Meeks in the mix
First, let's clear something up, from Cindy Richards in today's Sun-Times:
On the other side, we have Republican state Treasurer Judy Baar Topinka. She's the social moderate and fiscal conservative....
Cindy, why do you shy from calling a spade a spade? Judy is pro-abortion and pro-gay, the two hallmarks of a social liberal.
Now, to the point, from McKinney, Spielman, and Swartz in in today's Sun-Times:
"I'd be glad to have a conversation with everybody who believes in the right to life and the sanctity of marriage," Meeks said.
Senator Meeks, call me.
Back to Miss Nomering Cindy:
[Meeks is] offering himself as the morally superior candidate. He's banking that his anti-abortion and anti-gay rights beliefs will connect with white conservative Christian voters who will be turned off by the more moderate views of both Topinka and Blagojevich.
"Come on with me, white churches ... Call me and tell me to run for governor," Meeks told his Salem Baptist Church congregation Sunday.....
Ok, Senator, I'll call you.
Closing with McKinney, Spielman, and Swartz:
Meeks hinted that his political courtship of conservative Republicans... could extend to the GOP primary's runner-up, Aurora dairy owner and investor Jim Oberweis.
Oh, this could be great.
45 comments:
I hate to see ministers in politics. Meeks talking like this convinces me why.
He does demonstrate the potential for realignment though and just begs the question why the Republicans don't try and chip away in the city.
Note Laura Washington's reassurance to Blagojevich at the end of her recent column that African-Americans don't support Meek's call for higher taxes.
As far as pro-gay and pro-abortion... I read this in the Weekly Standard yesterday about infant euthanasia in Holland,
Moreover, a study published in 1997 in the Lancet determined that in 1995, about 8 percent of all infants who died in the Netherlands--some 80 babies--were euthanized by doctors, and not all with parental consent; this figure was reproduced in a subsequent study covering the year 2001.)
Sanctity of life just strikes me as a far greater issue then the sanctity of marriage. Marriage has changed over time. We can weather those changes.
Respect for live changes too, but it's a far more brutal thing... read the Standard article.
RUN JIM RUN!!!!
MEEKS-OBERWEIS 2006!
Jill said JBT is liberal so she must be!
JBT must support abortion at anytime, for any reason, for every female, correct? WHAT?! She DOESN'T?!
Oh, JBT supports RESTRICTIONS like banning partial-birth and supporting parental notification. I guess that IS moderate.
JBT must support gay marriage, correct? WHAT?! She DOESN'T?!
Oh, JBT supports civil unions and current anti-discrimination laws but opposes gay marriage. I guess that IS moderate.
Wow, so JBT is a MODERATE and Jill is either IGNORANT or a LIAR.
anon 8:11
Republicans need to stand for something in this State if they want to win.
The best way to stand for something is to debate it.
This is important debate and calling Jill a liar not the way to get it started.
Jill is not interested in debate. If you don't agree with her absolutist positions, then as far as she's concerned, you're a liberal. Anything contrary to that label is ignored or dismissed. The Republican party USED to stand for common sense government that empowered the individual, versus the Democrat's proposed welfare state. Right-wingers like Jill are foreign to the idea of common sense, let alone honestly debating (or even acknowledging) positions outside of their rigid ideology.
anon 8:11 -
I'll go with "liar." Maybe even add "moron."
So "Obie" will get into the abortion game to add to his anti-Hispanic rhetoric? Maybe he'll start passing out aborted fetuses in ice cream containers, just to shock passersby!
Jill has so far exhibited nothing within the realm of common sense. I'm friends with a bunch of conservatives, and although I disagree with what they say almost all the time, I at least respect them. Jill earns none of that respect.
It's pathetic that now she's pulling for a set of candidates that will get, combined, about 16 votes. Yeah. Meeks and Oberweis in '06. Pathetic.
Jill, would you turn away support from Gays who support your views on right to life?
They're out there you know.
The labels are irrelevant and never more so then today.
The principles though, are enduring things, and I think the respect of life a basic one.
If folks with a rainbow banner show up to support you, you should consider accepting it.
Jill, you insult African-Americans (and I laughed when you actually used that phrase) when you assume they would immediately support Meeks just because of his skin color. What will happen is an Obie/Meeks ticket would draw all the right-wing crazies (excluding those that vote for Topinka based only on the "R" next to her name) and result in an easy win for Blago.
Oh, I also laughed when you stated "Oberweis' right-wing ideology beat Judy." Yes, except when he didn't beat Judy. That's funny.
And, Bill, although I respect you and your opinions (but disagree with many of them), I'll bet you Blago's hairpiece that if someone showed up on Jill's doorstep with a rainbow banner, she most certainly would not accept it. She should, but she won't. It's sad when a so-called "respect for life" seems to go hand-in-hand with bigotry.
Look my pic. I need his hairpiece.
That aside,
I think we're at a moment of change. Maybe I'm just looking at the world through my own changes of thought the past few years. But I suspect I'm not alone.
Eight percent of infant deaths the result euthansia is a horrible callousness about life. A horrible decision by Docs that they can judge the worthiness of life. Gays should be very concerned about that... it was a judgement made on them in Germany.
They should be allies in this cause.
So I think it's time for change and a shrewd politican is going to seize on it and build a coalition.
Joseph Bottum over at First Things calls it a New Fusionism, and there is no reason it can't happen in Illinois,
The opponents of abortion and euthanasia insist there are truths about human life and dignity that must not be compromised in domestic politics. The opponents of Islamofascism and rule by terror insist there are truths about human life and dignity that must not be compromised in international politics. Why shouldn’t they grow toward each other? The desire to find intellectual and moral seriousness in one realm can breed the desire to find intellectual and moral seriousness in another.
Hello again,
I have homosexual friends who are pro-life, and I am happy to work with them on the issue.
But that doesn't mean I have to accept their homosexual positions. We work together on life issues, but we opposes eachother on Marriage (some of them, I have homosexual friends who do not support Homosexual marriage) You will find that not all Homosexuals are flamming liberals tony. Hello the so called Closet Republicans anyone?
I have found if rather funny recently as I have all these moderate (liberal) republicans screaming unity like a battle cry from the Civil War. What is it I am supposed to get behind...
I have been listening to the Republican Candidates speeches and I am sorry, but someone tell me if I am in the wrong room.
We just had the republican candidate for treasurer at UIS (I am a student) and to sum up what she said that neither her nor Judy have ruled out a tax increase!
HOLY RONALD REAGAN BATMAN?!!??
What happen to tax cuts fuel the economy (Reagan, Bush, JFK, ect...)
So I am suppose to support abortion (except for POSSIBLY parental consent, homosexual marriage, and tax increases?!?
uhhhhh....I thought I left the democratic party....but these arguements seem real familiar?! Maybe I got in the wrong room? Is this the democratic party office?
Can someone please direct me to the republican party? It appears Illinois has lost theirs.
Jill, your post is a perfect example why you get no respect from serious candidates.
If a candidate who is for common sense restrictions is "liberal" ("libral" for the easily swayed), then who indeed is a moderate?
Your statement about Oberweis beating Judy is delusional. Let me remind you- Judy took in more votes than Jim- and Judy was declared the winner!
Lastly, your hatred of anything Topinka to the point of holding up a gun grabbing, tax raising, teacher's union tool is- now watch this- UNconservative (and LIBRAL). And will split the conserative coalition wide open.
All because you hate Judy and didn't get your way in the primary.
Topinka's not as liberal as the average Chicagoan, who is a Democrat. So relatively speaking, the Sun Times is correct to call her a moderate.
Jill,
What do you think about gay adoption. I am 100% for it because I am pro-Life. The question you have to ask is not whether the child would be better off with two heterosexual parents than two homosexual parents, but rather whether you would rather have that child raised by two homosexuals or be aborted. I have common sense, so I would much rather it be raised by a gay couple than aborted.
There are few bigger hypocrites on the political scene today than pro-Lifers who oppose gay adoption. Are you one of those hypocrites, Jill, or do you really put life above all else? I'm hoping you're the latter.
Also, I don't like being told that I'm a liberal because I support gay marriage. I'm pro-Life and believe government should be as small as possible and taxes as low as possible and that all state services not related to security should be privatized. How does that make me liberal?
I don't have a problem with a Liberal label by the way, except most liberals trash my views as not liberal... and considering they won't use the label anymore... that's odd.
Anyway, remember Humprhy's Liberal Mantra,
One of Humphrey's speeches contained the lines "It was once said that the moral test of Government is how that Government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly; and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped," which is sometimes described as the "liberals' mantra."
The Schiavo case really convinced me Social Conservaties would pass the HHH's Liberal test easier then most Democrats today. They were awfully quick to make judgements about pulling the plug on a life they felt not worth living.
A lot of people who opposed the GOP on Schaivo did so because they actually have a belief that the Federal government should have some limits. Schaivo's parents were given complete due process, and Congress getting involved was sickening. I say that as a conservative, so I guess the pro-big government position was indeed liberal.
Angry Conservative,
If I recall right, the only Judge you ever found in favor of Schiavo's parents, was one appointed by Clinton.
Like I say, these labels mean little today. The effort should be on some common and fundamental poltical principles around which new coalitions can be built.
"She's the social moderate and fiscal conservative....
Cindy, why do you shy from calling a spade a spade? Judy is pro-abortion and pro-gay, the two hallmarks of a social liberal."
"Social conservatives don't march in gay pride parades and support gay civil unions."
- Jill, no one is saying JBT is a social conservative, its obvious she isn't. YOU were denying she was a social moderate, which she obviously is. Don't you know what you wrote on your own blog?! I don't know whether you're trying to lie about JBT or you're just simply incompetent. Its a tough call.
A social moderate wants more then just a few exceptions in the extreme cases.
Judy supports abortion in almost all case. She just SAYS she wants a parental notification law and banning partial-birth abortion. I know huge abortion supporters who agree with these two things. It takes more then a few issues that most people agree with to say you’re a moderate.
Judy also opposes the right of faith for pharmacy workers. Doctors have a right of conscious, so don’t nurse’s. This is moderate?
Also Judy is considering tax increases? Hello I don’t consider that fiscal conservatism.
Why should Meeks call you, Jill? You don't believe in the right to life. You don't believe in funding for health care for mothers. You don't believe in contraception funding. You don't believe in funding education. You do believe in the death penalty. You are one of the most ant-life people around.
You are "anti-abortion." You are not "pro-life."
Let's clear up the confusion. We don't trust someone to be ethical who supports killing unborn babies. Sorry it was one thing to vote for her for treasurer, but its another thing to vote for her for governor when there is a possibility the Supreme Court could send the issue back to the states in the next few years. Judy Barr Topinka will not get my vote and I know a lot of conservatives who agree with me on this.
You can throw all the fits you want and try to turn this on us its not going to change the fact that Judy is going to lose. The republican party in illinois is turning its back on social (and fiscal it appears) conservatives and they think enough democrats are going to cross over and vote Topinka?
You are living in a dream land my friends. The majority of angry democrats are not going to vote for topinka, they will either not vote or vote for Rod because of party loyality. The old saying about conservatives still rings true for republicans:
"You may lose because of us, but you will not win without us"
Good luck Illinois GOP, you are going to need it.
Meeks isn't likely to win, but I'm greatly intrigued by the possibility that he's even willing to work with conservatives. I hope he can make this work. I just want him to drop his desire to raise taxes. Perhaps he can promote school vouchers and school choice.
Bill,
That post on Infant Euthanasia in Holland is definitely a nominee for non sequitir of the week.
PP, that would imply she actually does research or would let facts get in the way of her hatred and double standards. She would deny unwanted children loving parents for the same reason she hasn't adopted any of her own. It's not about being "pro-life," it's about being anti-gay and anti-choice.
Jill--Ouch:
http://www.gapersblock.com/airbags/archives/something_stanek/
Oops, here you go:
Something Stanek
Anon 2:57,
She may not be at all substantive, but calling her racist is just wrong. It's sinking to her level.
Mexicoman,
8% of infant mortality in Holland is result of euthanasia. Lancet said sometimes without consent of the parents.
Where's the fallacy?
I'm not questioning the accuracy of it, I'm just saying that it has nothing at all to do with James Meeks's run for governor, which is why I called it a non sequitir
Maybe Jill has better things to do like actually being an active instead of just posting about it like some.
As much as you all post, you must check this more than "average bear". Don't you all have jobs other than those in the Treasurer's office were you can campaign on state time?
Jeffrey Isbell said...
"Maybe Jill has better things to do like actually being an active instead of just posting about it like some.
As much as you all post, you must check this more than "average bear". Don't you all have jobs other than those in the Treasurer's office were you can campaign on state time?"
Nice grammar College Republican Boy! Spend a little time in class.
Argon said...
"Anon 2:57,
She may not be at all substantive, but calling her racist is just wrong. It's sinking to her level. "
Not really.
Stanek keeps insisting that African-Americans are too dumb to know what is good for them. She claims that they are blindly following, without thought. That seems to me to be a racist statement.
I am still wondering why she continues to post here. She recites the same tired drivel, and in ways that are offensive but not creative, witty, or even well researched. I respect Rich Miller, but I also suspect that if David Duke generated a lot of site hits, he would have a featured column.
Mexico Man,
Meeks's bid for Gorenor wouldn't exclude opposition to euthanasia too?
His opposition to abortion doesn't include opposition to euthanasia.
He doesn't believe abortion is just the first step towards what's happening in Netherlands today?
I'm not a close follower of him on this issue. I've only read him on schools. But I'm quite certain from what I've heard he would feel this way.
My only point in all of this is I hate to see all of these social issues get lumped together under social conservatieve. One can be passionately be opposed to abortion except in the most extreme circumstances, and be supportive of same sex marriage, or indifferent to it.
Being for one, doesn't mean you must for the other.
The morality of the life position strikes me as much deeper then that of gay marriage.
One is a question of about fundamentals of life; the other is a question of sexual ethics.
I wouldn't drum people out of my party if they didn't consistenly support all positions.
In fact, the big reason why anyone shouldn't be drummed out of the party was given by Scalia when he said Judges no better qualified to make moral decisions then anyone else.
It's exactly why Roe v Wade should be overturned and put to the voters / legislatures.
Unlike slavery, were the Republic could not be half-slave / half-free; both abortion and same-sex marriage can have shades. Voters need to draw the lines.
BB, I'm with MexicoMan (Lou Dobbs?) on this one.
Abortion has been legal here for more than three decades. If legalized abortion is the first step toward euthanizing babies, whatever movement is for that has done a crappy job of explaining, publicizing or advancing their cause.
I felt like that once too senor anon..
..Schiavo was a turning point for me.
I was referring to the people that post 6, 7, 8, 9+ times on this blog. There are not many parts of my statement that are grammatically incorrect. I do know that a sentence must include a noun and a verb, unless the noun (You) is implied. Therefore, by saying: "Nice grammar College Republican Boy! Spend a little time in class", apparently you need to spend more time back in school (assuming you ever went in the first place).
I understand that my grammar isn't always correct, that's the purpose of school. However, I do not criticize others on their grammar. This reminds me of the saying, "pot calling the kettle black". Should overweight people make fun of overweight people? Should people that make grammatical errors, criticize other people's grammar? Who needs to be perfect in grammar, apparently it is not a major necessity to do great things or be in great positions, afterall, let's look at President Bush.
I am assuming that an education consisting of grammar isn't a necessity in the treasurer's office.
Keep up the good work Jill!!
Hey Jeffrey, we do more than campaign on state time at the Treasurer's Office. We smoke indoors, drink beer, and have wild frat-like parties. With all these activities, we hardly have time to break the law by campaigning on state time...NOT.
BTW, nice try, but Cathy S. went to the US Attorney with that one and it was found to be unsubstantiated; and Jimbo Oberweis tried to rehash it during the campaign and... LOST.
Sad news for you- they obey the law at Judy's office.
I didn't know that they played Polka at frat parties!
My grammar has flaws, but many times I am posting on breaks between classes or late at night.
I want to apologize to everyone that I do not have the time, or money, to hire a professional editor to review all my posts.
I now understand that if I make a grammar error I should be flogged and beaten. After I receive my beating I should be banned from the blog! How dare a blogger make a grammar error! After all we all know if you make a grammar error then you must be wrong on your views on taxes and social issues! Please forgive us masters of the grammar world.
We will ignore that fact that some of the best journalist and writers need editors! Lets talk about content, not a few grammar errors.
Oberweis has done nothing but disrespect the ILGOP by holding them hostage every time he and his ego want to hold an office.
Isn't it tell that a man, who ran for senate and governor, would settle for a seat on the State Central Committee...a position that the voters don't have say on (but should).
What an ego on this man, it's sad and pathetic.
There is no shortage of people wanting and waiting to adopt American infants whose parents have chosen not to abort.
The children that are waiting to be adopted are those who are older, whose parents relinquished them a bit later, who weren't considering abortion anyways, and the children from overseas.
So, is he going to call his party the Family Tax Hike Party?
Jill, I've given my parents this scenario in the past:
Candidate A proposes that in order to solve the state's ills and keep funding at current levels across the board, we need a hike in the income tax to 5% from the current 3%. Candidate A is also opposed to all forms of abortion.
Candidate B proposed that we can cut state government in areas that are obsolete, using the savings to solve the states ills while eliminating deadwood from state government. Candidate B is also in favor of limited access to abortion: termination of pregnancy in first trimester, spousal/parental notification, in cases of rape or incest and if the mother's life is in danger.
You are telling me that you would side with Candidate A, just because of the abortion issue? Even though the governor of the state, at this current time, would have no bearing on the issue?
You are the reason why the Republican party in this state is viewed as being full of crackpots.
Newsflash: a socially conservative candidate in this state WILL NOT WIN. Stop.
Don't look to Fitzgerald. He was running against Mosley Braun. The Easter Bunny could have beaten Mosley Braun.
Conservative Prolitariate, et al: I cannot understand the statement that even though some Democrats are "angry democrats", they will vote for the Governor anyway because of party loyalty. Given the fiscal condition of state government (and the federal government also), I find partisanship to be foolhardy. Why not vote for the person, regardless of party, who best represents the majority of the citizens of the state. What a novel idea!
If the ship of state goes down, rats of all political persuasions will be on board and folks, the ship is sinking. We cannot afford the "initiatives" that our current governor is constantly proposing and it will only excalate in a second term as the dream of national office gets bigger and closer. His battle cry should be "Damn the torpedos, full steam ahead."
Ah, Diogenes, where are you and your lamp when we need you.
Anon,
I am not saying its a good thing, but the power of party loyality above all in this state is a real thing.
I am a solid republican, but I am not voting for Topinka. However, in the republican case there has been a growing divided among social conservatives and party hacks for some time.
Democrats are upset at Rod, but they just won the governorship for the first time in a long time and I think when they get in the polling booth they will vote (most of them) for Rod. The Democrats are not as divided (in Illinois) as the Republicans now are.
Democrats are mad about the way Rod runs the state, but the Republicans are running a candidate that social conservatives (I am also economic) don't feel like we could support even if we wanted to.
So I am voting for Stufflebeam (C), but the democrats don't have this option yet (maybe Meeks).
My prediction as of right now...Rod wins by a landslide over Judy, and Stufflebeam, as long as he gets on the ballet, suprises everyone with a strong showing.
Let's make sure stufflebeam has the chance by downloading his petitions, get signatures and get them turned in so that he get's on ballots to ensure that he has the chance to unseat Blagojevich and makes sure that Topinka doesn't get in office.
Post a Comment