Daily Herald: Laesch wants Oberweis to withdraw ads
Laesch in yesterday's Daily Herald on the Oberweis ads. Laesch took on Foster too.
Laesch also criticized one of his Democratic opponents, Bill Foster, who has proposed the creation of a national ID card for all workers. Such an ID card is an impractical "Big Brother solution," Laesch said.Lauzen may have the good sense to steer clear of this one. From the Trib,
In response, Foster's campaign spokesman issued a statement bashing Laesch for offering "no practical solutions on the issue of immigration."
Laesch contends that border security and immigration are separate issues. He advocates what he calls "a more humanitarian stance."
ID cards won't stop illegal immigrants, Laesch said. Fair trade policies and measures that protect workers' rights and ensure they're paid adequate wages will keep corporations from "outsourcing poverty," he added.
While the wealthy Oberweis said voters are telling him the top issue is illegal immigration, Lauzen said he's been telling voters about his 15-year record as a state lawmaker.Lauzen does have this on his website which I think lays out a pretty sensible response to last springs rallies in support of illegal immigrants,
Recently, the Illinois House, with support of at least two area representatives passed legal driving privileges for illegal immigrants who currently flout immigration, employment, traffic and insurance laws. It is incredibly naïve, or downright dishonest, to expect our constituents to believe that this legal inconsistency was passed so illegal immigrants can be "tracked" better.Lauzen balances the fine lines in that piece.
The response to this enormous give-away is not gratitude, but protest.
As Americans, we are generous, patient people, but once we understand what is really happening, many people resent having their good nature taken advantage of. John F. Kennedy said, "Our nation is founded on the principle that observance of the law is the eternal safeguard of liberty, and defiance of the law is the surest road to tyranny...For no man however prominent and powerful, and no mob however unruly and boisterous, is entitled to defy a court of law."
8 comments:
Concerning the 14th Congressional District Republican Primary (regular election), I think Kevin Burns has been contributing the most to the silly department. Check out this letter-to-the-editor published this week in the Kane County Chronicle, along with other newspapers in the 14th from Burns' campaign chairman:
======================================================
Let’s have some debates
To the Editor:
Our campaign has grown weary of the rhetoric we have received from Chris Lauzen and Jim Oberweis in response to our invitations to engage in debates. After two months, we still are receiving the same empty replies.
Lauzen has proclaimed without specifics or explanation that “there will be eight to 10 major debates before the election.”
Let’s split the difference and agree on nine.
Oberweis’ vague response through the news media seems to offer a proposed time frame, to wit: “75 days before the election is the earliest I’ve ever seen.”
Let’s agree on 60 days so we can fit them all in without interfering with the holidays.
Nine debates in 60 days. Each candidate can plan three. If Michael J. Dilger wants to chime in, we’d be glad to include him, as well.
The voters deserve more than the rhetoric they’re getting now in glossy mailers and TV advertisements from Lauzen and Oberweis. Let’s give the voters an opportunity to actually meet and hear from the candidates themselves and then let them decide who is best to represent them in the 14th Congressional District.
Michael J. Donahue
Kevin Burns for Congress Committee, Chairman
Geneva
======================================================
Oh, how do we shut-the-Kevin-Burns-campaign up about debates! I wish Burns and his supporters would face reality -- State Senator Chris Lauzen and Jim Oberweis are not afraid to debate Kevin Burns. Burns is simply being ignored from debates.
Here are some facts. Burns' polling numbers are 4% according to a poll released by State Senator Chris Lauzen's campaign and 3% in a Jim Oberweis poll. Both polls were done by different, reputable pollsters and are saying the same thing concerning Burns' level of support within the 14th district -- there isn't much of any!
Additionally, Burns raised a paltry $60,000-something in the 3rd quarter fundraising, according to the Federal Elections Commission.
Lauzen has discussed his views for over 15 years of public service. Oberweis has run 3 times statewide in the last 3 election cycles so his views are known.
Until Burns can show better polling numbers or fundraising, he hasn't earned a live debate, let alone a place on the stage with the frontrunners Lauzen and Oberweis.
Deal with it, Burns campaign. You should seriously consider dropping-out of the race.
Leaving out Michael Dilger simply because I know nothing about him, I say that if Burns drops out that will leave two far-right candidates. As an independent voter, I will not vote for Lauzen or Oberweis in the general but would be open to the more moderate Mayor Burns, who is quite popular where he is already known.
Burns had the most small-donor donations in the last fundraising quarter in spite of smaller name recognition. Lauzen and Oberweis have more money but it's from very few donors.
Lauzen and Oberweis reside in the Twilight Zone. Neither one even addresses the Iraq occupation in their fancy schmanzy literature. Middle East policy is the single most important issue for many of us. Ignoring it is inexcusable. The only thing that would play worse in IL-14 would be another carpetbagger like Alan Keyes.
I will NEVER vote for someone like LAESCH who doesn't support our troops.
Yinn-
Hastert has won the 14th with 60% to 80% margins over his term since 9/11. It would seem the voters of the 14th have some tolerance for the military efforts in the Middle East that would carry over from Hastert's position to either Lauzen's or Oberweis' mostly mum-ness, which seems to be an acquiescence to the status quo. Until I see some evidence to the contrary at the voting booth, I think positions such as Laesch's are not resonating as solutions to Middle East policy in the 14th.
Where do you get that I support Laesch? I don't. Foster's my man.
It's not a matter of "tolerance" for military efforts in the ME. It's a matter of not letting any of the candidates duck the issue of the occupation of Iraq. Every single one of the Democratic candidates addresses it, and Burns addresses it. Trying to pretend that voters in the 14th don't care about it enough to prioritze it as an issue is obscene. Trying to position themselves as "friends to the taxpayer" without talking about Iraq is crazy.
Yinn, From today's NYT explaining why I think we're going to hear less from Dems on Iraq,
As violence declines in Baghdad, the leading Democratic presidential candidates are undertaking a new and challenging balancing act on Iraq: acknowledging that success, trying to shift the focus to the lack of political progress there, and highlighting more domestic concerns like health care and the economy.
It will be wrong if the GOP lets them duck it.
Lauzen's record has been demagoguing the abortion issue and pandering to the crazy right wing his entire tenure in the senate.
He has not much more of a leg to stand on then the crazy milk man.
He and group of right wing nuts in the senate all had a reputation for being obstructionist for Pate and the GOP Governors.
The milk man is less creepy.
Less violence in Baghdad? Tell that to the people who got blown up at the market last week.
If violence is declining, it's due to a combination of more troops (which is supposed to be temporary, so what's the next step?), to the Sadrists tightening their hold and to the U.S. military opting for "seek and avoid" missions in lieu of regular patrols. Plus, all those refugees moved out make for fewer targets.
Of course neither party should let the other duck Iraq. I am only pointing out that the IL-14 frontrunners are trying to do so.
Post a Comment