CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Brunch

Re: Brunch

Larry — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:51:05 -0000

No matter how much money Laura Bush brings in, it won't buy off voters. That's why so many fed-up Republicans like me are supporting Tammy Duckworth.

To read "Why Roskam Will Lose," visit http://republicansforduckwo...

Re: Brunch

Cubs-I give up! — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:14:18 -0000

Duckworth has 3% of her individual $ from inside the district.

Roskam has 54% of his individual $ from inside the district.

People who donate vote-Roskam Wins Big

Re: Brunch

Wumpus — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:14:38 -0000

They knew Cegelis could not win, her positions were known and she wasn't afraid to voice them. Duckworth, is pretty much an unknown outside she is a soldier, who was shot down in Iraq an dlost her legs. Outside of that, the media does not focus on much else.
No one focuses on her life prior to Iraq. I went to her website and I have said before, that they need to focus on her real job.
Let's be real, this is basically the typical partisan race, her money comes from unions, laywers and aborters/thier supporters and primarily outside the district, Hollywood and NYC (unless things have changed in the past 2 weeks). Roskam's money come's primarily from businesses, insurance companies and individuals who live in the 6th.

I agree, if she hadn't been severly injured in IRaq, she would not have been recruited for this race. That, in no way takes away from her service for all you overly sensitive pansies.

Re: Brunch

Skeeter — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 08:59:16 -0000

Finally, I agree with Baar.

Roskam does need to talk.

We need to know if he agrees with Mr. Bush's plan of cutting and running from the Taliban in southern Afghanistan.

That's the problem that Roskam is facing. He cannot possibly win on social issues since he really is an extremist on those issues, and if he wants to talk about defense he needs to talk about the failures of the B-Team in Afghanistan. Of course he can't talk about ethics since he sat and did nothing while his pals Ryan and DeLay were up to their usual activities. It is a tough time to be a Republican.

Re: Brunch

Bill Baar — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 07:59:16 -0000

Duckworth is the Democratic candidate because the only real issue is War. The Dems are right to run her. She's a formidable candidate and I've said so on this blog when she was running in the primary.

Roskam, if he underestimated Duckworth, was sadly mistaken. He needs to challange to talk over and over again on War and National Security. They need to debate, Iraq, Afganistan, Hezballah, Iran, preemtive war, wars-of-last-resort.

It's really the only thing worth talking about this election. Everything else is secondary.

That's why Duckworth is running. Roskam should recognize that. He'll lose, deservedly, if he doesn't.

Re: Brunch

NW Burbs — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:55:02 -0000

Should read:

(To be fair, itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s not like Roskam hasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t scared up his own share of outside-the-district support and money thanks to Tom DeLay, Dick Cheney, et al.)

Re: Brunch

NW Burbs — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:53:29 -0000

Bizarre. I can remember not so long ago when it was me who was being criticized on this same blog because I was standing up for Major Duckworth and her all-American principles.

Now it's Skeeter and others who receive such criticism.

More and more every day conservatives just come across looking and sounding like crybabies.

Welcome to reality, conservatives. It ain't exactly the way your bizarro world is supposed to look, now is it? Stop drinking the kool-aid for a few minutes and you'd see why Major Duckworth is garnering so much support from both within and outside of the 6th.

(To be fair, it's not like Roskam hasn't scared up his own share of outside-the-district thanks to Tom DeLay, Dick Cheney, et al.)

GOPJay, the only lead in any political race is the one on election day (or primary day in the case of Cegelis). Given that winning the primary is the goal she failed as a candidate. She's a great, smart person but between throwing money out the window like there's no tomorrow and not quite cutting it on GOTV strategy her campaign flopped. Period. So she lost the primary.

Besides, it's August. Cegelis is a non-issue. She supports Major Duckworth and a good many of Cegelis' activists are now volunteering for either Duckworth, other local Dems or both. (And it's funny how the Republicans in the room never bring up evangelical Christian Lindy Scott. What if he would've come in second? What sort of oddball distractions would Republicans come up with then?)

As to your point about Major Duckworth's injuries ... you may have a hypothetical, alternate-universe point if only because she'd have been less likely to have met Senator Durbin at Walter Reed and the two may never have gotten to talking about Iraq and the failed conservative policies swirling around the stay-on-the-wrong-course occupation.

But her injuries don't change her life experience prior to Iraq or her overall progressive values so I think you'd have a hard time arguing she wouldn't be the solid candidate she is today, injuries or no.

Re: Brunch

GOPJay — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 00:18:15 -0000

There's no question in my mind that Duckworth wouldn't be the HDem's choice for Congress if she had legs. There, I said it. Can the Dems say the opposite with a straight face? As far as I know, Cegelis also met with the Dems, yet was rejected, even though she led in the race. So what gives?

As for the DC operative being sent out, yeah, I guess it is a story. I've never seen that kind of press release being sent out on any congressional race. The fact that its a story suggests that current staff isn't kicking the ass they should be. That newspaper ink should be proclaiming Roskam's virtues.

Re: Brunch

johnny anonymous — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 20:15:56 -0000

In my opinion, mclaughlin has done a yeoman's job in this race. After returning to illinois from washington, dc, he was able to prevent a primary, raise $2 million and secure major labor support for peter roskam.

Why this issue about someone else is joining the campaign is a story, I have no idea. I heard they hired a new receptionist, maybe the press can do a story on that too!

Re: Brunch

Skeeter — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:27:24 -0000

Right, Bob.

It is all the fault of that damn "media."

We need stronger laws in this country. Somebody needs to start telling the media that they can't print this sort of stuff. How dare the media rip our government or good Republicans?

You with me on this Bob? Let's just shut that media down, right? We are proud Americans. Screw the press. Shut them down. Don't let them print it.

Right Bob?

Re: Brunch

bob white — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 18:04:46 -0000

The only reason duckworth is even in the ballgame is the fawning media coverage. She gets national story after national story because the media would like to see a democrat win. As for roskam, despite being a Republican in a Republican district, he has to fight through the tilted coverage. When voters start comprehending the full picture regarding duckworth's extreme positions on taxes, parental notification, and the patriot act, roskam will surge ahead. She won't be able to hide the whole campaign.

Re: Brunch

Squideshi — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:44:48 -0000

Ã¢â‚¬Å“The level of participation from the national Democratic Party is at a level that IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve never seen as a state senator and Ryan McLaughlin, my campaign manager, hasnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t seen,Ã¢â‚¬Â

Is this really all that surprising? The Democratic Party of Illinois is going to need some outside help in this election.

Re: Brunch

Lincoln's Logs — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 17:02:44 -0000

Those ads were amazing Skeeter, you are right.

I think that show how tired the ideas are coming from the NRCC...we're at war (a bad one at that), the economy is bad, immigration is a powder keg...and they dusted off the "tax man is coming" mail piece. What a joke.

Re: Brunch

HANKSTER — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:59:37 -0000

Walking Wounded, sir:

I know this is a conservative blog, there is not secret to that. I know that if I say something it is either true or I make it clear thats how I think, an opinion. I am not "nasty" to anyone who treats me the same they would a conservative on this blog. I pay my yearly fee like many of you do. I have problems when people say things that are not true. I will call anyone out who does that, and many people do. I won't take personal attacks from VanillaMan, you, or anyone else. Attack my views that I post, thats fair game, but make it personal and all bets are off.

The funny thing is I could say the exact same thing about VanillaMan as he said about me, but I didnt, and still he made it personal. I treat anyone who is honest and factual or at least is honest enough to say an opinion is an opinion with respect.

Re: Brunch

Walking Wounded — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 16:32:28 -0000

Nice try, but give it up, Vanillaman. Hankster has shown very little respect towards other commenters and even challenges Rich for how he handles his own webblog. Why you have to "watch your mouth" is a puzzlement. Nothing you've written has appeared to be rude or out of line to me. Hankster, can you read this without making a nasty comment?

Re: Brunch

HANKSTER — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:56:09 -0000

I agree with you Corn Hole! People in the 6th are smart, they know that a Congressman/woman has nothing to do with the Governor.

Re: Brunch

bored now — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:54:29 -0000

i mostly agree with ydd -- this race has tightened considerably -- and duckworth is definitely the beneficiary. not sure why he thinks it's significant that most voters in the 6th don't know who rahm is (one assumes that this will be made more clear when the advertising begins), unless they've run this through a focus group and found that voters don't care. (it's possible.)

mostly, though, the generic ballot test in the 6th is considerably different than it has ever been, and one should assume that duckworth will benefit from this. how much duckworth can benefit without a more contrastive message on issues that matter to the sixth remains to be seen.

the may poll was not the last poll done in the district...

Re: Brunch

Cornelius — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:51:44 -0000

sorry, that was "candidate"

I'd hate to get impugned for my spelling, especially when I'm being called "Corn hole"

still is funny, gets funnier everytime I read it!

Re: Brunch

Cornelius — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:49:27 -0000

Corn hole, thats funny!

What business does a Federal cnadidate have making comment on a State cadidate's legal troubles?

Seriously, Corn-hole is pretty funny...

Re: Brunch

Skeeter — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:46:23 -0000

Following up on Link's comment:
The Roskam mailer was interesting.

Pink.

I get it. Duckworth is a woman, so we will send out a pink mailer with her name on it.

The other mailer had the screaming woman.

This shows Roskam's view of women pretty well.

* * *

In response to GOP:

I didn't know that Lieberman served in Iraq. I thought he's been in the Senate the whole time.

That being said, I do respect the views of vets on military issues and I give it some deference.

I also respect vets who have shown leadership. Nothing against the grunts -- they deserve our respect 100% -- but if we are looking for leaders for our country, I think a track record of leadership in the armed forces is great.

That being said, I do agree with you that military service should not be the sole criteria. Judge Major Duckworth on her entire record on her positions and also on her service. Judge Roskam on the same criteria.

With regard to Roskam on tort law: Take a real look at his record. He can't decide what side he's on. Over the years he's been both strongly for and strongly against tort reform (which also goes to his leadership skills, but that's another matter).

With regard to my position if the roles were switched: I have always at best tolerated Sen. Edwards. I have a real problem with P.I. attorneys in government. I don't trust them. I suspect I would hold my nose on that one only because Roskam's views are just so extreme, but it would be a tough call. No dishonesty there.

Re: Brunch

Yellow Dog Democrat — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:45:06 -0000

GOP & Skeeter -

I think that all of this debate about experience misses the point. Voter's choose not based on experience, but on who they trust to make the right decisions. In this respect, experience can be a plus, but it's not the only factor.

Let's also remember that experience can be a huge negative. Ask Tom DeLay.

I think comparing Duckworth to Lieberman is farfetched. Lieberman is a politician, not a trusted authority, and I think that the reason he was tossed out and America is rejecting the Bush Doctrine is because we can see the disconnect between the words coming out of their mouth and the images in the news every day. Iraq is on the brink of a religious civil war, for Pete's sake -- even the generals are admitting that.

Not to change the subject, but Miller left the best part out of the Belleville News-Dem editorial:

This is all so reminiscent of former Gov. George Ryan, who initially blamed his driver's-licenses-for-bribes scandal on rogue employees. Ryan ultimately couldn't distance himself from his scandal; he was convicted in April on racketeering charges. As for Blagojevich: Stay tuned.

I was wondering when newspapers would begin drawing parallels between Blagojevich and Ryan -- not the scandals themselves, but how they have handled them. Those kind of quotes make for great direct mail and t.v. ads.

Re: Brunch

Yellow Dog Democrat — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:33:56 -0000

Tim -

Republicans are nervous because they saw Roskam's huge money lead evaporate. They are nervous because they expected Duckworth to be handicapped by deep party divisions following a combative primary, but she has united the party behind her. They are nervous because even though Roskam is supposed to be vastly superior when it comes to handling the media and retail politics, Duckworth is holding her own. Their nervous because Ralph Reed just went down in flames in Georgia and there are zero degrees of separation between Peter Roskam and the DeLay/Abramoff scandals. And they are nervous because Roskam's campaign has been floundering.

But most of all, Republicans are freaking out because the most recent poll numbers have Roskam-Duckworth in a statistical dead heat, 35-34, in what is supposed to be a staunch Republican district, and the leading issue in the district is the Iraq war and bringing the troops home, at 26%. It's not time to bust out the marshmallows yet, but Roskam could be toast.

Re: Brunch

Dasani — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:33:24 -0000

I'm not taking sides, I'm just curious. How many people posting here actually live in the 6th?

Re: Brunch

Tim — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:28:13 -0000

Corn-hole --

I find it interesting that you'll give TD a pass on her thoughts regarding the governor of her party in her home state. And I wasn't asking who she liked on the ballot, try reading my post genius. I asked what she thought of Rod's legal troubles.

Tell you what, you tell me the issues she is exempt from being asked about and we'll go from there, how's that work for ya?

Re: Brunch

Link — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:24:44 -0000

Clearly Peter thought he could coast to this seat with a campaign manager with little or no experience. That they're bringing in a hired gun from DC shows right there that they are scared.

Rich is right, those mail pieces were a joke.