Personal Asides: Chris Lauzen May Run for Congress…Hmmm. “Snuffed Out” Not Familiar to Chicagoans, Eh?

Lauzen.

It’s no news to anyone who has continually read this website that I supported Jim Oberweis for the gubernatorial nomination, supported Jim Oberweis for the U. S. Senate in the primary election and felt exceedingly depressed after the State Central Committee did not choose Jim Oberweis to succeed Jack Ryan for the senatorial nomination. Moreover, I have carried the fight beyond the gubernatorial primary to Sen. Bill Brady for targeting Oberweis in the primary when all logic would have prescribed him going after Judy Baar Topinka, the leading candidate. I still believe a kind of fix was in. That I should forget and forgive old enmities came home to me clearly when I heard that Jim Oberweis met not long after election with Brady and allowed bygones to be bygones—which is what I should have done instead of nursing old political scabs. After all, who am I to continue to be upset about Brady in behalf of Oberweis when Oberweis has made up with Brady? Exactly.

So now in the 14th district where the congressional seat is held by J. Dennis Hastert, the rumor is that perhaps he will not run again. If he does run again, obviously Republicans will support J. Dennis Hastert. But if he does not, a few names have been circulated. One is that of Jim Oberweis. Sorry, nothing against Jim because I have been an Oberweis veteran in the trenches…but this time I think my allegiance will shift to someone else….someone with excellent legislative experience, who has served the people brilliantly for 15 years…someone who is utterly unassailable from the standpoint of conservative credentials…who has been used to competing against heavy odds—almost always when the GOP establishment has been against him. This is State Sen. Chris Lauzen of Aurora. A superbly educated fiscal conservative, a superbly trained social and governmental logician, a man of the highest intellect and extraordinary gifts, it is my hope that he will be the successor to Congressman Hastert when the time comes.

Chris is noteworthy for doing what he thinks is right no matter what the political consequences. He was opposed in its initial go-round by some heavy Republican establishmentarian forces including Jim Edgar and won. He was singled out as one of the “Fab Five” in the state Senate along with Peter Fitzgerald, Patrick O’Malley, Steve Rauschenberger and Dave Syverson. I was gratified when he defeated Harry Seigel, an establishment favorite for the state comptroller nomination. I was impressed when he single-handedly and alone challenged George Ryan’s faulty spending on “Illinois First.” Since then he has walked alone but because of his doughty intelligence and convictions he has been joined by many of his friends, among whom I wish to be included. Not that we have always agreed--but disagreement with civility is part of polity.

If Jim Oberweis, who has already spent more than $7 million in past campaigns, runs for the Congress in that district…the umpteenth campaign of his life…he can do great damage to the prospect of a brilliant lawmaker going to Congress. There is always some greedy consultant who wants to importune wealthy people to run—for the consultant’s own benefit. For some reason—and I think it unfortunate—the electorate does not cotton to Oberweis: but I am no electoral psychologist. If I were, Jim Oberweis would be either Senator or Governor today. Now, I think it best for Jim to concentrate on using his good name and undeniably strong views to help the ticket this time and take a breather—especially from the 14th district. The chance to elect a Chris Lauzen to the Congress comes once in every blue moon…and I hope no conservative shirks from the opportunity to help him in the 14th. Of course you know that I don’t have any vested interest in Chris’ political career; my radio show hosts both sides of every contest, the mike open to all candidates for the post, Republican or Democratic.

I’d be interested in what you think of Chris in Reader’s Comment.

Snuffed Out.

As we have seen, Fr. Michael Pfleger, the left-wing media darling and such a hot exponent of gun-control that he threatened to murder a Riverdale gun shop owner, is an angry demagogue who excels at delivering stem-winding political sermons to congregations for whom he is expected to celebrate Mass. This is hot stuff for the liberal media which, since they are disinterested in moral absolutes, have adopted “gun control” as the first article of their secular religion. Pfleger has gotten away with slangy street palaver to shows how hip he is, how well he understands the lingo of ghetto life. He has even put on a South Side black accent…although he is white…to be close to the discordant masses he calls grandly “my people.” In essence what you have is a white version of Fr. Jean Bertrand Aristide with all the trimmings and yearnings for political power.

Because he is an emotionally overhung faux crusader, devoid of humor or modesty, when he went rhetorically over the top the other day and shouted to the gun shop owner that we will “snuff you out” he could not bring himself to say he misspoke. Had he done so, the error would be as quickly forgiven as it was unprinted by the supplicants of the media. No, just as his great mentor Jesse Jackson, Sr. cannot admit of an error, neither can Pfleger. So he was forced to insist that he didn’t and doesn’t know the meaning of the phrase “snuff out.” He is ignorant that since Al Capone’s day, it has meant murder. And he says the fact that the media who covered him didn’t mention his remark shows that the media themselves were unaware of what “snuffed out” means.

A friend who ran a check with “Roget’s New Millennium Thesaurus” found that synonyms for the word “dead” include deceased, dead duck, departed, done-for, exterminated, extinguished, fallen and “snuffed out.” Another check for the words “not alive” include defunct, departed, lifeless, liquidated, off’ed, rubbed out and “snuffed out.” Perhaps it would be good for some who read this to send it to the various city desks and assignment editors who feign ignorance of the words.

The subsequent publicity of the episode has made nary a dent with the secularly humanistic liberal “Tribune” which believes that if it does not cover a story that slights liberals, it didn’t happen…nor with the blissfully slavish Ron Magers of Channel 7 who with Cheryl Burton ran a panel on violence which included Fr. Pfleger, the patron saint of gun confiscation. The presence of guns, you see, not anything else—not broken families, not the failure of clergy to insist on observance of the moral code…the presence of guns is the sole reason for violence…not lack of religious or moral message which can be laid to the doorstep of the unruly and disobedient priest and his colleagues. Let’s say Magers and Burton read their scripts and asked the proper questions mandated by their editors. Whenever I see those two I think of the phrase delivered after application of the powder puffs: “I’m ready for my close-up, C. B!”