Will Election ’16 give us the “Battle of the War Stories” for U.S. Senate?

Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., wants another term in the U.S. Senate. Whether he’s vulnerable to electoral defeat remains to be seen.

Yes, I’ll admit it is scary to be discussing this campaign now – considering there’s a year-and-10-months remaining until the November 2016 elections that will decide whether Republicans can keep the U.S. Senate seat that has flopped back and forth between the major political parties in recent years.

FROM CAROL MOSELEY Braun to Peter Fitzgerald to Barack Obama (with a combination of Roland Burris and Kirk completing the Obama term when he became president); is this seat bound to flop back to Dems?

The Hill, a Washington, D.C.-based newspaper that focuses on Congress, wants to believe so.

They put together a list of 10 senators they believe are most vulnerable to being defeated in the 2016 elections. Kirk is Numero Uno on that list.

Kirk, even when he was in the House of Representatives representing the North Shore suburbs, was not amongst the hard-core conservative ideologues, and that is a fact that has those people less-than-enthused about six more years for the suburban Highland Park resident in Washington.

ALTHOUGH ANYBODY WHO thinks that will result in Kirk making up for lost ideologue votes by getting support from some Democrats who can back his stances on environmental issues and gay marriage ought to think back to 2002.

That was when incumbent Gov. George Ryan had supposedly taken a series of stances on social issues that offended his alleged Republican ideologue allies.

But Democrats were so eager to elect “one of their own” that there was no talk of crossover political support. Which is how we got the concept of six years of Rod Blagojevich as governor!

I can easily see the Democratic party people, including the party hacks, all eager to show that any Republican electoral success back in November was a mere fluke, and that the presence of Bruce Rauner ought not to be regarded as any kind of trend in Illinois.

I DID NOTE that The Hill tapped four potential challengers to Kirk; including Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and representatives Tammy Duckworth, Cheri Bustos and Bill Foster.

I was thankful that they didn’t include the name “Pat Quinn” in their list – as some people are trying to believe that Quinn is concocting schemes to get himself elected to another political post following his gubernatorial defeat.

Particularly at his age (early 60s), Quinn has likely lost any momentum he ever had to win a statewide election. He’s back to the guy of the 1990s who ran unsuccessfully for Illinois secretary of state, lieutenant governor and the U.S. Senate – and whose electoral bids were treated as an excuse for laughter.

But I’m not writing off Kirk at this point – particularly because it’s so early in the electoral process that I feel appalled at myself for even contemplating this issue now. So much can change between now and November of 2016 that nobody’s going to remember that Kirk was ever considered vulnerable.

ALTHOUGH I HAVEN’T forgotten the fact that Kirk didn’t take a majority of the vote (only 48 percent) when he won in 2010. It was only the presence of Green and Libertarian party candidates on the ballot that kept Democratic challenger Alexi Giannoulias (remember him?) from prevailing.

Of the challengers, I find the idea of Duckworth to be the most intriguing. The woman has a significant record of military service that certainly would match up with the record Kirk claims (he served in the Naval Reserve for many years, and it was only the stroke he suffered in 2012 that ultimately caused him to retire his rank of Commander a year later).

Could it become the “War story” campaign of 2016 – with the two trying to show who was the bigger “war hero?” Which could make for some of the most outrageous rhetoric of Election ’16!

  -30-

Political people way too eager to involve themselves in “Duck” outburst

I hadn’t planned to write a word concerning the recent alleged controversy over one of the “Duck Dynasty” characters making comments implying he’s not sympathetic toward gay people.

FOSTER: Will he benefit?

For one thing, I have never watched the television program on the A&E cable television station. The premise of it just strikes me as being stupid, and I don’t care what this person has to say about much of anything!

SO FOR ME to come out and denounce him for being a dink who needs to get a clue about this being the 21^st Century and how we as a society have evolved just strikes me as being overkill. There already are too many people out there who feel compelled to trash this person.

Just as there are others who will eagerly latch on to the guy because he’s willing to “speak the truth” about “the homos” and other people whom they are determined to think ill toward. That says more about their own warped attitude towards people.

But those people do have the potential to cast ballots, which is why there are political people who are eager to cater to them.

Locally, the Illinois Review website (which also tries to appeal to many of those ideologue-motivated readers) pointed out how Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner has his campaign ads appearing on the web site maintained by the business of the family in the program.

THAT, IN AND of itself, doesn’t mean much. My understanding is that Rauner is using his personal financial advantage to try to get his name out in as many places as possible – giving himself so much name recognition that the rest of the GOP candidates are buried under it and can’t dig their way out!

While the Capitol Fax newsletter reports how one of Rep. Bill Foster’s challengers for the congressional seat – Republican Ian Bayne of Aurora – is going around calling Phil Robertson the equivalent of Rosa Parks.

JINDAL: Forgetting 'free' speech?

Bayne wants to think that Robertson willing to say what he did about gay people was “courageous” and “a stand against persecution of Christians.”

Which makes me wonder if there are some people who call themselves “Christians” who believe that persecution occurs whenever they’re not permitted to persecute other people! And how offended REAL Christians ought to feel that others are using the label to describe their own thoughts.

IT ALSO MAKES me wonder about the need of some political people who feel compelled to seek out the votes of these people.

CRUZ: From govt shutdown to Duck?

These government officials, many of whom aspire to higher offices in the future, are making a conscious choice about whose support they want come those future Election days.

Which is what made a Washington Post story from Friday all the more interesting.

Amongst the political people across the country who have decided to publicly side with Robertson include Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal; Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas; and one-time Vice Presidential hopeful Sarah Palin.

IN PALIN’S CASE, I’m inclined to laugh. Who expects her to ever run credibly for anything again? But the other two have strong enough presidential aspirations that the day will probably come when the public is asked to contemplate whether either one deserves a stint living and working on Pennsylvania Avenue in the District of Columbia.

The Post also spoke with Ralph Reed of the Faith & Freedom Coalition, who defended the political people who are siding with Robertson by telling the newspaper, “These voters are paying attention, and they are going to remember who stood up.”

Actually, Reed – the one-time Christian Coalition director who himself has run unsuccessfully for office – is correct on this point.

People are paying attention to how these would-be politicians act. We will remember who felt compelled to take this incident as an issue that somehow felt serious enough to take a stand.

WE’RE GOING TO remember those, such as Jindal (who has said he “remembers when TV networks believed in the First Amendent”) who don’t comprehend the concept of free speech to realize that those who disagree also have the right to express that dissent.

Which may come back to roost to the point where politicos will wish they had just kept their mouths shut now.

 

Perhaps they never watched the Disney film “Bambi” and the moment when Thumper told us, “If you can’t say something nice, done say nothing at all.”

  -30-

Do we really desire politico sequels?

Officially, we don’t yet have boundaries for the Illinois congressional districts that will be used for the next decade. Gov. Pat Quinn has yet to sign into law the measure that creates the boundaries that will ensure Democrats prevail across most of the state through 2022.

DUCKWORTH: Will she finally run for office?



Yet we have heard some speculation about people being willing to move to run in specific new districts that they technically don’t live in right now.

AND IT SEEMS we have at least one official willing to give up a job to set up the circumstances to run for office in a congressional district that technically does not exist yet. We also have a former member of Congress who seems to have the Judy Garland syndrome in thinking we "really, really love" him so much that we want him back.

For the former, we’re talking about Tammy Duckworth, who earlier this week resigned her job as assistant secretary for the Department of Veterans Affairs. She got that post when Barack Obama became president – as something of a reward for her past political efforts in Illinois.

Those efforts included her campaign in 2006 for a west suburban seat in Congress. That district leaned Republican, but Duckworth was the Democratic challenger who wound up coming close to actually winning. Instead, we got (and still have) the concept of Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill.

It has always been believed among Illinois political observers that the campaign put the taste of electoral office in Duckworth, and that she would someday run for something else.

THAT IS WHAT has the Chicago Tribune reporting about speculation that Duckworth’s resignation from her job is about allowing her to have the time to spend campaigning for office – specifically, a seat in Congress.

Not that she would take on Roskam again. The newspaper had her running for a new congressional district that, as of now, has no incumbents living within its boundaries.

Which would mean that, for now, she’d be unopposed. Although I expect the Republican Party would come up with someone to challenge the suburban Hoffman Estates resident.

And there may well be a Democrat or two who decide that it would be worth their while to set themselves up within what is proposed to be the Illinois Eighth Congressional District.

BUT FOR TODAY, at least, Duckworth is the front-runner for a congressional district that technically does not yet exist.

Now assuming that Duckworth actually runs for Congress (which isn’t a sure thing, since she has considered – and rejected – past bids for U.S. senate and Illinois lieutenant governor), it could be an interesting sequel to her most prominent campaign of the past.

That was the one in which Duckworth emphasized her life story (an Iraq conflict veteran who lost her legs when the helicopter she was piloting was shot down) in an attempt to try to make it appear that people with a comprehension of the military and its ways were not restricted to the Republican Party.

It didn’t quite work in ’06 when she ran against Roskam in the DuPage County-based Illinois Sixth Congressional District (the one represented for many years by Henry Hyde). Roskam held onto enough people who knee-jerk voted Republican out of habit in order to win the election.

BUT IF SHE doesn’t have an incumbent to run against this time, it could make it very possible that we (finally) get the concept of “Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill.” – representing a northwestern Cook and DuPage county district, with a little stretch pushing into Lake County.

Because at least now she’s giving up that post that was providing her with an income – even though the Tribune reports that it is not set yet when her last day on the job will be.

But she still has a long life ahead of her, which makes it seem unlikely that she is finished up in public life. It may be purely my gut feeling, but I sense this will be the time she decides to actually run for an office (rather than fall back on whatever state or federal Veterans Affairs post she happened to hold during an election cycle).

Whether former Rep. Bill Foster ought to be equally as enthused about his chances is also something to be studied.

BECAUSE IT SEEMS that Foster got his chances bolstered on Tuesday when his most likely opponent decided to back away from running for office in a Congressional district (the Illinois 11th) that doesn't technically exist yet.

FOSTER: A comeback?



Foster is the Democrat who managed to take the seat held by former House Speaker Denny Hastert back in 2008 (the year of Barack Obama), only to lose it two years later (the year of the Tea Party nitwits).

Of course, it also helped Foster in winning that Congressional seat that he was running against James Oberweis -- who when he isn't involved with a locally-prominent dairy company comes across as the type of person only a Tea Party type could take seriously.

But this particular district is another one that was drawn in ways to hinder the desires of those voters on the fringe of the Chicago metro area who would prefer to remain separate -- and are having trouble accepting that Chicagoland truly is spreading to include their turfs.

  -30-

Terrorism turns to partisan politics

Call it the campaign strategy for 2010 – any Democrat who doesn’t play along with the GOP attempt to scare Chicago with talk of terrorists hitting the Willis Tower or O’Hare International Airport is going to get attacked anyway.

Now I understand that campaigns are about criticism and trying to differentiate oneself from the opposition. I also realize they can get nasty pretty quick. People who are too sensitive ought not to be running for elective office.

YET THE TYPE of criticism that is coming from the proposal to put inmates from the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba (the so-called terrorists who act in a perverted take on Islam) to the vacant state prison at Thomson, Ill., is so shallow as to be offensive.

What I’m referring to is a series of press releases I have been receiving in my e-mail in recent days in which GOP officials are using interchangeable rhetoric to dredge this issue up against anyone who dares to go through a political life with a “D” rather than an “R” after their name.

Some of these releases have come from the gubernatorial campaign of Andrew McKenna, while others have come in the name of the Illinois Republican Party.

The statements I have seen have been critical of Democratic Senate hopeful Alexi Giannoulias, and Reps. William Foster and Jerry Costello. None of them have been quite so quick as to state a stance on the issue of the inmate shift.

SO THE REPUBLICANS are going out of their way to criticize them for being quiet – claiming that a real candidate would have jumped the gun and shot his mouth off, just like they have.

But the thing about all these statements I have seen is that the rhetoric is nearly identical in each statement, which makes me think it is a party strategy that is being earmarked for use against all Democrats.

Which means that there probably are many more statements in circulation criticizing other Democrats, across Illinois and the nation, for this very same issue.

It bothers me to think that anyone has the gall to think that rational people would be swayed by someone who wants us to believe that thinking before opening one’s mouth is a negative trait.

NOW AS I wrote earlier this week, this issue involving the fate of the Guantanamo inmates is one that has become a partisan mess – Democrats generally are supportive because President Barack Obama has touted the idea, while Republicans don’t want Obama to get anything that might be considered a positive achievement.

So they’re trash-talking the idea, even though it makes sense and is a solution to a problem that has to be addressed.

It is sad to say that at least some Democrats are taking the rhetoric that moving such inmates to Illinois makes Chicago a bigger target on the international scene too seriously.

Rep. Melissa Bean, D-Ill., has made some statements in recent days that imply she has problems with the idea of the so-called terrorist suspects being brought to Illinois. She represents a district in the outer Chicago suburbs that once was considered a Republican stronghold, and is one that the GOP would like to have their candidate win back come the ’10 elections.

SO SHE WENT so far as to make the statements in line with the Republican rhetoric so that they can’t use the issue against her in their campaign leaflets and television spots once the general election cycle picks up next fall.

It is the same logic that caused then-Sen. Obama a few years ago to vote for construction of a wall along the U.S./Mexico border, even though the Democratic Party “position” was that such a wall was a waste of federal funds, in addition to being a generally stupid concept.

The Illinois GOP went so far as to issue a statement praising Bean for taking a GOP-like stance on the issue, which means they’re now trying to stir up resentment amongst Democrats against Bean.

Anything that helps weaken her, it could work. The fact that Obama was on the record as backing that border wall was one of the reasons that Latinos were more inclined in the Democratic presidential primary last year to support Hillary R. Clinton instead of the concept of Obama-mania.

IF NOT FOR the general disgust of Latino voters for the GOP these days, it probably would have hurt him in the general election too.

This tactic is more about Republicans trying cheaply to define an issue on their terms. I’d like to think the electorate is too sensible to fall for this.

Otherwise, my e-mail box is going to be overflowed with the same stupid statement sent over and over, with the only variable being the “fill in the blank” for the name of yet another political person to be criticized.

-30-

"Illinois 14th" shows how little I know

This is one time I don’t mind being wrong. It was a nauseating thought that dairy owner-turned-political dreamer James Oberweis could actually win election to a seat in Congress.

As it is, I find it disturbing that he came as close as he did (48 percent, with 96 percent of the votes counted), and that there obviously is a sizable chunk of the population that thinks someone of Oberweis’ ilk makes a credible candidate for public office.

IT IS A vocal minority, and it is one that likely will go all out to try to win in November -- when the two candidates go at each other again. A bit better organization (or perhaps a less abrasive candidate), and the GOP would be celebrating victory in the Illinois 14th congressional district special election.

I think state Sen. Chris Lauzen of Aurora could have won that congressional seat, both in the special election and in the November general election. Too bad the Republicans in the far west suburban/rural northern Illinois district didn’t nominate him.

Some Democrats are inclined to think some high-minded goal was achieved with Bill Foster’s victory. “This says there is no district that is going to be safe for Republicans,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., told WGN-TV.

I’m not swayed.

FOSTER HAD BETTER be careful, or else he could be the one whose political career lasts little more than filling out the leftover crumbs of retiring Rep. J. Dennis Hastert’s term – which runs through early January 2009. After all, Oberweis has the funding to run a top-notch aggressive campaign, and he has shown a willingness to play political hardball.

That hardball style of campaigning will forevermore be Oberweis’ political legacy – particularly The Commercial.

It was the ad from a past U.S. Senate campaign where he flies over Chicago’s Soldier Field and tries to create the image of capacity crowds of illegal immigrants packing their way into the United States week after week after week.

While he did not do anything so blatantly offensive in this campaign, he still kept up the talk on the immigration issue. He clearly wanted to get the votes of the people who have a fear of continued newcomers to this country, and who view the eastern end of the suburban/rural district with suspicion (Aurora is developing a significant Hispanic population).

I'D LIKE TO think it was a sudden turnout of Latino voters who decided to keep the “milk dud” (as former Illinois Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka so wonderfully dubbed Oberweis when he ran against her in the 2006 Illinois gubernatorial primary) from winning an election.

It probably wasn’t. But it would be a nice image. And it is that growing population that will make it impossible for someone like Oberweis to even come close to winning in future years.

Two final thoughts on the outcome of the special election.

I WILL GIVE Oberweis some praise for not dragging out the evening. He made his concession call to Foster and made his public statement prior to 9 p.m.

And I would urge Foster to keep in mind just why so many people had a problem with Oberweis. In some ways, Foster is no better. It’s not like Saturday’s results were some great moral victory.

Foster was just as willing to play politics with the immigration issue and try to appeal to the same people whose votes Oberweis desired. His rhetoric doesn’t exactly make him a friend of the people who most wanted Oberweis to lose. Without a change in his political outlook, he’ll be no better than Oberweis.

-30-

U.S. Rep. James Oberweis, R-Ill.

There. I wrote it. But he’d better not get too used to the title, because he’s going to have one heck of a fight immediately ahead of him in order to keep it.

It would appear that after four campaigns costing the Chicago-area investment manager turned dairy owner and ice cream parlor entrepreneur more than $10 million of his own money, James Oberweis will finally get a political office to call his own.

MY GUT FEELING says that Illinois’ 14th congressional district is so in-bred Republican (particularly in the rural parts that comprise its far west end) that Oberweis will win Saturday’s special election to complete the remainder of the term to which retiring Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., (formerly U.S. House speaker) was elected in 2006.

However, that term only runs through the rest of this year. All Oberweis is going to get is the right to be in the minority party of Congress at a time when the mood of the country as a whole is swinging against them.

So it shouldn’t be considered a major victory for Oberweis (or a defeat for Democratic party challenger Bill Foster) as much as just another step in their desire to have real political influence.

James Oberweis wants to think his door-to-door campaigning across the Illinois 14th congressional district put him in a position to win Saturday's special election. His personal wealth used to build name recognition and demonize his Dem opponent in a short-election cycle were more significant factors. Photograph provided by Oberweis for Congress.

No matter what happens Saturday, Foster and Oberweis remain the Democrat and Republican nominees in the Nov. 4 election to win a two-year term of their own, beginning in January 2009.

SOME POLITICAL OBSERVERS believe Foster has a chance to actually win the seat, saying they think that social and political trends that will favor Democratic candidates across the United States in general will also apply to this district.

They think the lack of Denny Hastert (an extremely popular local figure who was perceived as never having forgotten where he came from, no matter how high up the political ladder he climbed) will cause people to look at the actual personalities on the ballot, rather than focus attention on the political parties to which they are affiliated.

I’m skeptical that will happen for Saturday’s special election, although it could very well happen come November.

Foster could easily lose on Saturday, but then win big in the General Election – thereby getting himself a full two-year term of his own, while Oberweis will merely get to finish off the crumbs left over from Hastert’s term and will gain a “political loser” reputation – as if losses for the U.S. Senate and Illinois governor hadn’t already given him that rep.

IF THERE HAD been more than one month of time passing between when Oberweis and Foster won their nominations and the actual special election, then maybe Foster would have had more of a chance to exploit the “national mood,” so-to-speak.

But the lack of time, combined with the fact that many people who live in that district are Republicans because they perceive the political party as the mechanism that allows them to prevent Democratic Chicago from overwhelming their interests, means many local voters will merely vote for the GOP, just like they always have.

Foster, if he really wants to win, should focus his attention on keeping the momentum of his campaign from being lost. Even with Oberweis spending the spring and summer months in Washington, there won’t be much time for him to accomplish anything of significance. He is not going to be the standard issue incumbent in the November election.

Oberweis could easily get tied into the Republican caucus and be hit with all the mistakes they inevitably will make this year. He could be weakened just enough that Foster could beat up on him for issues we don’t even know about yet.

SO THE POLITICAL junkie in me is focusing my attention on that election, in large part because it is the only one going Saturday in Illinois (Sorry, I just can’t get excited about the Wyoming presidential primary).

It really wouldn’t be much of a loss for Foster not to win on Saturday. Even if I turn out to be wrong and the headline on this commentary makes me look foolish by day’s end, all Foster would really get to be is the member of the majority party with the least amount of seniority.

In one respect, it will be good to see this special election cycle come and go. I am tired of all the nasty broadcast ad campaigning that has been taking place. Both of these candidates are exaggerating their opponents’ resumes in an attempt to unfairly demonize them.

Perhaps it is because neither one of them really has anything worth bragging about. I know for a fact that I would have a hard time choosing whom to vote for, if I lived in that district (ironically enough, my step-brother recently moved into the far east end of the Illinois 14th congressional, but not in time to register to be able to vote Saturday).

OBERWEIS IS GOING to have no problem falling in line with the segment of Congress that is more than willing to pander to social conservative elements that want to blast the immigration issue out of context – twisting it into something that can be used to demonize people so as to get votes.

Oberweis is the candidate who in past bids for the U.S. Senate tried to plant the image in the heads of Illinois voters of massive sports stadiums filled with illegal immigrants. Even in his current campaign for the U.S. House, he has kept up the partisan rhetoric.

I lost count of how many times he tried to imply (both in television campaign ads and during personal appearances) that Foster is a liberal freak who wants to raise peoples’ taxes so that there will be more money to pay for social services for people that Oberweis would prefer to think do not belong in this country at all.

What is sad is that Foster really is a guy who is more than willing to throw his own digs at Oberweis on the immigration issue.

WE GOT TO re-hear the charge from past campaigns that Oberweis hired people without proper immigration papers to work at his ice cream parlors (he actually hired companies to staff one of his parlors, and they hired the people without “green cards.”) We also got to hear that Oberweis agrees with President Bush “on almost everything,” even though the one major area they do disagree on is immigration.

Bush actually had the reasonable approach, while Oberweis wants to play politics with people, particularly those who have come to the United States from various Latin American countries.

Foster doesn’t want to clarify it because it might imply he sides with the people affected by immigration cases – a viewpoint he thinks would cost him votes.

As much as Oberweis’ campaign activity in elections past and present offends me, it is not like there is really anything about Foster that makes him a viable alternative. While the Chicago Sun-Times used that as an excuse to begrudgingly give Oberweis their endorsement, I don’t know if I could have followed suit.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Democrats tried challenging James Oberweis for the large amounts of his own money (http://www.dccc.org/stakeholder/archives/005948.html) that he spent on his campaign against Bill Foster.

For those interested in the investment advice of Oberweis, one should check out (http://www.moneyshow.com/msc/marketresource/speaker.asp?speakerid=577SPK) his newsletter, “The Oberweis Report.” I personally get a kick out of a corporate executive whose business address is on, “Ice Cream Drive.”

Will Oberweis (http://www.jimoberweis.com/) finally win an elective office? Or is he destined for his fourth defeat? We will know by Saturday night.