As you know, I backed Jim Oberweis in the primary but if you heard my radio show last night you’ll see the vast, almost chasm difference, between Ron Gidwitz, an economic conservative and Judy Baar Topinka (as she demonstrated in that caterwauling cat fight called a debate on Sunday night which is due to be re-aired this morning on Channel 5 at 11 a.m.). My point is that in Topinka you have someone who served for more than 20 years in state government and politics and still comes to the debate winging it with no definable program for getting the state out of its present sorry condition.
My earlier column on the Train Wreck was to point out that social conservatives who supported Brady well beyond the time when it was obvious he either wasn’t able to win or couldn’t muster the finances bear major responsibility. Much of the hashing back and forth in Reader’s Comments are rather, if I may say so, unconvincing justificatory excuses such as: with a runoff, Judy still might have won from Lovie’s Leather…well, Oberweis couldn’t have won anyhow; Roeser’s comments “are not objective” (of course they aren’t: no analysis is objective but is subjective) from D. Thomas who storms about saying Oberweis was “unprincipled” with ties to the “Wizard of Carpentersville”…and another from Lovie’s Leather: “get over it, Tom; cry me a river.” …another that Brady got into the race first and before Oberweis got in, Brady was “leading” (you have to be a kind of moral theologian to compute that one: Brady was leading Oberweis before Oberweis got in)…but after Oberweis got in, Oberweis was leading but anyhow Brady had been in first so Oberweis should have withdrawn…
Yet another objection: my point that following Topinka’s loss it’s time to rebuild the party with new leadership—what’s different now than in 2002? That kind of futility that because it hasn’t been done yet it can’t be done in the future from Matt Nelson…besides, as Jason A says Topinka will win anyhow (give me a drag on that, Jason). See, this is weasel-worded self-justification: call me a whiner, say Oberweis made his own mistakes like tying up with Jack Roeser: anything except agreeing that Brady and his people did the damage. None is so blind as he who will not see. So now you got the 62-year-old prematurely orange-haired lady, dressed in the carefully selected Goodwill Industries jump suit that matched her hair (supposedly to strike a chord with the working class?) with no program whom one of you predicts will win anyhow. You’re kidding yourself friends and if it makes you feel better o.k., except that mistakes unrecognized are sure to be repeated. My thanks to those who called in with agreement last night and to Yvonne Arentz who wrote in to the Blog.
The objection of Speaker Dennis Hastert who linked up with Nancy Pelosi to blast the Justice Department for supposedly violating separation of powers by getting a court order and invading Congressman William Jefferson’s cache of cold cash has no intellectual or constitutional worth to it. What Hastert’s really worried about is that Justice may in fact traduce Hastert’s preserves in a legal search for something. Hastert is edgy because an ABC “investigative” reporter, the same one who rigged an automobile to ignite in flames so as to produce a better photo op some years ago and who got fired for it, is playing footsie with somebody from Justice. Hastert ought to lighten up. Nothing he has done or even contemplated doing will be probed.
Must a gubernatorial candidate espouse a new program to get your support?
ReplyDeleteJudy said in her campaign commercials that she would 1)hold the line on spending, 2) pay down our debts, and 3) live within our means. She is not promising new programs to win anyone's votes, including conservatives. Compare that with the weasely Rod Blagojevich, who gives away our money to keep Rev. Meeks out of the race.
Frankly, Judy is coming across as more of an economic conservative than Pres. Bush. Whereas spending has gone through the roof under GWB, Judy is making no promises to anybody--and for this you slam her.
Tom, I wonder how "conservative" you can be and demand new government programs that the State of Illinois can ill afford.
and you are still talking about the primary... why? I really liked Gidwitz and really enjoyed your show last night. But the primary is over, Gidwitz lost, and hopefully he won't run again because the embarrassment of losing two or three state-wide elections is too much for anyone to handle.... I am sick of the primary talk. I love primaries, but it's too recent to be interesting history. I think you just keep writing about the primary because you have nobody to support in the general election, right Tom? There is nobody you like, so you have to drudge up the past. Please, let's have a look to the future.
ReplyDeleteI agreed with your entire piece Tom. My response was titled true and the content stated Brady will lose conservative backing in the future because of this. And I said JBT is dead and both her and Bob K need to go to rebuild the party from the bottom up.
ReplyDeleteI said Blago will trounce Judy as I have since the primary ended. I backed Oberweiss and agree 100% with everything you have written about the primary - both before and after March.
Maybe you were responding to Lovie's Leather who stated "Judy still might have won" (in a runoff with Oberweiss) or David Graf's statement that Blago was a lock vs. Oberweiss which I think are wrong assessments.
What state do you think we are in. This isn't Kansas, people. Liberals outnumber conservatives in the state by a large margin. Oberweis couldn't have won, even if he did, he would have been inneffective. With a democratic house and senate, do you really think Oberweis would have been effective? But why am I arguing this, it is yesterdays news!!!...
ReplyDeleteTom, I vote in the primary for the candidate I like the best. I reserve the general election for the "lesser of two evils."
ReplyDeleteYou had a chance to vote for Birkett and then Brady, so obviously at one point you thought he was the better candidate. I didn't have that opportunity to vote for the best candidate before the primary.
After you voted, the issue of money came into the picture and affected who you supported. Your vote for Oberweiss was really a vote against JBT.
Is there any election you will favor us "regular people" voting for a candidate, as opposed to against a candidate?