Dirty money in the 18th District? Not by Illinois standards

Today's Word on the Street column notes that Democratic Congressional candidate Colleen Callahan has given up the $2,500 it received from Congressman Charles Rangel. She gave the donation to two different charities.

According to the Journal Star:

"A House subcommittee recently was formed to look into Rangel's activities, which include alleged failure to pay taxes on $75,000 in income from a Dominican Republic vacation home. Rangel has denied any wrongdoing."

I noted a comment made by 11Bravo -- a frequent Peoria Pundit commenter and contributor -- asking exactly how much money Aaron Schock's campaign has accepted from Congressman Jerry Weller (R-11th District), considered by many the most corrupt member of Congress.

It's a legitimate question. After all, Weller's former campaign manager is Steve Shearer, the man who's managing Aaron Schock's campaign. I checked the Federal Election Commission's Website, and found no personal contributions to Schock from Weller. I couldn't find any political action committees controlled by Weller, so I doubt there are any of those types of contributions from Weller either.

For those who aren't aware, Weller is retiring. But unlike Peoria's Congressman Ray LaHood, Weller is retiring under a huge cloud of corruption that dwarfs anything hanging over Rangel. Weller is literally in bed with a fascist, the daughter of Guatemala's former dictator and who is herself an active member of a ruling party responsible for human rights violations.

Illinois voters will overlook a lot of dirt, but sleeping with bloody-handed human rights violators is a bit much. But taking a contribution from a sitting, un-indicted Congressman who is later accused of not declaring a home on his taxes? Illinoisans snort at this sort of thing.

First, I don't hold Shearer responsible for Weller's ethical lapses. Second, Shearer is far too slick a political operative to have made a fuss about Rangel's donation to Callahan if there's a paper trail showing cash from Weller going to Schock.

ALSO: I do believe this is the second straight Word on the Street without a contribution from PJS reporter Karen McDonald.

Crossposted to Peoria Pundit

Read more...

Do we want to offer police protection only to candidates who can afford it?

I've been neglecting my duties.

Anyone who reads this blog can quickly figure out which politicians I prefer over others.

But I'd like to think that when the candidates I like take positions with which I strongly disagree, I will say so.

I've put off writing at length about the controversy over the "bill" some folks want to charge President Bush of the Aaron Schock Congressional campaign for the $38,000 in police and security services provided during the July 25 fund raiser at Weaver Farms in Peoria.

Frankly, I'm not a fan of Schock. I think Democratic challenger Colleen Callahan would make a better Congressperson.

And I chortled to myself as Callahan and Peoria City Council member Gary Sandberg scored points with the voting public by complaining about the costs the city picked up providing protection during this rather elitist affair.

But I am somewhat amazed it's getting as much traction as it has. Folks, I hate to break it to you, but it is the job of local police to provide assistance to the Secret Police when they are in town protecting the life of the the leader of the free world. This is true whether the event features a lame-duck incumbent raising cash by charging $5,000 a pop for a photograph at a closed-door event, or if it's some junior senator (without a shot in Hell of winning his party's nomination for President) stumping for a former colleague outside the Peoria County Courthouse.

Putting a dollar amount on the services of the men and woman of the Peoria Police Department cheapens their contribution to the city. They are not hired guns. They are not security guards. To be asked by the Secret Service to coordinate and cooperate in the protection of the president of the United States of America is both their duty and their privilege. It has nothing to do with politics. It has everything to do with protecting the public.

But if you want to take politics into the equation, consider this: Do we really want elections in which candidates have to pay municipalities for the protection they receive? If minor party candidates and independents like Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney or Chuck Baldwin had to pay even a fraction of $38,000 every time they made a campaign appearance, they wouldn't be making a lot of campaign appearances.

During a presidential race, candidates might make eight stops a day. Some of them are fund-raisers not dissimilar to the one we're discussing. Add that up over a year-long presidential campaign, and we're talking about huge sums of money. I'd ask anyone griping about the elites who showed up for Schock's Weaver Farms event to stop and consider how adding millions of dollars to the cost of a campaign will make for easier for non-elites to get involved.

It would be the easiest thing for the Schock campaign to just write a check (which is something I suggested as a way to end the controversy). But I'm thinking now that it would set a precedent, so let's forget that idea.

And don't worry, I'll be going back to giving folks reasons to vote for Colleen Callahan soon.

Crossposted to Peoria Pundit.

Read more...

Steve Shearer defends Schock in "debate debate" tiff

I received the following email responses from Steven Shearer, State Rep. Aaron Schock's campaign manager, to information that Schock will not attend the Peoria Area World Affairs Council debate next month. Callahan has criticized Schock for not agreeing to debates in the race for Congress from the 18th District. The response:

Aaron Schock and his campaign never committed to this proposed World Affairs Council debate in Peoria in the first place. Aaron has agreed to do a World Affairs Council debate in Jacksonville. He already did one for the Peoria World Affairs Council in the primary which was broadcast on radio.

As you can see on the list posted on your blog of the 10 debates Aaron Schock has agreed to do, there is one in October which the co-sponsors, WEEK-TV, the Journal Star and the League of Women Voters, are still working out the date for. This will be held in WEEK's studios and broadcast live on television. WEEK has a very large viewership in the 18th Congressional District, so it is false that Aaron Schock is not willing to debate in a televised debate.

He will also participate in the Peoria Chamber and WMBD's debate which will be broadcast on WMBD radio.

There will be both a televised and a radio broadcast debate. Aaron Schock has agreed to 10 debates, which is a level not many congressional campaigns do. They will be held by diverse organizations that are each well respected; several of the debates have multiple organizations co-hosting the event; they are spread out among the district, and one will be televised and one will be broadcasted on radio. All in all, we feel the line up Aaron Schock has agreed to will allow for a thorough airing of the candidates views on subjects across-the-board. Colleen Callahan can disagree all she wants as to what Aaron Schock should do but she is running her campaign, not this one. Most objective observers will agree that ten debates are a solid commitment.

Debates are an important component of a congressional campaign but not the only component by far. Again, there will only be three presidential debates because Barack Obama has only agreed to three.

Colleen Callahan needs to make the most of these 10 debates and figure out on her own how else she will take her message to the voters. Aaron Schock is not going to walk her hand in hand throughout the district, taking up one third of the evenings left in the campaign.

The Callahan campaign's first press release on the subject of debates wrongly said "Schock has agreed to exactly zero debates." That point was proved flat out wrong. Now, when given ten separate opportunities to debate, Callahan and her campaign clings to another false notion that Schock pulled out of a debate. The bottom line is that she has ten opportunities to debate Aaron Schock, including both a televised and radio broadcast debate.

The Callahan campaign has said the "debates" to which Shearer refers are actually forums and joint appearances, and not true debates in which candidates take turns answering questions. Many commenters have expressed similar sentiments. In the interest of fairness, I asked Shearer to respond:

They all have either questions from the audience which each candidate will answer, or a moderator or panel asking questions. Debate rebuttals will be included in at least the formats of the: WEEK-TV/Journal Star/League of Women Voters televised debate; the Peoria Chamber of Commerce/WMBD Radio debate broadcast on radio; the Jewish Federation of Peoria Debate; the World Affairs Council and League of Women Voters debate in Jacksonville; and the Southwest Kiwanis Debate. AARP has not yet determined its format. Each of the ten events will allow for a side by side comparison of the candidates on the issues.

Cross posted to Peoria Pundit.

Read more...

Schock will miss Peoria World Affairs Council debate

State Rep. Aaron Schock will not attend the Peoria Area World Affairs Council debate, which is scheduled for 7 p.m. Sept. 10, at the Peoria City Council chambers. There's no word yet on whether the debate would proceed with other 18th District Congressional candidates Colleen Callahan (Democrat) and Sheldon Schafer (Green). It's guessing it will, and will post when I find out.

Callahan's campaign manager, Terry Towery, says they were notified by the PAWAC by phone earlier today. No explanation was given. He speculated that Schock may be trying to avoid being videotaped by the television news media during a debate with Callahan.

Towery reiterated the campaign's position that Schock is ducking the debates by either not committing to actual debates or by committing and then not showing up. And Towery said that Schock's campaign manager, Steve Shearer is "playing word games" by citing forums and joint appearances when refuting the accusations.

I've sent an email to Shearer and I am awaiting his reply.

Both campaigns have been trading snippy press releases over the debate debate issue this week.

UPDATE: Elaine Hopkins reports that the debate will go forward with or without Rep. Schock. The debate will be carried on WCBU-FM and streamed over the Internet as well.

Cross posted to Peoria Pundit.

Read more...

The Net roots are getting behind Callahan

When Colleen Callahan got into this race for Congress (18th District, the seat now held by Ray LaHood), I told everyone who would listen that if she had any chance to win, she had to get on the Internet in a big way AND she had to win over the "Net roots" of the Democratic Party.

And that means she had to win over the fine folks at Daily Kos.

And it looks like that's exactly what is happening with two posts, here and here. The George Bush fundraising visit to Peoria -- as well as Republican candidate Aaron Schock's implication that those who don't support Bush aren't patriots -- has rallied The Kos crowd to offer support and financial assistance:

Can we match that fundraising for Colleen? Schock has currently sold 500 dinner tickets for a current total of $250,000. If 10,000 people donated just $25 over the next week for Colleen Callahan, she could match that and not have to have The WORST PRESIDENT EVAH stump for her.

If ever there was a real opportunity for your $25 donations from across the country to effect a race THIS IS THE ONE. Let's collectively send a message to the National Republican party that sending Bush to stump for Republican pukes like Schock will send cash flowing to the Democrat in that race.

Protestations by Washington DC political strategist Steve Shearer to the contrary, they've gotta be getting a little bit worried.

Cross posted to Peoria Pundit.

Read more...

LaHood removed lingering doubt and gives Schock his endorsement

Is it really big news that Republican politicians (or those hoping to run for office again in he future) have endorsed GOP wünderkind Aaron Schock? Current 18th District Congressman Ray LaHood attended a press conference to officially endorse Schock, as did LaHood's predecessor, Bob Michel. Also tossing their support to Schock were John Morris and Jim McConoughey, who ran against Schock in the GOP primary.

At first blush, it seems like such a non-story. That Republicans are endorsing the Republican nominee isn't exactly a big surprise.

But, maybe this time it is at least a little bit of a surprise. Believe it or not, there was a bit of a doubt that LaHood would come through with an endorsement for Schock.

There were signs from the start that the sitting Congressman was miffed at Schock for not heeding his advice to wait a while before announcing he was he was going to for the the retiring LaHood's job. It's a certainty that state party bigwigs were annoyed at him for giving up a State House seat that almost certainly will return to the Democrats, and for doing so a few months after they dumped a lot of cash into getting him re-elected.

Then Schock was called out for perhaps violating federal election rules by, among other things, running his Congressional campaign out of the county GOP headquarters where he was renting space.

Also, LaHood was among those who expressed opposition to Schock's position (originally defended, and then excused away as some sort of joke) that the United States ought to give nuclear weapons to Taiwan if Communist China didn't stop arming Iran.

It's also a reality that Schock -- while talking like a moderate back home in Peoria -- talked like a conservative when talking to conservatives, and took a sharp turn to the right in the primary. LaHood, while popular throughout the large, mostly rural 18th District, is nevertheless a moderate who sometimes faces scorn from some of the conservatives Schock has been sucking up to recently.

For these reasons, many observers (including this blog) spent the months preceding the primary election waiting for the shoe to drop and for LaHood to endorse someone other that Schock, probably McConoughey.

But LaHood finally stated that he probably wouldn't make an endorsement, but would keep an eye on the campaigns and how they were being run. I took that statement as a warning to the Schock campaign to keep it clean. Schock gets good press for running clean campaigns, but that's only because Schock's people operate their whisper campaigns under the radar.

I kept hearing during the primary that the senior LaHood feared some sort of retaliation against son Darin LaHood, who is running for Peoria County State's Attorney against Democratic incumbent Kevin Lyons.

But the primary is over, so it's a cinch that LaHood would endorse Schock and be done with it, right? Wrong. Schock's opponent in the Democratic Party is Colleen Callahan, a woman who is well-known throughout the 18th District due to her work as a agriculture reporter. As is well-known now, Callahan once helped organize a fund-raiser for LaHood, who Callahan has praised for his support for Illinois agriculture.

I can only assume that LaHood would be inclined to think favorably about someone who went out of her way to cross party lines to help him raise campaign cash.

One Peoria blogger, Elaine Hopkins, recently said that LaHood was signaling during a recent meeting of the ACLU in Peoria that he might actually toss some electoral love Callahan's direction:

Another notable comment by Rep. LaHood was his referral to the Democratic nominee to replace him in the House as: "a very good and knowledgeable candidate here, in Colleen Callahan". That statement alone might not have been given a second-thought except that he never acknowledged, or even uttered the name of Ms. Callahan's GOP opponent. To several of us attending, it sounded almost like a subtle endorsement of Callahan. Interesting…

That was not to be, however.

Cross posted to Peoria Pundit.

Read more...

Schock's site lends a hand to Callahan

I looked over Colleen Callahan's official web site, and I have to say that, so far, it lacks real content. Except for providing readers with some contact information and a way to donate, there's not a lot there.

In other words, Aaron Schock's site has Colleen's beat all to Hell. Sorry, guys. Maybe that will change.

But not all is lost. Schock's campaign is so itent on making a case that his huge campaign warchest makes him invulnerable to challengers, the site links to a Springfield State Journal-Register article about how Callahan has to play catch-up in the cash-raising biz.

The problem (for Schock) is that this article didn't just talk about cash. The article humanized Callahan by introducing people to members of her family. I imagine not many people know that her daughter, Brittney Burns, is a top-notch lawyer with tons of experience fighting crime and working with the legislature. Sounds to me like she's be a huge asset to her mom if she gets elected to Congress.

The message seems to be that Schock is the front runner 'cause he has a ton of cash, while Callahan has her smart and politically talented family on her side.

Were I operating her site, I'd be sure to link to the same article.

Crossposted to Peoria Pundit.

Read more...

Dirty tricks on the Web from the Schock campaign? Kinda doubt it ... (UPDATED 2x)

Does Colleen Callahan (Democratic congressional candidate the 18th District) have a campaign Website yet? Anyone who's looking for one might stumble across this one: CallahanforCongress.com.

Methinks it's NOT her site. Except for the disclaimer "Copyright. Callahanforcongress. All rights reserved" and a link to GoDaddy.com, the only content is a picture of a cute little girl (emma.jpg) wearing a shirt with a "Callahan for Congress" decal, complete with a red-white-and-blue Democratic donkey. With a red slash drawn through it. Like in "Democrats prohibited."

Like I said, PROBABLY not the site of someone who is running as a Democrat.

There's a debate going on in the comments section of this post. Someone accused the Aaron Schock (current 92nd district state rep, running for 18th District for the GOP) camp of creating the site. One of my readers posted the WHOIS information for callahanforcongress.com stating that the owner of the site is John Callahan of State College, PA.

I did a Google search. There is a John Callahan with that telephone number. But there's no news articles anywhere about a guy with that name from that city who's running or thinking of running for Congress.
The mayor of Bethlehem, PA, is also named John Callahan. He might conceivably be interested in running for Congress, but one would think he would have an address in Bethlehem. And as a Democrat, I doubt he'd post a pic of anyone wearing a slashed-out Democratic Party symbol.

The site was registered on Jan. 17. I and other media broke the story that she was running on Jan. 24, but it was common knowledge amongst the political illuminati for a some time before then. So it'c conceivable someone in the Schock campaign or someone who wanted to help decided to throw together a placeholder Web site in a dastardly plot to deny Colleen a simple and easy-to-remember domain name for her campaign. And with the fast financial resources at their disposal, they found some dude in State College to be their willing thrall.

Yeah. It's possible. Seems an awful lot of trouble to go through when colleenforcongress.com is still available. As is vote4callahan.com.

A quick phone call tomorrow will clear up the confusion. I hope. "Cause I don't want to spend the next eight months debating silly crap like this.

UPDATE: Left a voicemail message at 11 a.m.

UPDATE: Courtesy of Dave Dahl, I now have two links for Colleen Callahan campaign: Citizens for Callahan and Colleen Callahan for Congress. I'll look 'em over and pass judgment later today. It looks like the nefarious scheme to deprive her of a campaign website has failed.

Crossposted to PeoriaPundit

Read more...