Uncategorized

Oberweis’ Extreme Immigration Record

What’s most interesting about the Illinois-14 race is that hardcore immigration opponents lost again and with one of their standout candidates.

In 2002, Oberweis’ criticism of Bush’s immigration stance essentially made him persona non-grata to the national party and that relationship didn’t improve with the 2004 race. The difference this year was that Hastert shepherded him through the national party because of the bad blood between Hastert and Lauzen.

Oberweis staked out the hardcore send back 12 million people immediately and no exceptions kind of policy and not only embraced the position, but embraced fairly radical anti-immigrant activist organizations.

Most amazing is that John McCain, long a reasonable voice on the immigration debate embraced Oberweis as McCain’s flip flop to the dark side of several issues continues.

Oberweis is a Board of Director for NumbersUSA which is one of the leading right wing anti-immigration groups.

He’s spoken at Illinois Minutemen meetings such as this one on May 6, 2006 mntmn017.wav

And despite railing on the businesses using undocumented workers, Oberweis Dairy never wondered why the company cleaning for them could afford to do the work they were doing.  Turns out the contractor were paying below minimum wage for undocumented workers.

In his hubris, he made one of the funniest political commercials ever, which was also filled with falsehoods:

[kml_flashembed movie="http://youtube.com/v/Nst-aXvdrR4" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Now, his son decided to sue the DCCC for pointing out the story about hiring a contractor that paid undocumented workers under the minimum wage:

[kml_flashembed movie="http://youtube.com/v/r08qdqN_fbk" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Kooks Away….Bill Pascoe Writes Another Manifesto

Pascoe’s most recent work of ‘art’

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Bill Pascoe
FEBRUARY 28, 2008

FOSTER, EXPOSED AS A TAX-HIKER, MAKES STUFF UP

(BATAVIA, February 28) — Oberweis for Congress spokesman Bill Pascoe today criticized liberal Democrat Bill Foster for airing a television advertisement made up of half-truths, distortions, and outright lies.

“Bill Foster’s latest television advertisement should come with a parental warning notice — ‘Smear campaign ahead,'” said Pascoe. “But that shouldn’t be surprising — if I’d been caught planning to raise taxes by $3,914 per taxpayer, I’d probably have to consider making stuff up, too. The choice for voters couldn’t be clearer: Bill Foster wants to hike taxes and spend more on failed big-government programs, while Jim Oberweis wants to cut taxes and shrink government so families can keep more of their own money.

“Of the three major claims made in Mr. Foster’s advertisement, two of them are demonstrably false, and the remaining claim is deliberately misinterpreted to create an impression at odds with reality. Bill Foster — whose own mudslinging began two days into the special election (as noted by the Beacon News) — should be ashamed.

“To begin: the Foster ad falsely claims that Jim ‘supported Bush’s scheme to privatize Social Security, gambling your retirement in the stock market.’ Bill Foster knows this isn’t true, because he sat next to Jim Oberweis yesterday in the Chicago Tribune’s editorial board endorsement session and heard Jim talk about his plan to strengthen Social Security, to make sure it’s still there 30 years from now. (Interestingly, Mr. Foster himself suggested he wasn’t at all concerned about Social Security’s impending troubles, indicating it ‘wouldn’t be [his] first priority,’ and suggesting that a 30 percent cut in benefits to future retirees would be all right with him.)

“The on-screen sources listed for Mr. Foster’s ridiculous allegation are the Daily Herald of Feb. 17, 2002, and Jeff Berkowitz’s ‘Public Affairs’ show of Dec. 7, 2007. NOWHERE in the contents of EITHER source is there ANY indication that Jim Oberweis ‘supported Bush’s scheme to privatize Social Security’ — in fact, that would have been quite impossible, given that the Bush Administration DIDN’T EVEN OFFER A PLAN TO ADDRESS SOCIAL SECURITY’S LONG-TERM STABILITY UNTIL 2005, THREE YEARS AFTER THE FIRST SO-CALLED ‘SOURCE’ CITED!!!

“The Foster ad continues its calumny with this whopper: ‘Oberweis thinks we should end employer provided health insurance.’ That’s patently false, and Bill Foster knows it — he’s heard Jim say that to his face in editorial board meetings that have taken place over the last 48 hours. The two companies that bear Jim’s name — Oberweis Asset Management and Oberweis Dairy — both pay for health insurance for their full-time employees, and Jim has made clear he supports employer-provided health care.

“The Chicago Tribune even acknowledged that it had inadvertently mischaracterized Jim’s position on this issue, and issued a clarification that reads, ‘A story in the Feb. 23 West edition of the Metro section mischaracterized 14th Congressional District Republican candidate Jim Oberweis’ position on health care. While Oberweis advocates replacing the current employer-based health-care system with tax incentives that encourage people to buy their own insurance polices, he did not say the system should be eliminated.’ (See: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-claris_2-27feb27,0,7738809.story)

“Jim Oberweis believes we should offer Americans MORE choices in health care, not fewer. And he believes we should not force Americans to give up control over their own doctors and their own treatment by forcing them into a one-size-fits-all ‘universal’ health care scheme that cost hundreds of billions of dollars, as Bill Foster proposes.

“Further, the Foster ad declares, ‘Oberweis said ten more years in Iraq is the right approach.’ Actually, what Jim Oberweis said was that General Petraeus’s ‘Surge’ strategy is working, that we should continue to withdraw our troops gradually, as Iraqis take more responsibility, and we may have to leave a residual force in Iraq for up to ten years.

“Finally: Has anyone noticed that the quote the Foster campaign constantly uses — ‘I’ve supported the President on almost everything’ — comes from a newspaper article that’s more than FOUR YEARS OLD? That’s more than half the length of time George Bush has been in the White House! Has anyone noticed that the very title of the article cited — ‘GOP Senate rivals back away from Bush’ — has been deliberately hidden by Mr. Foster? Has Mr. Foster not read any newspapers between January 2004 and today? Has he not been made aware of the many instances in which Jim Oberweis has publicly disagreed with the President since then — particularly, for example, on the twin issues of immigration reform and management of the Iraq war?

“Liberal Democrat Bill Foster has been exposed as a man who wants to raise taxes on married couples, on families with children, on small businessmen and farmers, even on capital gains and dividends — this, as the economy is going into a rough spot. Liberal Democrat Bill Foster has been exposed as a man who wants to allow employers to hire illegal immigrants, as long as they’re willing to pay an ‘amnesty tax.’ Liberal Democrat Bill Foster has now been exposed as a man willing to force another $440 billion, big-government health care program down the throats of the American public. It’s no wonder he’s reaching for the standard Democrat playbook — distort, misinterpret, or falsify, whatever it takes — because his only alternative is to give up.”

— 30 —

Paid for by Oberweis for Congress

Never mind that most of this is just wrong–this is one of the worst press releases ever and it’s  because Bill Pascoe has to prove he’s right regardless of what helps his candidate the most.

Already, I exposed above that Oberweis’ own site supports eliminating employer provided health insurance.  More in the next few posts.

News at 11

Tribune tries out another web site redesign.

What they seem to be missing is that everytime someone gets used to and comfortable with the new site design, they change it again. I’m guessing this whole thing is being evaluated by focus groups who sit there and give them a list of complaints about the organization and style and as the new layout is introduced they check them again ensuring great frustration ensues.

Here’s a hint.  Pick a style and leave it alone.

Of course, it does make it easier to decide to skip the endorsements and claim one cannot find them. I always wish I hadn’t found them after I read them.

How You Know the Story is Crap

 More from the story at MyDD

Sitting on the Commission of Chicago Landmarks board, Michelle knew of a permit, waiting for review and approval to sell, for a designated Historical Georgian revival home built in 1910 with four fireplaces, glass-door bookcases fashioned from Honduran mahogany, and a 1,000-bottle wine cellar owned by a doctor in Kenwood. The Commission is supported not only by donations and taxes but also by charges for permits.  It’s a pretty extensive process, and they want a complete history of the house and property when a permit is requested. Once the Board approves a permit, the application goes to the city planning or zoning commission if more than a simple sale is involved.

This isn’t true.  Landmarks does not approve sales at all.  They only approve changes to the property and have no control over the zoning or ownership. They would have some influence over what is built on the new lot, but they are not capable of blocking a sale of property that is listed as two separate lots.
From Landmarks FAQ 

Q.Q.   When is a building permit required and for what kind of work?When is a building permit required and for what kind of work?

A.A.   No additional City permits are required for Landmark buildings.  The Commission simply reviews permits as part of the normal building permit process. The Commission annually reviews more than 1,800 permits for Landmark properties, most of which are approved in one day. Routine maintenance work, such as painting and minor repairs, does not require a building permit. Under the City’s Rehabilitation Code, there is also a special historic preservation provision that allows for greater flexibility in applying the Building  Code to designated landmarks in order to preserve significant features of such buildings.  More information on getting a permit is available from the Landmarks Division.
Q.Q.   How does the Commission evaluate proposed changes to How does the Commission evaluate proposed changes to existing buildings or the design of new construction?xisting buildings or the design of new construction?

A.A.  The Commission has established criteria to evaluate permit applications for both renovations and new construction. These criteria and the Commission’s review procedures are published as part of the Rules and Regulations of the Commission of Chicago Landmarks (pages 27 through 33). The basis for the criteria is the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The Commission also has adopted policies regarding many aspects of rehabilitation work, and these polices are detailed in Guidelines for Alterations to Historic Buildings and New Construction, available from the Landmarks Division.

Q.Q.   Does the Commission have jurisdiction over zoning?Does the Commission have jurisdiction over zoning?

A.A.   The Commission has no jurisdiction over zoning. The Commission can, however, recommend reductions in the depth of required setbacks in certain instances to ensure that the character of a Landmark District is maintained.

Q.Q.   How does landmark designation affect property values?How does landmark designation affect property values?  Will landmark designation affect property taxes?Will landmark designation affect property taxes?

Both of the above are frequently asked questions. As far as the value of property is concerned, the factors  affecting value are quite varied and depend on the individual property, its location, etc.; in the eyes of some buyers, landmark designation is regarded as an asset, and both real estate advertisements and real estate agents often tout this as a selling point. Studies on the effect of landmark designation on property values have generally shown that it does not have a negative impact on property values. As far as real estate taxes  are concerned, neither the valuation of property by the Cook County Assessor’s Office nor the tax rate is affected directly by landmark designation.

Super Tuesday Illinois Democratic Presidential Primary

Obama is going to win, the question is by how much. There were concerns down south of Springfield for a while with Hillary polling well, but that appears to no longer be a problem.  Obama won’t do as well down there as in Chicago, but he apparently has a healthy lead.

Survey USA listed the numbers today at 66 30 and that seems about right to me–the only question was they had African-Americans making up 22% of the voting group, yet in 2004, they were higher than that.  The Survey USA poll that was closest to Obama’s final tally (and the only poll that close) had the percentage at 25%.
In fact, if you look at the Survey USA polls released across the board today, there’s a fairly significant drop in the percentage of African Americans included in the samples in all states with significant African-American populations. Most seem to be 3-5 points of African-Americans as a percentage of the population.

There are a few possible reasons for this. One is that African-Americans are less likely to vote come Tuesday.  Given Obama is on the ballot that is unlikely and counter to everything we’ve seen this cycle.

Or it could mean that samples are having a hard time being polled over the last few days and they are undercounted. If that’s the case, it could be a good day for Obama.

Super Tuesday IL-10

This pits two good candidates against each other for a chance to take on Mark Kirk in the fall.  You know, Mark Kirk, the guy supporting a guy for President who suggests we stay in Iraq for 100 years.  That guy.

Jay Footlik has gotten a bit of a bum rap from a lot of the activists in the area and is a decent guy. I’d love to see him stick around and run for another office after this cycle as I see a great guy with good political skills and experience.

He’s been doing decently with endorsements including a very nice one from the Lake Sun News.

That said, Dan Seals has put everything into this race and ran a very tough race with very little support from DCCC last cycle.  Whomever the winner is of this primary will be running for a top tier seat targeted by DCCC while the RNCC goes broke.  He’s smart, has great relationships within the District, and good name recognition for a challenger. On top of additional support, all indications are this year should be an even stronger year for Democrats as we add a bad economy to an unpopular war.  Add death and disease and the Democrats will be running against the four horsemen of the apocalypse.

This race also features two the most problematic named candidates in a while with Footlik being obviously a bit fun to poke at, but Seals shares the name of a crappy country singer.

Policy wise there isn’t much difference and both are incredibly strong on Israel, a key issue in the District.  Seals has a lot of loyalty amongst primary voters for running a strong campaign last cycle and I expect he’ll win Tuesday and by a decent margin.  Jay has worked his butt off, but there isn’t a compelling reason for most primary voters to switch.

I’ll reiterate, I like Jay and I hope he runs for something in the area again, but I don’t see it happening Tuesday.