Call It A Comeback
It’s hard to figure out who to dislike the most here: Jack Franks or The Blagorgeous.
Mr. Franks is up for election this year, and while this blog is reliably Democratic, unless there is some serious exculpatory information out there, take the Cross Blog’s suggestion and support Perry Moy
That’s about the end of any budget that Jim Edgar had hoped for to run the Illinois for Bush team.
We’ll be doing it daily since we are near a decision of the Party! Ditka appears serious.
Maureen Ryan does an article on blog ads and their explosion. For some they can be significant, but to now I’ve found that the ads do a good job meeting my bandwidth costs and a bit more in terms of meeting other costs of being a blogger and not much more. It’s nice and I don’t do this for money so that is perfect for me. That said, being a largely regionally run blog, while site visits continue to increase steadily in the last few months, my traffic is relatively low compared to Eschaton or Daily Kos.
Jeff Berkowitz puts together the list of who’s in, who’s out and who is potentially persuadable.
I haven’t seen the official list of who has applied for the job so if anyone has it—and isn’t going to get in trouble pass it on.
A couple things to clarify from Jeff’s article
McCracken said no and he lists Jim Thompson, Peter Fitzgerald and Schillerstrom as people who might change their minds. I can’t imagine Big Jim would get in this race. I could be wrong and maybe DC reignited the fire, but I see that a fight he wouldn’t want at this age. Peter–as Jeff says is effectively out though I’ll add it isn’t just because of Judy and Kjellander, but also Speaker Hastert. Schillerstrom is gearing up for an ’06 Gubernatorial bid so I don’t buy that (though the confusion on the poor Governor’s face as he confuses Schiller of the Board of Ed and Schillerstrom will be hysterical–didn’t I already fire that guy?)
Bring back MacDougal? Only in my dreams, only in my dreams.
Unless Ditka comes through, I think option one is likely:
Go with an embarrassing candidate and blame it all on Jack.
According to the So-Called Austin Mayor
If only Rod was that mad at me….
I’m sorry Congressman Weller, but if you were paying attention the post as a member of the International Affair’s subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere actually means you should be talking about internal Guatemalan politics and now that you are going to be family with a butcher it becomes increasingly interesting how you might talk about it.
Would you mind denouncing Rios Montt’s history of violence against indigenous tribes? How about denouncing genocide of Mayans under Rios Montt’s rule and his harassment of them last year as he ran for office? You know, when your future wife was working to get him elected and Rios Montt’s activities have led to him being held on charges for inciting riots–how about denouncing that?
Where is all the moral clarity I kept hearing about in regards to Iraq? Doing Mayans not deserve the same moral clarity? Just curious?
Over the last decade, Mr. R?os Montt has re-emerged as the head of a political party, the Guatemalan Republican Front. Adriana Beltr?n, a researcher of Guatemala for the Washington Office on Latin America, a human rights group, said that the party “supports the interests of the right-wing military.”
When Mr. R?os Montt ran for president of Guatemala last year, his daughter called him “totally democratic.” She said that people in one town who pelted him with rocks and drowned out his speech with chants of “Murderer!” had violated his human rights.
“Zury has supported her father very strongly, and as far as I know she has never distanced herself from the atrocities, the scorched-earth policy or the massacres that were part of his presidency,” Ms. Beltr?n said.
I mean really, I have gay friends and I know very little about their sex lives, but the IFI press releases read like a bulletin board guide to the Chicago Gay community. Actually like a small portion of the gay community, but why quibble with stereotypes.
But more importantly, they take on Maureen Ryan for her story on Leigh Anne Wilson who owns a sex toy store and runs a great blog (soon to be on the new-non-politics blog roll). For the most part, I don’t care about people’s sex life and I think I can safely say my sex life is not the talk of the town (it’s fine thanks, but married people don’t exactly cause a stir having sex with each other).
Wilson’s store to me is the best of the type because it doesn’t deal with mainstream porn that is very degrading to nearly everyone involved (not that I haven’t watched it, but hey). It does deal with adult toys and aids that are a way of spicing up one’s sex life. What’s the problem?
While I find Jack!’s problems rather funny given his connections to groups like the IFI, ultimately the problem wasn’t what was in the file, but the lying about what was in the file.
UPDATE: Leigh Anne had a good take on the whole deal on her blog
Peter Labara takes on Jack! Jack’s problems are deeper than the SCLM or the Combine.
Jack Ryan Gambled with a Lie and Lost–and We Lost, Too
By Peter LaBarbera
There are some pro-life and pro-family leaders in Illinois (and
nationally) who are urging Jack Ryan to reenter the race against Democrat
Barack Obama for U.S. Senate. Here?s why I am not one of them.
We spend a lot of time and energy in the pro-life and pro-family movement
defending truth, including the idea that absolute truth–right versus
wrong–exists. We say that words have meanings that are often distorted to
advance anti-life and immoral policies like abortion-on-demand and
homosexual ?marriage.? (The quote marks denote our attempt to preserve the
meaning of that word.)
Along comes Jack Ryan to the rescue of a down-and-out Republican Party of
Illinois, which is reeling from a corruption scandal and liberal
leadership that undermines the aforementioned noble principles. (IL GOP
Chairman Judy Baar Topinka sat atop a float in the recent Chicago ?gay
pride? parade.) Like many family advocates, I was drawn to Jack?s pro-life
and pro-marriage record, as well as his message of reaching out to African
American voters. He also sought the advice and support of conservative
leaders–a definite plus.
What none of us knew about Jack, however, was that he was taking a massive
gamble by lying about the contents of his divorce/custody files, which
contained the explosive charge by his ex-wife, Jeri, that he took her to,
not one, but three ?sex clubs,? and pressured her to have (public) sex at
one of the clubs. Jack?s bet was that the files would remain sealed.
Ultimately, they were opened due to a lawsuit filed by the Chicago Tribune
and WLS-Ch. 7.
Jack?s defenders have tried to make this an issue of liberal media
misconduct–how GOP-hating journalists relished undermining a Republican
Senate campaign, paving the way for the Left-loving Obama to go to
Washington. As one who has spent my entire professional life critiquing
liberal media bias, I am not one to give reporters a pass. But the same
Tribune that exposed Jack?s past also pried loose the nasty divorce
records of Democrat Senate hopeful Blair Hull, so this was a case of
bipartisan snooping. (Of course, Brent Bozell of the conservative Media
Research Center is right when he says that reporters generally do not
cover liberal political scandals with the same zeal that they do
conservative scandals.)
It appears that Jack Ryan lied about the contents of the then-sealed
divorce papers to anyone who inquired about them, including two writers at
Human Events, a conservative weekly newspaper based in Washington, D.C.
It?s pretty hard to get farther from the ?liberal media? than Human
Events, which was one of Ronald Reagan?s favorite reads. (I used to write
for Human Events and am a Contributing Editor for the publication; see
www.humaneventsonline.com.)
Human Events? nationally respected Political Editor, John Gizzi, and
Associate Editor David Freddoso were two of the people Jack misled. In a
June 24 column titled ?Lyin? Ryan,? they wrote that they were surprised at
the divorce revelations ?because Ryan looked both of us straight in the
eyes and lied to us in an off-the-record lunch two weeks ago.
?At one point, we asked him point blank about the files and whether their
release would be damaging. Ryan insisted emphatically that the files
contained nothing untoward. And we said to ourselves later, why would he
lie to us since the files were to be released in a matter of days? A
campaign staffer even said to us, in Ryan’s absence, that Ryan was acting
against his political interests by not releasing the files. He said that
they contained nothing but information on his son, whom he loves dearly
and only wants to protect.?
Note the escalating deception revealed here: not only was there nothing
embarrassing in the files, but it was AGAINST JACK?S POLITICAL INTERESTS
to release them. This reminds me of the old ?Seinfeld? episodes where one
lie would lead to another to cover up the first, and so on. As the axiom
goes, it?s always the cover-up that gets you in trouble.
You may recall that just before the primary vote, as rumors swirled of
damaging content in Jack?s divorce files, he vigorously denied that they
contained any embarrassing information. He said he was only interested in
protecting his young son, not himself, by fighting to keep them sealed. Of
course, now we know that had the ?sex club? allegations been revealed back
then, Jack would have lost the primary and the Illinois GOP would not be
in this mess.
After news of the files? salacious revelations broke, Jack refused to
answer ?yes? or ?no? to the simple question of whether he had in fact
visited the three sex clubs. Now, few people would even think of venturing
into a perverted sex club, but if you did, wouldn?t you at least remember
it? Yet Jack kept referring questioners to the divorce papers. Meanwhile,
ex-wife Jeri stood by her account in the files, and it was clear that Jack
could not be publicly at odds with her. Then, with his credibility sinking
fast, Jack pulled a ?Clinton? by trying to put a new spin on the story,
claiming, ?The worst thing I can be accused of is asking my own wife to
have sex in an inappropriate place.?
No, Jack. The worst thing you can be accused of is engaging in a campaign
of deception to advance your goal of winning the GOP nomination–at the
expense of your own staff, other candidates who were victimized by your
half-truths, and a party that needed a straight-shooter at this critical
juncture to lift itself out of the morass of corruption and despondency.
As a deeply flawed person, I hope this doesn?t come off as sanctimonious,
for I can hardly imagine running for public office and being subjected to
the intense scrutiny of a cynical media. Few could endure that. And only
God knows what led Jack to make his miscalculation. But this does not
change the fact that he put self before others, and played loose with the
truth as he gambled that it would never surface. Perhaps ambition got the
better of him, but isn?t there already too much of that in Washington?
As people of faith, we are the ones who insist that old-fashioned values
like honesty, truth and honor matter. So does public policy: it would be a
big mistake for the Illinois GOP to put forth a pro-abortion,
pro-homosexual candidate like Andrea Grubb Barthwell to run against the
pro-abortion, pro-homosexual Obama. The people of this state need a choice
on these critical social issues, but we must remember that standing for
integrity transcends party politics.
I teach my children that Bill Clinton was a disgrace to the presidency
because of his shameful exploits, his immoral policies–and because he
lied to the American people, even as he could be seen carrying his hefty
Bible out of church on Sundays. When a Republican like Jack Ryan gets
caught in a lie, we have to be consistent and call it what it is. Yes,
it?s convenient to blame aggressive reporters, but Jack?s integrity
deficit was not a media creation. He reaped what he sowed, as the Good
Book says, and now he needs to show some contrition for what he did rather
than blame the media and liberal Republicans for his demise.
Pro-lifers and pro-family conservatives who downplay GOP integrity crises
risk being labeled as hypocrites when they go after Democrat deceivers.
The Ryan fiasco is a lesson for all that regardless of political
persuasion, failing to tell the truth can have awful consequences.
Jack Ryan took a huge gamble that the truth about his past would not be
revealed. And he lost. Unfortunately, the people of Illinois lost, too.
Rahm Emmanual (D-5) is on Air America talking about the election.
ArchPundit