QC Examiner

From Mark Steyn at The Corner:

I’m getting a bit tired of Senator McCain’s anti-business shtick. The line about serving “for patriotism, not for profit” is pathetic. America spends more on its military than the next 35-40 biggest military spenders on the planet combined: Where does he think the money for that comes from?

As for his line about “some greedy people on Wall Street who need to be punished”, aside from being almost entirely irrelevant to the subject under discussion (the subprime “crises”), it reveals, I think, one of the most unpleasant aspects of McCain. For a so-called “maverick”, he’s very comfortable with the application of Big Government power, and the assumption of Big Government virtue. Undoubtedly there are “greedy people on Wall Street”. Why should he and his chums be the ones who decide whether they need to be “punished”? If greed is to be punishable, why doesn’t he start with a pilot program applied to, say, the United States Senate and report back to us in five years how that’s going?

Today I finally received love letters from the two lovers who are vying for my attention to become my IL State Senator.

It’s too late for me, since I have already voted for Rumler, but Mr. Examiner will not vote until Super-De-Duper Tuesday.

The front of the Jacobs mailer has  what is obviously a photoshop picture of him holding up a faux-Dispatch with the headline “WIU-Moline gets $2.4M”.

Not only is this dishonest, but it’s a damned poor photoshop job to boot!   Shame on Mike for this bit of dishonest hokum.

The other side of the mailer has a (I presume un-photoshopped) photo of Mike with claims that he is a recognized advocate for better jobs, a champion for lower taxes and a fighter for better education funding.  Well, gosh, I’ll bet he’s for Mom and apple pie too!

Want to go to Jacobs’ website for further information? Sucker! There ain’t one, or at least one that he included on the mailer—-I guess Mike’s main constituency is old people who are not connected to the internet—people even older than me, it would seem. 

Moving on to Rumler’s mailer, it is obvious his was done on the cheap and is not as slick as Jacobs’.

He lists his “Democratic Values”,  which is stuff  like enhanced education opportunities, honor our veterans and protect civil and human rights.  These would seem to me to be universal values, shared by all, Democrats and Republicans alike.  Being pro-choice and calling health care a “fundamental human right”, maybe not so much.

Also included is a list of Rumler’s public service experience and his endorsements.

Unfortunately, the photo shown next to “Endorsed by” is taken so far away we can’t tell who the hell they are, or what organization they represent.

But at least Rumler has a website, which is www.PaulRumler.com

Mr. Examiner says he will be voting for Jacobs on Super-De-Duper Tuesday since he approves of Jacobs standing up to Blago and thinks the local Democrat powers-that-be will have more control over Rumler than Jacobs.

I agree with the standing up to Blago thing but as to who is more controlled by party bosses, I’m not so sure.

It’s really sad that practically all discussions concerning local politicians end up with the debate over who is more in the pocket of the Politburo.

Regular readers know I’ve been all over the map about the POTUS thing. From Richardson, to Huckabee to Ron Paul—and everybody in between.

As I mentioned previously, last Tuesday I did the early voting thing.

For POTUS, I voted for Obama and his delegates, most of whom I loathe because they are Politburo insiders.

My decision to vote for Obama was in no way intellectually driven; it was entirely visceral.

I began to form my pro-Obama opinion some time in December. I still have no coherent narrative as to why I chose him, but here are some links to articles which reflect my thinking/feeling:

1. A Bush news conference in December where Bush was asked what he would look for in the next POTUS.  He said he would want to know what principles the candidate would stand on, in good times and bad, and who they would rely on for unvarnished advice.

2. This blog post by Callimachus about choosing a POTUS by his/her ability to grow in office. Sez Cal: “Obama, however, impresses me as having enormous will and capability to learn on the job, to soak it up and use experience to make himself better at it.”

3. A Lawrence Lindsey op-ed about the three things we should consider when choosing a POTUS:

a) Has the candidate faced a crises or overcome a major setback in his or her life?

b) Has the candidate had a variety of life experiences—not just politics?

c) Can the candidate tell the difference between a foreign enemy and a political opponent?

4. Many conservatives believe they can work with Obama even though his politics are liberal.

5. With the presidency, character and self-knowledge matter more than experience.

6. The Reagan Diaries. This book gave me insight into the day-to-day life of a POTUS, and from this book I learned that all sorts of problems will be thrown at a POTUS, not all with a three-point white paper solution. A POTUS needs a core belief system in order to be effective.

Finally, the Clintons are the masters of the politics of personal destruction, and if Obama can survive the Clinton Smear Machine, he can survive anything!

My favorite thing is to connect press with politics and how they conspire to keep us barefoot, pregnant and stupid.

So I was pleased to see this blog post from Peoria blogger, Bill Dennis about how a Peoria local media entity had decided to run for office in the 18th Congressional District.

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it? Baker, Zinga? Where is the line?

The truth is there ain’t one.

Our local press is in bed with the local politicians. Haven’t you ever wondered why

Phil Hare and Lane Evans got a pass for 24+ years? Why only Mike Boland gets negative stuff reported about him?

The line separating press from politics is very narrow—we need to be sure the press isn’t in bed with the politicians.

Or rather, we need to acknowledge and accept the fact that the press and politicians are forever intertwined.

UPDATE 01/28/08: Ed Felker is mad as hell and he’s not gonna take it any more! After months of abuse, Felker took umbrage at my characterization of him as “a former Democrat operative” and emailed me to set the record straight. According to Ed, he has never worked for a candidate or political party and won’t even vote in primaries.

So I guess my theory as to why local reporting on the 17th CD is so poor has just been shot to hell.

My apologies to Ed Felker and the offending, incorrect paragraph has been deleted. 

For several years, Mr. Examiner and I have been doing movies and dinner as a return to our earlier dating habits (the 70s).

As a result, for better or worse, we have seen a majority of the movies up for Oscar nominations. I must say here, that in almost every event, we find the movies of the 2000s inferior to the movies of our dating years (the 70s).

But plunging ahead, we have seen the following Oscar nominated movies:

There Will Be Blood

Atonement

No Country For Old Men

Elizabeth: The Golden Age

Sweeney Todd

The Assassination of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford

Into the Wild

Gone Baby Gone

None of these were our favorite. That would be Kite Runner.

But if I had to choose among the nominees, I would pick:

Johnny Depp-Best Actor

Cate Blanchett - Best Actress

Atonement - Best Picture

Casey Affleck - Best Supporting Actor

Amy Ryan - Gone Baby Gone

Both us are in despair about the current crop of movies—-if you aren’t a nihilist, you ain’t in the movies. 

From Rep. Pat Verschoore (D-Politburo) in an article in the Dispatch today, about Jerry Lack;

It’s always hard to run against an incumbent…

I wonder how in hell Verschoore would know. Verschoore never ran against an incumbent in his life. In ‘03, in the usual Politburo fashion, he was appointed to serve out the term of Joel Brunsvold.

It’s no wonder Verschoore is financing Lack’s campaign against Boland. Mike Boland is the only person in the area who began his political career by VOTERS deciding rather than the powerful Politburo. Such independence must be punished, and Verschoore, who is himself the beneficiary of Politburo dirty back-room dealings, is just the guy to lead the attack.

It really is a pity that Boland didn’t return the favor by financing a challenger against the free-rider Verschoore.

The Boland v. Lack race had me in a quandry since neither represented change. Boland has been my Rep. since ‘94, but Lack is just another puppet of the Politburo, which is the anti-change agent in RICO.

Ultimately, on Tuesday I decided to go with Boland. I’ve never been a big fan of his, but at least he isn’t a representative of the culture of corruption which Jerry Lack certainly is.

It was a tough call.

An article in today’s Dispatch reported the not-so-shocking news that the local incumbents were ahead in money raised for IL Senator and 71st District Representative.

Well, surprise! surprise! as Gomer Pyle would say. It appears that our nep Senator lied to us. Yeah, I’m shocked, too.

As I blogged about here Mike Jacobs crowed that he was the superior candidate because he took “very little campaign money from legislative leaders.”

Facts show that Jacobs’ largest single donor was the Illinois Senate Democratic Fund, which is controlled by Emil Jones. This would explain Jacobs’ remark that he was “uniquely positioned” to be in leadership position if Jones stepped down. Sheesh!

The article also says that Mike Boland has received the majority of his campaign contributions from a fund controlled by Mike Madigan.

But what I found interesting in the article is the fact that the majority of Jerry Lack’s funding is coming from Pat Verschoore. Lack is challenging Boland.

So at the prodding of commenter Beth, I emailed Verschoore and asked him why he is financing Boland’s challenger. I’m not counting on a reply from Verschoore, but if I do get one, I’ll post it here.

“You’re Black” Versus “You’re The Boss’s Wife.”

I’d say the operative word here would be yo-yo, or maybe mass group dementia, or maybe just too much time and money on their hands, because according to this AP report a liberal advocacy group, called Americans United for Change (AUC) has decided to spend 8.5 million dollars on a negative campaign against—-GEORGE BUSH!

AUC is comprised mostly of union leaders (AFL-CIO, AFSCME, SEIU, NEA, etc.) and their stated goal is to make sure Bush’s public approval rate doesn’t improve as his administration comes to an end—–like Bush couldn’t do that all by himself—- and for free!

AUC thinks Bush’s rating might improve in his last year, just as Reagans did, but Bush is no Reagan. They also fear that an increase in Bush’s approval rating will help congressional Republicans, but since the approval rating of the Democrat controlled congress is BELOW Bush’s, wouldn’t the money be better spent promoting Dem candidates for Congress, rather than blowing 8.5 mil on a lame duck POTUS?

This is the sort of faulty reasoning and fiscal irresponsibility that has doomed unions to the fringes of our society—and what a waste of money! What’s next? 5.7 mil to revive the flagging buggy whip industry? 9.3 mil to bring back the IBM Selectric?  2.5 mil for promoting the use of  carbon paper? Sheesh!

Since our specially selected congressman is a major spokesman for Big Labor, expect  him to be a big player in this idiotic endeavor, and to ratchet up his divisive anti-Bush rhetoric.

Since  Big Labor requires the beneficiaries of their largess to earn their big paychecks, I’m sure Hare will be up to the task, because without Big Labor money, Hare would be left hanging like a yo-yo.

Not a pretty sight.

The Never-Ending Campaign had been weighing on me for some time, so when I saw in The Dispatch that the Early Voting Trolley was going to be in my ‘hood today, I decided to go down there and just get it over with.

Aside from the “just do it” aspect, I reasoned that while the weather conditions today weren’t ideal, at least the roads were clear and there was no ice storm or blizzard, and who knows what the weather will be on Super-De-Duper Tuesday? 

Another factor was the trolley was just a mile from my house and my regular polling place is over 8 miles, so hey, what’s not to like?

When I got there I had to fill out a piece of paper with my name written and printed, and declare a party.   The machines were touch-screen, which we have never had up here in North Boonieville—just punch cards.

So the “helper” pretty much stood over me the whole time I was voting (I took out a Democrat ballot) and when I was finished, he began hectoring me for not voting for unopposed candidates.  I informed him that I never vote for anyone who can win just by voting for themselves.  But why was that any of his business?

Hmmmmm. Now that I think about it, I should have done what any REAL Democrat would have done and started hollaring about “voter intimidation”!

When I finished voting the machine spit out my paper ballot, and the “helper” took it from me.  Having paper ballots as a backup is a good thing,  but now this Democrat operative knew my name and how I voted.  Sheesh! 

So while the Early Voting Trolley was an interesting experience, I don’t advise it for anyone who values privacy in the voting booth or for anyone who dislikes being told how to vote.

PS: I did not vote for Phil Hare.

UPDATE: I deleted the name of the “helper” since it’s possible I incorrectly identified him.