the party line 100% or else! That system collapsed a decade ago.
Its tough being a moderate Republican in Illinois. You get attacked by elements of your own party and Democrats too, who claim with forked tongues that they would vote for a moderate Republican, then fail to do so.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:22 am
If you are a Democrat, the Tribune’s position is great news. They day after day narrow the definition of “Republican” and therefor the breadth of support for party in the long run. It’s almost like the anti-Koch brothers bought the paper and their real plan is a permanent Democratic majority in Illinois.
Comment by Calhoun Native Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:22 am
So … legislators are NOT supposed to represent their constituents? Poe does represent the views of those that elected him.
Comment by Anyone Remember? Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:23 am
Skeeter,
I’m not Oswego Willy, but I do think political parties can (and are) ideological, while lacking “core values” everyone in the party has to believe in.
America is a two party system where both parties are “big tent”, it makes sense to work with whichever party you have more in common with, even if you don’t have much in common with either.
In some countries, like many European countries, their different electoral systems mean there are 5-15 parties in parliament, and it’s much more true that “you can’t be a member of party Y if you believe x.”
But once they’re in parliament, they still have to form governments. Governments are formed by many different parties and everyone has to compromise, just like every member of the Democratic and Republican parties here.
That’s a dirty little secret about Democracy, if you want to have power to change things you need a majority, and sometimes that involves compromise. Poe might be a fiscal moderate and social conservative, and Durkin might be a fiscal conservative and social moderate, and they might have very different views of the world, but they both clearly have more in common with each other with the House Democrats, and both are trying to implement their ideology, even if just a little bit.
In that sense, I think it’s silly to talk about “core values.” No one set of beliefs is going to have 50+1%. You can be as passionate and convinced as possible, but if you want to change things you have to work with the people who are willing to work with you, even if you don’t like them, or don’t agree with them on something.
Comment by Angel's Sword Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:23 am
Democrats have their limits of party acceptance as well. Scott Lee Cohen comes to mind.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:24 am
===And really, is Rich Miller the best qualified person in Illinois to determine who is or isn’t a GOPer? Is that really his call to make?===
Make sure your Litmus Test and Blood Oath are attached to the “Rich Miller Score Card”.
Yikes, look at the SDems and the HDems … do they all look the same on everything?
Look at the HGOP and the SGOP … do you see more or less diversity in ideology and where they sit on the political spectrum than their Dem Caucus counterparts?
More of the same, means more … of the Fewer!
“Are they Republican enought?”
I just don’t understand it. Look at the 2 years Lee A. Daniels had the Majority. If you look that the diversity of the ideology of that Caucus, and understood that, we would not be having this discussion about Raymond Poe and/or Jim Durkin and who is more Republican!
I am screaming in tne wind!
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:25 am
As a “self identified” Republican, I wish the Tribune, Ty Fahner and Illinois Family Action would stay out of the Republican Leadership race. So according to Fahner et al, if you don’t want to crush the public employee unions, you ain’t a Republican. And according to Family Action if you support gay marriage you ain’t a Republican. This Republican believes that the pension crisis is best addressed with a compromise, and that the party has been weakened by those from the far right that demand everyone adhere to their very narrow-minded positions. I’m disgusted with all of them.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:29 am
Defending my GOP party isn’t easy these days- I’ll stipulate to that. However, having grown up in a primarily Democratic family, I believe they lost their way a long time ago. True, they don’t have litmus tests. That’s because in their efforts to grow, they’ve accepted every point of view. At some point, when you support everything, you really don’t stand for anything. They really don’t have a hard platform of communal beliefs, preferring instead to hash it out “issue by issue” and “vote by vote”. This hasn’t exactly been unsuccessful here in Illinois. The GOP needs to be a bit more tolerant of diverse views while maintaining a general position on issues of the day. The Dems accommodate their zealots and have never let them chair the meeting, but gave them a seat at the table. The GOP has had zealots in the big chair who’ve hit the “chute” button under anyone at the table who disagrees on anything. There’s a better way. It’s an ugly process, but I honestly think we’re getting there in the most painful way to get there. We haven’t done everything wrong, but we sure could stand to do a few more things right. How’s that for an honest assessment?
Comment by A guy... Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:29 am
Exactly, hisgirl.
Comment by Chavez-respecting Obamist Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:29 am
Has anyone seen or heard from Jack Dorgan?
Isn’t it the job of the party chair to anticipate and head off these types of conflicts?
Comment by Bill White Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:30 am
Carl Nyberg
When Jim Edgar was on his way out the door, the Tribune Editorial Board lauded his pension ramp-up law, which is currently eating the budget up alive (and they now currently opposed).
Comment by Anyone Remember? Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:30 am
Agree with Pot’s take on Willy’s response to Skeeter’s partly-rhetorical questions about party membership.
But, the choice for who Leads a caucus in the House is different from who “deserves” a party label.
Effective support for shared goals, consensus-building, and negotiation to a result, are critical legislative leader attributes.
Add the campaign leadership skills of finding, and supporting winning candidates.
You should be able to get both in one person.
Comment by walkinfool Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:31 am
==They day after day narrow the definition of “Republican”==
If the “they” you are referring to are the Republicans themselves, then I agree with you. What rock have you been under?
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:31 am
O.W. and Rich have pretty much said it all. To be viable and competitive, the Illinois G. O. P. has to be a “big tent” party. Same holds true for the national G. O. P.
Comment by nikobey Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:37 am
“What rock have you been under?” Kid Rock, but that’s a long story.
Comment by Calhoun Native Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:40 am
“That is also why you have Caucuses, and after elections, getting the diverse group of legislators on One Page, moving the Agenda forward, while assisting the Principles of the Democrats forward, or as forward as the diversity can carry it”
Oswego, if there is no core party value, then what is the agenda? It seems that the agenda would be “elect more of our own party.” That seems to be a good agenda if the goal is patronage (whether contracts, jobs, or other favors). However, if the agenda includes substantive matters, it does not seem effective.
Unless your primary goal is a job or a contract, why should a person do campaign work for a party rather than an individual candidate?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:41 am
The similarity of the Far Right in America and in Illinois to the Muslim Brotherhood is extraordinary. Their way is the sole path of the True Believer. No compromise, no sympathy for non-believers - after all , G-d / Allah is undoubtedly on our side.
Comment by Capitol View Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:44 am
===Just because a politician calls him/herself a member of a particular party doesn’t necessarily make it so.===
It’s a political party, not a religion. Stop acting like disagreements among Republicans is a form of apostasy. Reasonable people can disagree on any number of issues yet still share a common set of values.
I think the zeal of the evangelist wing of the GOP has driven many Republicans from the party, sort of like the Tribune’s editorials have driven so many readers away.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:44 am
Walking, I can assure you my questions are not rhetorical.
If I knew the answers, I would be posting them.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:45 am
==if there is no core party value, then what is the agenda==
There is a difference between having party values and demanding that everybody agree with 100% of those values.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:45 am
It goes without saying, calling people “RINOs” makes sense if this was a solid Republican state like Georgia or Texas. Using that term in Illinois however is very self-defeating.
Comment by Levois Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:45 am
To the Post,
Dear Tribune!!!
Food for thought, as you try to marginalize an opportunity to win …
===
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Aug 22, 13 @ 1:22 pm: |Edit
My take…
I want the New Minority Leader to be committed to THREE principles;
1) Commit to a Professional Campaign Senior Staff. Get the best possible talent, work as Leader even harder than Staff, and understand how Senior Staff must be committed to the Day to Day staff on-site at the Targeted races, and Senior Staff that understands what it means to Target races, and what needs to be done to WIN Targeted races.
2) Commit to being a prolific fundraiser. Show donors the New HGOP Campaign Staff and campaign commitment to winning, and lay out that the monies committed are towards winning seats, not paying rents, salaries, bar tabs, with zero return in “Seats Gained”. When this new Leader is not strategizing, this new Leader better be dialing for Dollars.
Finally…
3) Using the Reagan Rule of 80%, and STUDYING the 1996 Democratic Wins that got Speaker Madigan the gavel back, this new Leader need to understand how the recruitment, polling, diversity, ground game, GOTV and Election Day execution made the difference in getting the gavel BACK in MJM’s hand, and why… it hasn’t left that hand since. The new Leader and this new Senior Staff must… must understand how to win, when the “Jerry Clarke Map” is against them. The 1996 Democrat game plan of those targeted seats, polling, recruitment of candidates, field organization, GOTV and Election Day execution is the “Road Map to ‘Beat the Map’ 2014″. Understand how they won, understand TO win.
Whichever HGOP member that can COMMIT to those three, will be successful.
I won’t saddle any possible Leaders with my Dopey Blessing, bug the Three Principles above… is how I am going to measure your success.
Count on it.
With respect and wishing the HGOP luck, honestly,
Oswego Willy===
If Poe can get My Party to 60 in the House, if Durkin can get My party to 60 in the House, than I am on board … whoever … can get to 60 and live up to the 3 Principles to do it.
With kindest personal regards to the Tribune, I remain.
Sincerely yours,
Oswego Willy.
p.s. Dopes!
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:47 am
I get the feeling that the GOP isn’t going to see the light until it gets positively stomped on the 2016 Presidential Election.
Comment by train111 Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:50 am
===Scott Lee Cohen comes to mind.===
What exactly are you saying Anonymous? SLC was arrested for assaulting his ex-girlfriend. Should the Dems have stuck by him because abuse is a Dem value or because, once you are a declared Dem, the Dems should support you no matter what you do or have done?
Comment by what? Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:54 am
None of the above - are you really equating conservative hegemony of the GOP to slavery and a woman’s right to vote? Just checking…cause if so, you just might be part of their problem
- None of the Above - Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:03 am:
“If the Republicans continue to force everyone to toe line on social issues, they will be the party of the perpetual minority.”
Glad that the abolitionists and the suffragettes did not bow to your reasoning too! Their positions represent minority points of view, but eventually they carried the day and the USA is better for it.
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:56 am
===Oswego, if there is no core party value, then what is the agenda? It seems that the agenda would be “elect more of our own party.” That seems to be a good agenda if the goal is patronage (whether contracts, jobs, or other favors). However, if the agenda includes substantive matters, it does not seem effective.===
That … ia why you have Caucus meetings, and you set an agenda with the “hand that is dealt” to the new Republican Speaker, seeing how many votes they may have to …”oppose SSM, or Reverse Whatever.”
- Skeeter -,
This is not as hard as you are making it.
Example?
At one point you had Rosemary Mulligan AND Bernie Petersen in the same Caucus.
Ok?
Now, do you see how even a vast majority of issues many … many can disagree with either Bernie or Rosemary?
They were both Republicans.
Neither, for some of their projects, could get a majority to agree with them to move something or another …
However …
If you were a member of the HGOP Caucus, you may have needed their support to get the votes necessary for YOUR project.
It’s herding cats.
The HGOP is polled at 45-2 against SSM, the SGOP musters 1 vote out of 19 FOR the SSM … there is no diversity …there is no “other side” for the Caucus to pull from to move ANY agenga…
Oh, they may all agree what needs to be done now, and what they all want to do … but with no majorities to even move any part of an Agenda idem that can pass, the Caucuses lack …
Bernie Petersens … and Rosemary Mulligans
That is why … they are Irllevent Caucuses, and they have Irrlevelnt Leaders.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 11:58 am
The tribune just wants another Chicago leader so they can continue to tell people south of I-80 how to live…Ramond Poe was standing up for what was right and constitutional something the tribune and Chicago politicians seem to forget altogether!!!!
Comment by concern1 Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:00 pm
Wonder what Ty, Farmer Bruce and the Tribbies are doing this weekend to celebrate Labor Day?
Re-enacting the Haymarket hangings?
These guys kill me. Teachers and public employees are killing the golden goose? The math doesn’t even come close to adding up.
Even the chicken-hearted Obama administration has finally figured out it was the likes of JPMorganChase and Bank of America who stole from everyone, wrecked the economy and will do so again unless stopped.
The cynicism of casting teachers, cops and janitors as villains in the Age of Outlaw Banksters is beyond me.
How anyone could believe that junk is incredible.
You’d think after the way Zell abused and robbed his workers, the Tribbies would know better. Or maybe kissing-up to Zell was how the current editorial crew got their jobs.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:02 pm
As much as I enjoy the Trib editorial board-bashing that goes on here (can’t believe McCormick almost won a Pulitzer for his pension editorials), let’s not get too warm and fuzzy about Raymond Poe.
If you ever talk to them about pensions, it becomes clear that Poe and his cohort, Rich Brauer, believe the state’s most vulnerable, particularly those on Medicaid, are leeches that are stealing money that should go into their constituents’ pensions. This remarkable narrative of the pension problem sounds great to all of the Sangamon County GOP stalwarts who earned their jobs (and pensions) by sucking up to Irv Smith and his ilk for decades. But it reflects the reality of the problem no better than the Civic Committee’s narrative that state workers, teachers and university employees are leeches sucking up all of the taxpayers’ money.
I also take issue with Rich’s description of Poe being an effective rep. Poe and Brauer are longtime backbenchers who can barely put together a grammatically correct sentence, let alone be messengers of the party to the entire state. They never proposed a pension solution of their own, despite the fact that thousands of their constituents depend upon them. They squandered their small piece of the capital bill by directing money to build UIS a new police station and other frivolous requests from special interests; meanwhile Springfield’s infrastructure is in horrible shape and the school district needs at least two new high schools.
The House GOP will be much better off with Durkin when they elect him today.
Comment by Marty Funkhouser Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:06 pm
I have met Raymond on several occasions and had some business dealings with him. He is a fine man who represents his district well. The Republican party (as well as the state) sure could do a heck of a lot worse than Raymond Poe. Look at the Dems…..
Comment by the unknown poster Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:11 pm
Can Rich please install an “I Agree with Oswego” button? I find myself agreeing with him more often than anyone else in the party.
Comment by SirLankselot Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:18 pm
Here is a question for those of you who do work for any local political organization –
If the person who ran that organization sent out a memo today saying “After much pondering over core values, I’ve decided to switch from my party to the other party”, would there be any calculation as to whether to follow the party leader other than “Is that party leader likely to retain office under the new party label?”
Other than loyalty to local individuals who have won office, what keeps a person tied to a party?
For what is is worth — I would flip without a second thought. I wonder how many people would refuse to follow and why they would refuse.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:18 pm
Raymond Poe makes really good fried chicken. Period.
Comment by Keyser Soze Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:30 pm
==Ironically, the fringe groups want the party to act like the Eastern European or Cuban Communist parties, where you toe the party line 100% or else! That system collapsed a decade ago.==
That’s about right.
What’s so hard about this? It generally takes 50% plus 1 to have an opportunity to govern.
Neither party has anywhere near a majority that even self-identify as party supporters. And within those groups, there are divisions.
See how tougher it is to get to 50%+one without compromise, tolerance and patience?
The zealots can never figure it out. They’d rather talk to themselves and do nothing while allegedly “standing for something.”
Get out of the dorm room.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:42 pm
Looking at Raymond Poe’s voting record, he sure seems to be a true conservative republican:
http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/6379/raymond-poe#.Uh-DvuBIhC4
His votes in favor of honoring contracts with retired pensioners seems like simple integrity for man of principle and honest moral values, irrespective of any party affiliation.
But I can see how that would irritate those in the rich & greedy club who have their grand scheme of squeezing even more wealth away from the middle class.
Comment by Cod Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:42 pm
So it has all come down to this: the core value of the Republican Party is that you must support the interests of the top 0.10%, even if that means disregarding the Illinois and U.S. Constitutions and the rule of law.
This is precisely why I, who enthusiastically supported Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, am no longer a Republican, and cannot see myself ever again voting for Republican candidates for any office.
Comment by Andrew Szakmary Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:48 pm
Maybe it’s not the way to deal with the thing, but I stopped reading Tribbie editorials about 3 years ago.
Subsequently, my blood pressure dropped about 20 points. Really.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:49 pm
- SirLankselot -,
thans for the kind words, but I think the only way it would work is if we all in My Party agree to maybe what I am saying and not to me.
The message is far more important, and if you agree with it, pass it on. It’s not my message, it should be My Party’s message, so spread it. It may help more than you think.
- Skeeter -,
===If the person who ran that organization sent out a memo today saying “After much pondering over core values, I’ve decided to switch from my party to the other party”, would there be any calculation as to whether to follow the party leader other than “Is that party leader likely to retain office under the new party label?”
Other than loyalty to local individuals who have won office, what keeps a person tied to a party?===
Loyalty, and “your word” be it to your District, your Caucus, or even your Party is all you have if you are elected.
Flipping with the wind hasn’t help to many lately, Arlen Specter is one that pops up in my mind pretty quickly.
As to the former Seantor, who has sinced passed, he might be your “case study” as to why you may not want to do ‘that’;
Specter thought His Party left him. Ok, so he leaves, thinking, I can win with how people see me, if I wrap myself as a Democrat, and with PA leaning more Dem, and my record, this is a “no brainer”
People do not like disloyalty, as the GOP painted his move, and voters do not like to vote for pandering candidates who think changing the wrapping on the product automatically makes them who they will like.
Change the Party from within, change within diversity of the members, welcome new thouhgts, reach out to many, educate…but do not abandon.
That is why I stay with My Party.
We were great. We are Great. We have forgotten what made us Great, and being great … is not in the form of a test … or an oath.
Either we will remember that, or we will fade way.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:49 pm
Purity tests or grudges? Sometimes it’s hard to tell if differences are based on platform planks or festering emotions.
Comment by MarkT Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 12:58 pm
SirLankselot, there is still room on the Oswego Willy for Governor bandwagon.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:08 pm
It is worth pointing out that Raymond Poe was hardly alone in voting against pension reform. In fact, the majority of House Republicans joined him.
To drive the point even further, Leader Cross did not insist on a Caucus position in support of the pension bills. Does this bar him from receiving the Tribune endorsement?
Comment by Juvenal Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:12 pm
Loyalty to what, Oswego?
I mean if there are no core values, then why should it matter?
Whether it would be a good move for the candidate is one thing.
But as somebody who supports a candidate? Why should the initial after the candidate’s name matter to me?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:22 pm
Skeeter: Understand.
Comment by walkinfool Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:22 pm
@Norseman
lol, consider me on board then!
Comment by SirLankselot Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:28 pm
“Change the Party from within, change within diversity of the members, welcome new thouhgts, reach out to many, educate…but do not abandon.”
If there are no core values, then what are you changing your party to? Other than to a group that can win and take power?
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:29 pm
“chicken-hearted Obama administration.”
Here is some great news that has wonderful implications for Illinois. The Feds won’t interfere with states’ marijuana legalization. They will be more in the background, like fighting against sale to minors.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/feds-wont-sue-stop-marijuana-use-2-states
As far as purity, my Democrat voted for SB 1. She later signed onto SB 2404. She also voted for other stuff I didn’t like. She voted for a lot of stuff I like. I stuck with her, figuring the grass is green enough. Same with her party. Third parties don’t do well enough for me. Democrats do something that’s a tad bit important in politics…they win elections.
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:31 pm
Let’s remember that “purity” tests and demands do not come only from GOP leaning organizations or far right fringers within the the party. Ask candidates for office about a Democratic leaning pro-abortion group and their questionnaire. If you don’t answer each and every one of their questions exactly as THEY want you to answer them, then suddenly you are anti-woman rights and a neanderthal from the middle ages.
What keeps me in the GOP party? My core beliefs and principles. I would rather fight to restore those beliefs and replace the fringe nonsense that clutters up the party platforms than walk away.
I may be one of a few voices crying in the wilderness on this subject within the GOP, but I’m not going away and I’m not going to shut up about it.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:33 pm
===I mean if there are no core values, then why should it matter?
===
Party affiliation is mostly a tribal thing. If you want parties to have specific, hard and fast core values, then you’re in the wrong country. Parties have general themes, that even they don’t follow. Republicans want less government, except for those who want a bigger military, more government intrusion into private affairs, etc. Dems say they fight for the middle class, except when they cut pension benefits and raise taxes.
You’re demanding something that has almost never existed. The Republican Party was formed to oppose slavery. That was all the members agreed on. But when slavery ended, they moved on.
If you want a specific list of what a “real” Republican or Democrat is, you won’t have more than a handful of people on your rosters.
Give it a rest. This isn’t sophomore year.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:34 pm
- Skeeter -,
Look at the GOP platform, if you MUST…
Look at the Democratic platform then too …
If you have a Dem that supports the Democratic platform 100% and then calls out any Democrat that doesn’t follow it completely a “non-Democrat”, that would sound silly to ILDems here.
ILDems seem to come from their Party ID as not a Litmust Test or Blood Oath, THE defining lists of MUSTS that make you a Democrat by only following them.
Have you seen the H&SDem Caucuses. Ideology-wise, the overlapping priniciles that are guided by the “Platform” are then shaped into an Agenda that can get passed by getting the votes needed for passage.
That is how a Caucus and a party work.
Now, as you keep saying about this GOP, I, Oswego Willy am saying to “stand for nothing but winning” …
Read exactly what I post and exactly how I post it.
The Reagan Rule of 80%, along with looking at the Platform, historic context, and prevailing politics today, we in My Party should be as diverse as America, and Illinois, and as welcoming to those agreeing with us 80% of the time, as it was when the Bernie Petersens and Rosemary Mulligans sat in the same Majority Caucus with Speaker Lee A. Daniels having the gavel.
If you still … do not understand.
I can’t help ya.
Being able to get to 60 votes in the House is not best done by being 100% pure …Getting to 60 votes IS best done by getting 60 seats, that can agree…80% of the time.
- Sir Lankselot -,
Get - Norseman - your information, our first meeting has moved from a phone booth to 3 or so cubicles at the Oswego Library, get on the email list!
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:39 pm
Rich,
Anymore can we say this is a both parties position??
–more government intrusion into private affairs–
After all we now have the new improved NSA domestic spying.
Comment by Mason born Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:42 pm
=== But based on his fiscal voting record, he might as well move his desk to the Democrats’ side of the chamber. ===
That’s so stunningly ignorant, even by the Trib edit board’s standards.
One might say, “Based on their maniacal determination to vaporize the public pension systems, the Trib editorial writers may as well share desks with the Civic Committee.”
Are they writing from a tower overlooking a magnificently diverse city in the heart of American, or from a triple-reinforced fallout shelter buried deep in the ground?
Comment by Raymond Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:45 pm
Whoops …
“… heart of America …”
Comment by Raymond Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 1:47 pm
As a Democrat I am enjoying the implosion of the party of no. I am twerking up and down the aisle with glee as I am sure MJM is doing also.LOL
Comment by Blurred lines Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 2:10 pm
@Skeeter ==If there are no core values, then what are you changing your party to? Other than to a group that can win and take power?==
Uh, exactly. What good are core values if time and time again, the voters don’t agree with them? It’s gone well past just being the minority party, but the veto-proofed minority. The ILGOP has absolutely no power within the legislature, and that’s pretty pathetic.
You can stick to your core values, but I’d rather win elections and actually have a chance at affecting bills.
Comment by ChrisB Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 2:52 pm
Which core values is everyone talking about? The core values of Republicans vs. the core values of the extreme fringe which shouts louder and gets more attention?
There IS a difference if anyone would even bother to check.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 3:18 pm
The party of “No” is an awfully convenient cop out for the fact that anything goes party cannot get anything accomplished even with veto proof super-majorities.
Comment by None of the Above Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 3:44 pm
Anyone else think it is either or both funny “ha ha” and funny strange that the elephant is talking out its,….backside?
Comment by Sinequanon Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 4:07 pm
Clowns. Poe a wanna be Dem? The Tribune continues to write editorials that soon will cause the paper to not be taken seriously and may indeed bankrupt the company. The doofuses there don’t even know who their friends are. Pathetic beyond belief
Comment by low level Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 4:57 pm
Wait, did Rich actually say Jack Franks is a Democrat?
Comment by Truth teller Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 9:55 pm
Isn’t the hidden story here that the Trib edit board has now officially and finally announced that it is Republican? No shocking surprise, but I don’t think they’ve ever officially declared themselves partisan.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Aug 29, 13 @ 10:01 pm