Yard Sign Time

Regular readers know that yard sign wars drive me batty as the primary purpose of yard signs in most campaigns appears to be to give volunteers something to do more than influence votes. There’s a mild impact of yard signs in giving a sense of momentum, but generally they aren’t that useful.

Even better, McQueary touches on the issue today. First, I can vouch for John, I talked to him well before he got in the race and was seeking out help and assistance from other relatively successful grass roots candidates so the notion he is a plant is incorrect–and he did put out the yard signs, but apparently Mike Joyce didn’t have anything else to do with his life because:

REAKING SULLIVAN NEWS- Kelly Campaign Guru Mike Joyce
Caught in the Act….

AND THE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY CONTINUES …. thought you’d
all want to know the latest!

Last night, John Sullivan’s campaign for Congress in
the 3rd Congressional District put up 1,000 yard signs
in the 19th Ward and Oak Lawn. This morning about 3
were left. The signs had been torn down over night.

That, evidently, was not enough for Sullivan’?s
opponent John Kelly. This afternoon, Kelly Campaign
guru Mike Joyce, drove his official Cook County car
around the district to tear down more signs. He
stopped out in front of the Sullivan campaign
headquarters and his accomplice got out and ripped
down all of the Sullivan signs in front of the
Sullivan campaign office. Campaign Manager Andrew
Moore ran out of the office and stopped the thief with
signs in hand. In an act of courage, Mike Joyce drove
off in his county car and abandoned his young
accomplice. Later he called the kid on his cell phone
and told him to take the bus home.

John Sullivan, who at the time of the sign theft was
receiving the endorsement of the Concerned Latino
Voters, said, “I can’t believe that my opponents’
campaign is more interested in campaign thuggery than
in talking about the important issues in this campaign
like the need for universal health care, a plan to get
of Iraq, safeguarding pensions and protecting civil
and human rights for all.”

Sullivan went on to say “The county policy about use
of cars is clear. They are only to be used for
official county business, not political shenanigans.
That county business hopefully does not include theft,
vandalism and electioneering on a Sunday afternoon.”

Sullivan received the endorsement of the Concerned
Latino Voters because of Congressman Dan Lipinski’s
vote in favor of HR 4437. (Lipinski is Sullivan’s
other opponent in the race.) That bad vote by Lipinski
served as the catalyst for the March 10 protest march
in Chicago. Sullivan is strongly committed to the
cause of justice and integral immigration reform that
respects the human and civil rights of ALL immigrants.

You could at least have the respect to go pick up the poor kid….

Schlafly Radio Spot

RADIO — 60 SECONDS

ON TUESDAY, REPUBLICANS WILL VOTE FOR THE HEART AND SOUL OF OUR PARTY. THIS IS PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY, PRESIDENT OF EAGLE FORUM. MANY OF YOU KNOW ME FROM MY YEARS WORKING FOR CONSERVATIVE AND PRO-LIFE CANDIDATES. TODAY I AM ASKING YOU TO SUPPORT JIM OBERWEIS FOR GOVERNOR.

REPUBLICAN VOTERS NEED TO RALLY BEHIND ONE CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE. JIM OBERWEIS IS THAT CANDIDATE. HE WILL PROTECT THE SANCTITY OF INNOCENT LIFE, SUPPORT THE PRO-FAMILY MARRIAGE AMENDMENT, STAND UP FOR OUR 2ND AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND LEAD THE FIGHT HERE IN ILLINOIS AGAINST ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.

IF THESE ARE ISSUES THAT YOU CARE ABOUT, THEN IT IS IMPORTANT THAT JIM OBERWEIS GETS YOUR SUPPORT. JIM IS THE ONLY CANDIDATE WHO CAN BEAT LIBERAL JUDY TOPINKA IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY. DON’T BE FOOLED BY OTHER CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATES WHO SAY THEY CAN WIN. A VOTE FOR ANYONE OTHER THAN JIM OBERWEIS IS A VOTE FOR JUDY TOPINKA.

PLEASE VOTE FOR JIM OBERWEIS FOR GOVERNOR IN THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ON TUESDAY, MARCH 21.

If God wanted you to be the candidate, it wouldn’t matter how many straws you have

Hmmmm…so if I lose money at the Blackjack table, what does that mean God wants? Does it mean he wants Jennifer to kick my ass? Just a thought, but for those of you confused, the Uberweis suggested a game of chance to his earnest rivals Gidwitz and Brady which would decide who remained in the race.

Not satisfied with just playing a game of chance, Uberweis suggested he have 10 chances to one chance for each of them.

The best is this though:

Oberweis said that he called Brady and Gidwitz and asked them to “pull out and support me” but refused to confirm the details. He said he was “stunned” Brady would discuss a private conversation.

I have this image of him being put in a nice straightjacket saying, “I’m stunned that Bill Brady told everyone I am Jesus Christ and that I was going to strike down Judy with a lightning bolt. I mean, can you imagine sharing something told to you in confidence?”

Defending Brady Again

Part of the screed goes into how Brady violated FEC rules while Jack Roeser’s honest mistake was just about negotiations.

Let’s look at the Brady problem. Brady’s Federal Account had no activity since his year end report in 2000. Brady and Eugene Funk, his treasurer, then failed to file the 2001 end of year report, made all reports in 2002, and then screwed up 2003 adn 2004 reports by filing late and getting late notices. The only reason the account was left open was Brady had loaned himself $50,000 with $42,000 of that unpaid and about $35,000 cash on hand. He probably left it open with the theory that he could get the extra $7000 from somewhere. It was a dumb choice, but mainly careless. There were no monetary transactions after the end of the year in 2000 so not filing was dumb for the reason we now are talking about it, but nothing more than a technical violation since nothing was being hidden. In each case, Brady dealt with it within a few months.

On the other hand, Roeser’s violations were violations of reporting money contributed to his PAC. It’s fine to say that he gave the money and so it isn’t a big deal, but the entire point of campaign finance disclosure is to enable voters to determine from where the money is coming. Roeser gets fined and then ignores it for nearly four years—only getting around to it after the Trib and others started to ask questions.

Brady made a series of dumb mistakes. Roeser found the time to fund an number of candidates and issues over four years, but couldn’t be bothered to follow the primary requirement of Illinois election law.

But worse is the absolute dishonest of the actual charge from FTN. They don’t even mention the delinquent reports, but instead focus upon an administrative termination.

More incredibly, Brady fails to mention that on June 8, 2004, the Federal Election Commission administratively terminated one of his campaign committees ? the one from his 2000 failed race for Congress. Brady is proposing Federal election type rules for Illinois ? but yet he apparently had trouble complying with the Federal reporting obligations after his Federal campaign ended. So the FEC eventually just terminated Brady?s Federal committee on its own.

Administrative termination is not something done because of a violation. It is done when certain circumstances are met and the campaign does not object:

? 102.4 Administrative termination (2
U.S.C. 433(d)(2)).
(a) The Commission, on its own initiative
or upon the request of the political
committee itself, may administratively
terminate a political committee?s
reporting obligation on the basis
of the following factors:
(1) The committee?s aggregate reported
financial activity in one year is
less than $5000;
(2) The committee?s reports disclose
no receipt of contributions for the previous
year;
(3) The committee?s last report disclosed
minimal expenditures;
(4) The committee?s primary purpose
for filing its reports has been to disclose
outstanding debts and obligations;
(5) The committee has failed to file
reports for the previous year;
(6) The committee?s last report disclosed
that the committee?s outstanding
debts and obligations do not
appear to present a possible violation
of the prohibitions and limitations of
11 CFR parts 110 and 114;
(7) The committee?s last report disclosed
that the Committee does not
have substantial outstanding accounts
receivable;
(8) The committee?s outstanding
debts and obligations exceed the total
of the committee?s reported cash on
hand balance.
(b) The Commission shall send a notification
to the committee treasurer of
its intent to administratively terminate
that committee and may request
the treasurer to submit information
with regard to the factors set forth at
11 CFR 102.4(a). The treasurer shall respond,
in writing, within 30 days of receipt
of the Commission?s notice or request
and if the committee objects to
such termination, the committee?s response
shall so state.
(c) The Commission shall administratively
terminate a committee if such
committee fails to object to the Commission?s
action under 11 CFR 102.4(b)
and the Commission determines that
either:
(1) The committee has complied with
the debt settlement procedures set
forth at 11 CFR part 116.
(2) The Commission has approved the
forgiveness of any loan(s) owed the
committee which would have otherwise
been considered a contribution under
the Act in violation of 11 CFR part 110;
(3) It does not appear from evidence
available that a contribution in violation
of 11 CFR parts 110 and 114 will result.

Trying to equate an administrative termination with a failure to disclose is

A) A deliberate lie
or
B) An act of incredible ignorance

There are no entries in the Enforcement Query System related to Bill Brady

Cross posted at Illinoize

And We Have the Second Part of the Screed

It’s hysterical, just hysterical.

You should go read it all as they say, but this stuck out

Grow up Bill

We obviously don?t mind some rough-and-tumble in a campaign. As they say, politics ain?t bean-bag ? especially in Illinois. We?re obviously tough in this publication on our elected officials ? because they work for all of us. But you also don?t see us out there preaching this hypocritical 11th Commandment stuff.

What?s truly annoying is the wimpy, hypocritical game Brady?s been playing. Isn?t everyone sick and tired of the preaching about the sins of being negative and ?attacking other Republicans? ? only to have Brady turn around sometimes just minutes later and be one of the nastiest guys out there?

If we wanted a pretty-boy weasel for Governor ? we could just keep the one we?ve got.

Brady has constantly tried to smear Oberweis as a ?flip-flopper.? But meanwhile this Brady guy goes back-and-forth from ?good cop? to ?bad cop? like a tennis ball.

This has been a common theme in this campaign. Topinka, Sell-Out Joe Birkett, Andy McKenna, Jr., and Jim Edgar have also been playing the same cynical game all year ? ?let me read you the 11th Commandment – while I shove this knife in your back.?

Brady can deny that he?s a spoiler and in cahoots with Topinka all he wants. It?s just funny how Brady?s using Topinka?s play-book.

Brady, Topinka and Sell-Out Joe are all the same kind of dishonest hypocrites. They all recoil and get nasty at the thought of any honest debate over what they?ve done while on a public payroll.

But they have no problem just making things up about Jim Oberweis.

What’s the Strategery?

I’m pretty sure it won’t work, but I think I have some idea of what Oberweis is doing–first, for his hardcore supporters, he’s revving them up with red meat to get them to the polls. The Train Wreck piece plays into that well.

He’s going to be at the top of all news stories with the wackiness and that reinforces to them that he’s the guy who is the alternative to Topinka. He also gets the last minute name recognition for the undecideds who would have broken for Topinka well before this if they were.

Finally, if, as I guess, his base is the most angry and the most motivated, turning this into an ugly slugfest is most likely to depress Topinka’s vote.

The problem is on two sides, everyone really hates the guy now so for the general and turning this nasty depresses his own turnout some too.

My take right now, Judy is the likely winner, but I’d give Oberweis about a 35% chance of an upset.

Please, Please Let this Man Stick Around After Tuesday

Oberweis and Weigand appear to be upping their level of craziness by the hour. In an aptly titled post, Rich describes the new Oberweis bizarreness.

The Blagojevich campaign is considering it’s super secret plan to kidnap him and hide him until Tuesday evening to try and stem the damage.

“It just shows the kind of innovative free-market thinking Jim brings in,” Wiegand said

Yeah, except game theory tells us that if you are actually facing two rational individuals, there is no way they’ll enter into such a contract. Now, if you are facing mildly retarded individuals who can’t do odds, you might have a decent proposal, but we actually try and attempt to stop the market from taking advantage of people in such ways. The point of the market is to give people freedom to choose, but to do that effectively they must have adequate information and ability to reason. The proposal is quite telling about how Oberweis views the market.

I thought Pat O’Malley was about as bitter as they come in 2002. I was wrong.

Just In Case Anyone Was Curious

The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

It would be absurd for an administration that says Scalia is their model for Supreme Court Justices to not adopt a plain reading of the document so if the administration authorized warrantless searches and seizures of homes, one can only conclude that the administration believes the Constitution is irrelevant.

For those with even the most minimal understanding of history, the Fourth Amendment was specifically created to protect citizens after abuses by the British government and military which ignored protections under British law—hence why Edmund Burke supported the American War of Independence, he saw it as a fight by Englishmen to protect their rights as Englishmen.

To suggest an authorization of force or even declaration of war would negate the Fourth Amendment is absurd. To act on such a claim is the essence of a high crime.