Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Reform and Renewal - Good news for a change
Next Post: Giannoulias scores again
Posted in:
* If you missed the live CBS 2 debate between Jim Oberweis and Chris Lauzen last night, you can watch the whole thing at this link.
* Here’s the station’s coverage…
After a brief handshake dairy magnate Jim Oberweis came out swinging — talking about Lauzen’s biggest single donor in his political career and his decision to return almost $100,000.
“It’s easy to see why you would give the money back, the donor was convicted of patronizing a 16-year-old prostitute,” Oberweis said.
But it took about forty minutes before state senator Chris Lauzen responded.
Oof.
* More from the Daily Herald…
In his opening statement, Oberweis brought up Lauzen’s decision last month to return a $100,000 campaign contribution from a convicted felon whose company was under investigation by the Illinois attorney general. Oberweis said he doubted Lauzen’s claim that he didn’t know about the issues surrounding donor John Burgess and his company, International Profit Associates, until recently despite numerous media reports over the past few years. […]
“In my entire career, I have never asked for nor taken anything that doesn’t belong to me,” said Lauzen, a state senator from Aurora. “My desire is to serve you well. When I’ve been confronted with a problem with a campaign contributor, I’ve sent the money back without being told or even asked. … For my opponent to say otherwise is cruel and a politically motivated lie and conduct unbecoming someone who wants to represent us in any public office.”
The problem for Lauzen is that he waited so long to respond. The Tribune wrote that the state Senator “appeared taken aback,” by the assault…
“It’s not about your character or even your integrity, it’s about your judgment,” said Oberweis, who devoted his entire opening statement to the topic at an Aurora University debate. “Chris, you can’t fix the problem if you can’t see the problem.”
* The two candidates agree on most actual “issues,” so all they have left is personalities and he-said-she-said’s…
Greg Buchner, who has voted for both candidates in the past, came to the forum Tuesday night to hear more about the issues. He left feeling he saw more venom than viewpoints.
“Unfortunately, I saw a lot more of that,” Buchner said. “They traded punches pretty evenly.”
* More punches…
…Oberweis responded to Lauzen’s “dead cow” mailer, in which he stated that a previous Oberweis campaign had been fined by the FEC for using funds from Oberweis Dairy for political advertising. Essentially, the issue was whether Oberweis himself could appear in ads for his dairy while running for political office.
Oberweis said that the $21,000 was a “civil penalty” agreed upon by all parties to avoid litigation, and noted that the campaign never paid a cent — the penalty was paid by the dairy.
* Meanwhile, in another race, Carol Marin writes about Lipinski family ethics…
Dan Lipinski loves his father, Bill Lipinski, and said so forcefully Tuesday at a meeting of the Sun-Times editorial board. But the question at hand is whether the family patriarch is both blessing and curse.
* More congressional stuff, compiled by Kevin…
* 3 GOP candidates debate again - Congressional hopefuls address world security
* Two vie on 13th District GOP ballot
* Lauzen mailer on immigration
* Quinn makes endorsement in Dem race to succeed Hastert
*** UPDATE *** Larry at ArchPundit has more on the Quinn endorsement of Laesch
*** UPDATE 2 *** The Tribune didn’t list this endorsement editorial on their “Opinion” web page, so I missed it. Here are more of the Trib’s nods for congressional candidates…
* Oberweis…
This page has been critical of Oberweis’ campaign tactics, particularly his vitriolic anti-immigration message. He has acknowledged that he made mistakes in past campaigns. He has a much better grounding on national issues than Lauzen, and to our knowledge, has never tried to change his name to Jim Oberweis, Dairy King.
* Foster…
Local Democratic leaders, though, seem to be coalescing around Bill Foster of Geneva, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. Here’s a first for an Illinois campaign: Foster is endorsed by 22 Nobel Prize winners. Foster is a strong candidate, and he has our support.
* Seals…
They’re both smart, well-prepared candidates. Voters, though, might have reason to question either candidate’s long-term commitment to them. Seals still lives a couple of blocks outside the district — he says he can’t afford to move into the 10th. Footlik just recently returned to the area, renting a home in Buffalo Grove. Seals gets the edge, based on a better grasp of local issues and concerns. He is endorsed.
Looks like the Tribune folks are telegraphing they’re intentions for the fall contest.
* Baldermann…
Baldermann has an impressive civic record, substantial local support and sensible positions on issues. He is endorsed.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 9:37 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Reform and Renewal - Good news for a change
Next Post: Giannoulias scores again
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Lauzen looks like an amateur! Of course, no one has more experience running and losing than Bi-Polarweis(TM). He took money from IPA, of course they are shady! What’s next, taking money from an online university or subprime lender..or Roesser?
Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 9:43 am
After reading Marin one always wonders why this stuff gets printed….rather than tell everyone what they already know about Dan Lipinski — which is no big deal — she should be giving a reason to vote for the others.
Did not happen. Guess that was too hard. Suggesting Pera will buck the system shows how little work was done here.
The Battle between ChopperJim and RoseBowl Chris remains a hoot.
Comment by DumberThanYouThink Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 9:51 am
Lauzen and Oberweis…Illinois would be better served if that seat just remained vacant. Also, check out Sneed today, Oberweis, if he wins, already planning his run for Governor in 2010.
Comment by Turner Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 10:00 am
Dumber,
Believe it or not, we agree! I don’t think anyone in the Lip camp is losing much sleep over Pera or that other guy from Palos. Carol didn’t give reasons to vote for Pera because there aren’t any.
Comment by Bill Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 10:14 am
I think the article should have dove in to Pera’s message more but then again I have seen his mail and I’m a supporter. Lipinski is to far out of touch on Stem Cell and Choice. The two are polar opposites.
Comment by DownWithLipper Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 10:32 am
I must have gotten left off Lauzen’s mailing list. Does anyone have a copy of the dead cow mailer. I would love to see it.
Comment by leigh Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 10:55 am
The debate leaves me with the firm conviction that neither Lauzen or Oberweiss should be elected. They are foolishly providing great fodder for after the primary. Even Obama and Clinton realised the error in this tact.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 11:16 am
FWIW, the Chicago Trib endorsed Oberweis and Foster in the 14th. Could this be the Tribune Kiss of Death to each?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/
opinion/editorials/chi-0116edit2jan
16,0,5665106.story
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 12:17 pm
“But Hastert represented his nation, his state and his district with honor, and stands as the longest-serving Republican speaker of the House in history. He was a calm and civil presence in Washington.”
With honor? That’s the first thing I think of when I hear about a guy who lined his pockets with gold after writing a transportation bill to include a new highway less than a mile from a bunch of land he owns.
Oh, and protecting a child molester? Super duper honorable.
The Tribune editorial page is pathetic.
And they endorsed the already corrupt tim baldermann. Jeez. The Tribunes new motto should be: “Corruption! Yay Corruption!”
Comment by jerry 101 Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 12:33 pm
Leigh, follow the IL-14 tab on Illinoize and you’ll find the dead cow mailer plus some.
I think Quinn’s endorsement will carry some wait with Democrats in Kane. A lot more than a trib endoresement.
Comment by Bill Baar Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 12:38 pm
I know I have been told that it is common to see both candidates for political office as unworthy mental midgets. I have been assured that once in office this feeling towards the new officeholder disappates. I have read that voters have felt this way towards some of our greatest public servants.
On the other hand, I am seeing two mature wealthy men behaving in a manner so embarrassing neither deserves any voter’s respect. Both men have proven that they cannot win statewide offices and one is a sore loser when he does lose. Will I forget Oberweis’ myriad losing campaigns in a desperate attempt to find love as a public servant if he wins this office? Will I forget Lauzen’s temper tantrums and libel lawsuit if he wins this time? Will I forget this campaign?
I guess I’m wondering if Altzheimers will help elevate either one of these schmoes in my esteem. I hear this happens.
As to Lipinski. He is almost everything I dislike about politics. But so is Blagojevich. If I was a devoted liberal Democrat, I would rather see a gullible delusional featherweight like Pera win in the primary than Little Lip. BUT, if I was a devoted Democrat who wanted to win easily in November, I would stick with the incumbant regardless of his social retardation. Unlike Blagojevich, Lipinski as congressman actually tries to do his job in Washington, however often he chooses reality over ideology and disappoints the leftists in his district.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 12:44 pm
Thanks BB.
Comment by leigh Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 1:25 pm
First chance I had to hear the whole debate. Thanks for the link.
Technically, Lauzen was more thorough in answering questions during the 90 second round. Oberweis seemed much more comfortable during the Lightening Round, which I think shows he’s more precise and articulate under pressure–and which in turn, worked against Lauzen who began to look even more “rehearsed”. Because that was a build up for Oberweis, I’d call that aspect a bit of a wash though I’m sure some folks walked away feeling that Oberweis didn’t answer many of the questions tossed at him.
Re: Image: Oberweis was obviously on the attack, which I think worked against him a bit. I think most would attribute his not answering questions thoroughly to his offense v. intentionally dodging them. Oberweis did EXTREMELY well, however, in use of humor–which is something new I’m seeing in his style. It works. He should consider running with that a bit more.
Lauzen’s strategy from the get-go worked in this case: he made it obvious that he wasn’t going to bite when Jim attacked and stayed focused instead. Because he has such a soft voice, however, he seems passive. On one hand, that gives him the “under-dog” advantage when Jim attacks. When Jim’s not attacking, it makes Lauzen passive and rehearsed. Lauzen obviously tapped heavily into stories and experiences. I’m not sure that that worked for or against him or Oberweis.
Generally, the whole thing was a wash from a technical perspective. However, Oberweis CAN come out SUBSTANTIALLY stronger during the next one with little effort.
Regarding someone’s statement on an earlier post that both candidates are the same, they’re not. There are some MAJOR differences on some key issues. The average voter would have picked up on them in just this one debate alone, and I think that those differences will call the winner. I don’t know enough about the area though to call it, but the differences are obvious.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 16, 08 @ 9:32 pm
I didn’t watch the CBS debate (even I have my limits) but I did go the league of women voters debate and I agree Oberweis did well with the quick response, especially v Foster… Lauzen clearly has the better handle on issues and has studied them, but Oberweis is improving and getting better with the give and take.
Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 8:00 am
Yes, Lauzen does have a better handle on the issues and it’s obvious that he’s studied them extensively.
I believe that out of four? races, this one will be the toughest for Oberweis.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 8:25 am