For those blaming Rahm, Durbin was the 1st to back Duckworth in 6th CD

Another follow-up to my Wes Clark in a skirt comment. This is from today's Sun-Times, as I have mentioned before Illinois' heavy hitters (Emanuel, Durbin, Quinn, Obama, Giangreco, Axelrod and Jasculca) are lining up behind Tammy. I doubt if the establishment felt Cegalis was a viable candidate this would be happening. I'm backing Tammy (if she runs), however I'm willing to let this play out in the primary.

-snip-
Emanuel (D-Ill.) has been encouraging Duckworth to get in the race for the west suburban seat being vacated by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.), undermining Cegelis because he is convinced she cannot raise enough money to win a general election where the front-runner for the GOP nomination is state Sen. Peter Roskam (R-Wheaton).

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) first broached the idea of a congressional run with Duckworth, who, as his guest, sat in the House gallery at the State of the Union address last February. Duckworth lost her legs and suffered a badly wounded arm when a mortar shell hit the helicopter she was piloting Nov. 12, 2004. She has spent much of the last year recovering at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.

Views on war unknown

While Duckworth is a political rookie with no campaign experience or political organization behind her, if she runs, she will be able to tap into a turnkey political operation engineered in large part by Emanuel. That operation consists of some of the state's highest-profile Democratic political professionals, including media consultant David Axelrod, direct mail marketeer Peter Giangreco and Jasculca, who said he met with her in Washington a few weeks ago to discuss the possibility of a campaign.

Jasculca said he was asked by Durbin's team to advise Duckworth -- whom he called "a war hero with a good story to tell.'' Lori Goldberg, a Jasculca/Terman vice president, has been advising Duckworth on scheduling and outreach "in terms of getting around the district.'' Jasculca said her informal advisers also include Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and "a few of people.''
-snip-

http://www.suntimes.com/output/sweet/cst-nws-sweet28.html

She may even be an excellent candidate, but there is no reason they had to turn her into Cegelis' spoiler. With the same backing that Duckworth will get, Cegelis could beat Hyde this time. They could damn well have put Duckworth into a race in a different district ... like thye 10th CD, currently held by Kirk, where there's no really viable candidate. The 10th should be a Dem district and Duckworth would be the ideal candidate to go up against Kirk with strong backing from the DCCC. But oh no ... they have to get cute with Hyde's district instead of having the potential to win two races with 2 strong candidates.

cegelis is getting screwed just like zamora did.zamora was dumped by the big boys cause they needed fat fucks political power to get o`hare and other projects. hell fatso got 2.5 million for our waterfront walk. i digress...zamora got 30+ % in a solid republican district with no help at all other than the local democrat orgs in this district. i`m sure he wouldn`t have won but this time he could make a real run with some heavy hitters..but they won`t. oh well it`s politics as usual out here in the cornfields..

. . .

but cegalis can't? because she is a true progressive, that's why. they like duckworth because she is inexperienced, and looks controllable. there are several districts with no good candidates. get your ass out there and find candidates to run against biggert, manzullo, etc. (there is a candidate against manzullo, but i think he is a sacrificial lamb that will be allowed to run and lose with no help.)

you know, instead of telling us what a rotten candidate cegalis is, why don't you tell us something about duckworth besides how many limbs she has. this is revolting.

i say again, primaries are a good thing for a party. give us a level playing field, supported by the party, with forums that bring the voters in, where issues are discussed in depth, and where the party does not play dirty tricks on our own candidates. starting with smearing good candidates on internet site, calling them unelectable, and trying to dry up their contributions.

Casting aspersions against someone you don't know about just because she is not your candidate. If Christine is the better candidate she will beat Tammy, 'nuff said. Its still unclear whether or not Tammy will run, but would you atleast let her introduce herself to the public before you start slamming her, give her chance you might like her.

then step out. fine. run a clean campaign, and i will hail the winner.
i just said tell us something about her. all you have done is wrap her in the flag. and smeared cegalis.

Emanuel just doesn't sit right with me.

Christine Cegelis ran pretty well against Hyde in 2004 and she obviously has put a lot of time and effort into next year's election.

I understand that this will be a hard fight, the Pukes aren't going to give up Hyde's seat easily, but I don't think undermining Cegelis' efforts will win the Dems any of so-called "swing" voters. Just because Duckworth is a wounded Iraq veteran doesn't necessarily equate into a winning candidate in a traditionally Repuke district.

I hate to say this, but maybe the DCCC really isn't interested in picking up this seat. After all, this is Illinois politics we're talking about here.

. . .if this move is wrong (which I don't believe it is) there is plenty of blame to go around:

1) Durbin was the one who first floated the idea. Why not bash him?

2) Obama and Quinn are advising Duckworth. Why not bash them?

3) If Emanuel is really out of order, where is the chairman of the DNC on this? Why not bash him?

I'm not here to defend Rahm on this, however it seems convenient to blame him but it obvious he is not acting alone. Are Obama, Quinn and Durbin DLC whores? Why are they not backing Cegalis? Cegalis was a Dean's Dozen in 2004, surely if this is unjust the f'ing chairman of the DNC would speak up in Christine's defense or at least he would call Emanuel, Obama, Durbin and Quinn to tell them to back off, right?

Over the last couple elections the Democratic challenger to Hyde as had strong runs. Brent Christensen ran a good race against him 2000 and DuPage County is the second largest Democratic County in the state behind Cook. Cegalis does OK in raising money, but she has less than $50,000 on hand, which many impartial observers would view as a sign of bad campaign management. (Mopinko, I know you are going to jump on me regarding this, but this is what the FEC report filed by CEGALIS shows, I'M NOT MAKING IT UP, I know you want to believe I am, BUT I'M NOT!) Maybe Duckworth is not the candidate to represent the 6th district, however lets see what the voters think. Obviously the DNC leadership (including Howard Dean who is silent on the issue) feels she deserves a shot.

talking to a gossip columnist, undercutting the democratic candidate. this is not the way a good chairman treats a candidate. the dnc is supporting her, and investing in her candidacy with training and support. so why is the dccc chair out there dredging up a candidate (in public) who does not even live in the district, has no experience, paying a pr firm to put he out there, promising her the "key" to his well oiled machine? why? will he pay for signature gatherers for the rush to get her on the ballot, or will they just roundtable her petitions?
as far as durbin, maybe he suggested she run, maybe he wanted her to run against bean, since that is her district. beside, all we have is a gossip columnist's word for that.
and drop that stupid $50,000 cash on hand crap. that is not what "many impartial observers would view as a sign of bad campaign management", that is a quote from a republican operative, in the same gossip column, that you have chosen to smear her with. it means nothing. she is doing a fine job of raising the kind of small contributions that the dnc is pledging to raise, since that is our party's base. (the dnc has exceeded macauliff's totals without resorting to big donors. that is the way to take back our party from the interests of the rich.)
and you are trying to say cegalis is a bad candidate because she "cannot raise money" or is it manage money, but duckworth can "turn the key" on the old party machine, and get whatever money and management she needs. sorry, that does not add up.
why do they want a novice in an important race? i think it is because they would rather lose the seat than see a real progressive, that they did not send, that does not owe them. if duckworth is elected, goody, she is a novice, they sent her, she owes them.
and in the meantime, biggert and manzullo and how many others have no opponent, or minimal opposition. and hastert's district has the same kind of shenanigans.
when there is a circular firing squad, it is because someone sent an assassin. why is the chair of the dccc out recruiting assassins? why i she sending out his "well oiled machine" against a progressive dem? why are there unopposed thugs in illinois? why is emmanual not following the plan? howard says no uncontested races. but emmanuel is more concerned with shooting down good, independent candidates.
everyone on this board knows that there are sellouts in this party. enablers of the thug agenda. how do these people end up representing us? just like this windy, just like this.

Or are you talking about someone else?

she is a tool.

. . .but if you want to trash her just because she does not write the way you want her to, then go right ahead. This place is begining to look more and more like a progressive Free Republic.

:kick:

but the dnc has been supporting cegalis's campaign. and the stated 50 state strategy is not being followed here in illinois.
that is really my biggest beef in all this. unopposed thugs in this state, and rahm is out shooting down progressive dems. just like the dlc sent clark out to shoot down dean, imho. and just like rahm has done in new hampshire, and texes, and ....

:kick:

And you are still ignoring Durbin, Obama and Quinn. . .I guess its just easier to defend an attack on Emanuel vs. an attack on Quinn. . .LOL

but saying that machine operatives, who have worked for obama, etc, are now working for duckworth only tells me that she is being sent by the machine. is that supposed to make her look good to me?

:kick:

in lynn sweet's column.
edited to add- and here at du, by windycity.

:kick:

:kick:

The best thing he can do is stay the hell away from her.

This district is going to be difficult enough - and the smart money is on Roskam against whomever the Democrats throw at him.

Dean is easily demonized as a raging, irrational liberal (a fact that would be easier to take if the DNC wasn't getting horse-whipped in the fundraising department). He campaigns in a district like this - he becomes the Dem candidate. And he loses.

Flame away if you must. This board isn't exactly the home of pragmatists.

If this district is difficut enough to win, why push a candidate with no political experience? This is an open seat where there is a Democratic candidate who has already run a campaign, got 44% of the vote against a long time incumbent and where the district is becoming less and less a Republican stronghold.

. . .it appears that Obama, Durbin and Quinn have more confidence in the new inexperienced candidate than the one who lost in 2004. Its that simple. The elected officials who are backing Duckworth have more confidence in her than they do Cegalis. If Cegalis is the best candidate why are they backing someone else, maybe the problem is not the people backing Duckworth, it might be Cegalis.

when they come out with an endorsement, you can come here and announce it. my reading of that article does not lead me to the same conclusion as yours. i wonder why. durbin saying she would be a good candidate for congress is not the same thing as saying that she should be rammed into a race where she will knock off a good, progressive candidate. she does not live in the district, she should run against one of the unopposed thugs in the area. i have to think that is what durbin had in mind.
anyway, first you say that the voters should decide in the primary. then you say, well the party big wigs decided, so who are you mere voters to complain. whatever talking point works that day, i guess.

And have a new buddy in Washington.

following a plan, that is working, to wean the party from big donors that are polluting our government, and our political process. and last i looked, the dnc was investing in cegalis, and other grassroots candidates like her.

Thats the whole point of this. Everyone knows when big money favors a candidate, its an uphill battle for the others. "Letting the voters think" is a load of crap IMO.

Shes already been campaigning. She was a Dean-dozen and lost to that Dinosaur Hyde in a red district. So lets go find a total unknown to undermine her? WTF is that about?

Who is Duckworth? What does she stand for? And why the need to undermine Cegalis??

How come running a candidate, giving the Democratic voters a choice is considered to be undermining.

Tell us about her. What does she stand for?

Why do you hate Cegalis?

. . .how does my support of a different candidate imply hate? You make the accusation, back it up. Tell me and demonstrate to me how I hate Cegalis. Did I say if she won, I would not support her? Did I say that if she won something underhanded happened? C'mon now you said I hate her, back up that assertion.

You wrote in the 1st post:

"I'm backing Tammy (if she runs), however I'm willing to let this play out in the primary."

Considering we DONT KNOW what she believes in, the only reason I can deduce is that you must hate Cegalis to support a COMPLETE UNKNOWN.

What does she believe in? 2nd time Im asking.

. . .you made it, own it. If you can step out and ask why I hate Cegalis, prove that I hate Cegalis. . .go ahead. Is there evidence?

As far as what Tammy believes we will learn that in the coming weeks, however, those who have had an opportunity to lend support to her candidacy (Obama, Quinn, Durbin and Rahm)would not have selected a Republican. . .or are you going to make that accusation as well?

In the coming weeks Tammy, should she choose to run, will make her ideas and her views known. Maybe I will change my mind and back Cegalis then, or the faith that I have that the powers at be wouldn't be backing her if she wasn't the real thing will be rewarded.

You are favoring an UNKNOWN over Cegalis. What would someone conclude then??

:kick:

I apologize for accusing you of hating Cegalis.

Now can you answer why you are favoring a total unknown over her?

I have no confidence in Cegalis at this point. She is doing an OK job raising money but she is blowing through it. The Republican, Roskam, is doing a better job of managing his finances. You can say money is not everything, which is true, but her campaign is not doing a good enough job managing its finances. Some will say that I'm engaging in dirty tricks, but the reality is I'm drawing conclusions and basing my opinion on what is revealed in the FEC report HER campaign filed. Should my concern based on facts be labeled dirty tricks? If so, why?

My support of Duckworth is based on bio. Some people call her a uniform, but she has an interesting story, and that story could very well shape her politics. Her eing a double amputee I'm interested to see where she stands on stem cell research, her being a veteran I'm interested to see where she stands on the war, the treatment of soldiers (and their families) and veterans, her being a woman I'm interested to see her position on choice, her being Asian I'm interested to see where she stands on Civil Rights, her being from Hawaii I'm interested in seeing where she stands on the environment. Her being a pilot I'm interested to see where she stands on the third airport and O'Hare expansion. Her being disabled I'm to see where she stands on healthcare.

You can say that is a lot unkowns, but I look at her supporters (Rahm, Durbin, Obama and Quinn) and I'm confident she falls on the right side of these issues, or else why would the be lending their resources to her effort?

She has not revealed too much about herself or her beliefs at this point and I kow there are a ton of people who can't wait to bash me for supporting her at this stage. . .so be it. If I'm wrong about her I'll admit, and I will support the nominee whomever it is but at this point I'm not a fan of Cegalis.

This probably will not quell the criticism I'm receiving for this but it is my answer to the question that was asked.

You are entitled to your opinion, but you offered nothing much in support of it until now. Maybe she will be a good candidate.

But questions still exist as to why in this contest? Also we have to see where she stands on things.

2006 is the most important election in America's history and I hate seeing precious money wasted in a primary fight.

Can you give me a link to Cegalis's FEC report?

. . .I'm not to interested in saving anyone any grief. Throughout this whole thing I have stated I'm not a Cegalis fan and I believe we have to look for alternatives and Duckworth is the alternative that is being offered. You will have to excuse me if I don't treat those who accuse me of dirty tricks, smear jobs, hating someone, etc. with any respect. I think its funny I have been called upon to defend my right to support another candidate, while others have attacked me for it, it cracks me up that no one challenged those who were attacking me to prove their accusations, but the focus was on me to defend my right to back another candidate just f'ing laughable.

My home computer crashed so I currently logged on from my back-up Mac running system 8, I can't access the FEC site, but mopinko provided the following information she culled from the site. YOU WILL NOTICE THE FACTS I HAVE STATE REPEATEDLY ARE NOT IN FUCKING DISPUTE (OK I know I'm angry and yelling but I have to acknowledge I credited Cegalis with almost $200,000 raised when it is only $159,884)! Yet I'm accused of god damned dirty tricks. I have bolded all of the lines that reinforce the facts I have been stating and basing my own damned opinion on.

H4IL06096 CEGELIS, CHRISTINE House
Illinois 6 Democratic Party Open Seat

Total Receipts: $159,884
Transfers From Authorized Committees: $0
Individual Contributions: $153,762
Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Committees: $5,342
Contributions from Party Committees $350
Candidate Contribution: $0
Candidate Loans: $0
Other Loans: $0

Total Disbursements: $113,902
Transfers to Authorized Committees: $0
Individual Refunds: $0
Non-Party (e.g. PACs) or Other Refunds: $500
Candidate Loan Repayments: $0
Other Loan Repayments: $0

Beginning Cash: $2,989
Latest Cash On Hand: $48,972
Debts Owed By: $39,179

Committees Included:
CEGELIS FOR CONGRESS
C00394007
Through: 09/30/2005

You favor a candidate that we know NOTHING about and you are not a Cegelis fan because she is not supposed to spend any money despite the fact that she has been campaigning for most of the year?

Yet Cegelis has been about getting out of Iraq and says all the right things. But because a CAMPAIGNING CANDIDATE spends money, you dont like her?

This is a candidate that is being forced on us by the DCCC mind you.

And then you get pissed because we suspect you???

This ought to be good.

I just dont get it.

:kick:

Got it.

smell. the same talking points that the very dlc chair of the dccc uses. we are concerned about the extent to which candidates for the democratic party are being selected by undemocratic means. so when we hear the rahm wants to replace a candidate that we think already has a mandate to run again, based on a 44% showing in a red district we want to know why. when the chair is quoted in the papers saying she is not raising enough money, but she is getting more and larger donations, we want to know why. when we can see plainly that she is on the same path as bean, in fact is outperforming bean, who now sits in congress, we wonder why the chairman is not pleased with that. when we see a camp wellstone grad, who is with us on every issue, who, in spite of the fact that she often wears pink, will probably never don the tutu, we want to know why the chair does not like her. and when we see UNOPPOSED REPUBLICANS right next door, but the chairman is about to insert a candidate into THIS race, we want to know why. and then when this replacement shows up, she is not the wealthy, wonderful replacement that was supposed to be the answer to the "problem" we wonder why.

and when you come here, and you parrot the chairman perfectly, with the same talking points, which we consider to be completely unfounded criticism, we wonder why. and when we ask you to defend this candidate, you spit out a lot of mumbo jumbo, and, imho, take a few words from durbin, and an obama aid on the payroll as an endorsement, we wonder where's the beef. and when you get all huffy, but do not answer questions, we wonder why.
so, don't be surprised when we take your whole act as an insult to our intelligence.


edited to say that we also wonder why rahm does not like a candidate that is following dean's plan for the party, and in fact has embraced and invested party recourses in. and why dean's plan of NO UNOPPOSED REPUBLICANS is not being followed in our state.

it is about smearing a good candidate with a whispering campaign. it is about dirty tricks.

Looking at Cegalis's filings seeing that she raised close to $200,000 in the 3rd quarter and only has $50,000 on hand and deciding we can do better? How is that a dirty trick?

Can you please answer LSK's question? It's very simple.

she has exceeded her totals from her last campaign, already. more and bigger donations. grassroots support, just like the Charmian said. she is ahead of where bean was in her second and successful bid. you keep trying to make an issue out of how much she has in the bank, but unless you have a problem with how she spent it, i don't understand that. all indicators are that she is building on what she did in 04.

so, why do you and rahm insist on repeatedly calling her a poor candidate, and insisting that she will not win, when there is every reason to believe that the opposite is true? in my opinion this is a smear. it dries up money, which you claim is the most important thing for her to have.
no doubt there are better candidates on the planet than cegalis. bobby kennedy jr, maybe. but being a better candidate does not seem to be the criteria here. first it was someone with money, then it was someone who could raise money, now it seems to be someone with a "good story".

publically beating the bushes for a candidate, when you have a good one sitting there is a dirty trick in my book. emmanuel has made no secret of it. how much of the counter-attack on the blogs to cegalis supporters, who are all singing the same song as you, wndy, is co-ordinated, i do not know. but you have the talking points down to a t. and you still haven't told me who you have got to run against biggert and manzullo. or what's so good about duckworth. but you have done nothing but churn this discussion. i am done responding to you.

. . .your paranoia is laughable and even more, very telling. I'm not on some mailing list receive guidance or talking points.

"how much of the counter-attack on the blogs to cegalis supporters, who are all singing the same song as you, wndy, is co-ordinated, i do not know. but you have the talking points down to a t. and you still haven't told me who you have got to run against biggert and manzullo." Beware of the Black helicopters.