Posted on 02/05/2009 8:00:24 AM PST by illinoisgop438
The leadership title holders of the Illinois Republican Party have done it again. They have found a new bottom in the wellspring of incompetence from which they drink: Paul Vallas for Cook County Board President.
"He'd be great for Republicans, great for Cook County, [with] impeccable credentials, substance and integrity." That is what House Republican Leader Tom Cross had to say about Paul Vallas to the Chicago Sun-Times.
My view of Paul Vallas as a Republican standard-bearer is a bit different as mine is rooted in Vallas' record. It goes something like this: Paul Vallas is a visionless, bean-counting hack in Hush Puppies whose singular claim to fame in Illinois is presiding over one of the worst public school systems in America as but another in a long line of Mayor Richard Daley's flunkies installed to maintain the status quo at the expense of the futures of hundreds of thousands of Chicago's young people.
Wait, I'm not finished.
For the Illinois GOP to champion Vallas as a Republican for any office is for the party to eschew system change where, as with Cook County government, it is needed most.
Street level drug dealers have destroyed fewer lives than the Chicago Public School system and Tom Cross thinks one of its former czars would make a good Republican candidate for high office?
Let's be clear, Paul Vallas is not converting to the Republican Party. Vallas is simply leveraging the party for the sake of his political expediency. Thanks to folks like Tom Cross, the Illinois GOP is such an empty vessel, so lacking a moral compass, that even a Chicago Democrat is welcomed on board to steer the party wherever they so choose.
Let's be clear about something else. There is a young, two-term State Senator from the suburbs named Matt Murphy who is interested in running for Cook County Board President. Matt Murphy was central to the recently concluded impeachment trial of Rod Blagojevich. Matt Murphy is a bright, articulate, credentialed Republican.
But, lest you worry, Tom Cross isn't going to fall into the trap of talking up a Republican. Matt Murphy's interest in stepping forward as part of a new generation of Republican leaders is rewarded with a shank in the back in order that the Illinois GOP may assist a failed educrat from the Daley Empire.
Brilliant.
If our country would have had leaders like Tom Cross around at the time of the Revolution, we would still be paying fealty to the King of England. Instead, we are in Illinois, paying fealty to the Chicago Nine. (Those are the nine Chicago Democrats who live within approximately five square miles of one another who control $70 billion worth of government and more than 125,000 public sector jobs in Illinois.)
Take heed Illinois Republicans, your leaders have spoken and their message is this: If you can't beat 'em, stop trying.
Paul Vallas will go the way of Ed Vrdolyak. Anyone remember him?
Vallas wouldn’t stand a chance in hell of upsetting Stroger Jnr. at the primary so he’ll use the relatively unused GOP side of the ballot.
I just about laughed at Andy McKenna being interviewed on WBBM radio last night.
I have to agree. I heard Mancow ask him about his changing to Republican and Vallas said he had always been kind of agnostic about party affiliation. I don’t know if that’s better than what he said yesterday — on some issues he’s more Democratic and on other issues he’s more Republican. The perfect Combine candidate. He said that Cook County needs an outsider —someone without connections to the machine and all it’s corruption— to come in a clean it up. In that case, Murphy would probably be the man, not Vallas.
*ping*
"Paul Vallas is NOT converting to the Republican Party. Vallas is simply leveraging the party for the sake of his political expediency."
That's the one thing some freepers don't understand. Their used to be a graphic posted here of Bill Clinton saying "Ya mean all I gotta do is put an R next to mah name and loads of freepers will support me? Golly! Where do I sign up?"
We need to distinguish between people who switch to the Republican for ideological reasons, and people who switch because it's political expedient for them to do so (in most cases because having an "R" next to their name is the only way they are likely to get on the ballot for the general election)
We should welcome former Democrats who join the GOP in good faith because they are no longer comfortable with the RAT agenda. This is especially true if voted their convictions for conservative items when they were in the RAT party, and that they butted heads with the RAT party leaders and were constantly under fire by their party and disliked/distrusted/hated by the rank and file Dems. In many cases such individuals were forced from the RAT party and far from "helping" their political ambitions, becoming a Republican actually makes it harder for them to win election (like Reagan converting in '62 followed by the RAT party landslide in California in '64). Examples include Ronald Reagan, Phil Gramm, Virgil Goode, and Norm Coleman (I don't count LIEberman since he was purged from the RAT over a single issue, and then went crawling back to them anyway and continues to caucus with the socialists as a so-called "independent")
However, we should shun those who casually toss an "R" next to their name on the ballot in a random election cycle solely because they stand little chance of winning the RAT nomination for the office due to a crowded primary field of bigger name Democrats in the race. This is especially true if they've always gotten along with the RAT Party leaders in the last, and spent their careers happily advancing RAT policies and RAT politicians without question. These people are NOT "becoming Republicans", they are using the GOP as a vehicle to get into a new office and will abandon any "loyalty" to the GOP at their earliest convenience. Examples include Michael Bloomberg, Arlen Specter, John N. Kennedy (the RAT state treasurer of Louisiana, not the former President), and now Daley stooge/Chicago Machine yes-man Paul Vallas.
Surprisingly, Norm Coleman has been condemned by some freepers for being a RAT over a decade ago (even though he was pro-life, pro-family, fiscal conservative who left the RAT party in good faith because he was hated by rank and file Dems), while John N. Kennedy, after years of dependable, loyal service to the RATs, tossed an R to his name a few months before last year's election and got a free pass on this forum. That's backwards to me. While the "moderate" center-left Kennedy was probably preferable to liberal Mary Laudrieu, he was certainly NO conservative and had no track record of every being one. A "hold your nose" choice in the general election, but under NO circumstances should a RINO get our votes in the primary. Amazing that so many freepers not only found him acceptable in the primary, but seemed gleeful at the thought of having a general election between two Democrats.
Will freepers make the same mistake with Vallas and "get behind" him in the primary, like our RINO leadership seems intent on doing -- simply because he's a "big name" candidate who is putting an "R" next to his name on the ballot?
Vallas is even worse than Kennedy. He did not run as a "moderate Democrat" when he opposed Blago in the RAT primary for Governor, he ran as a LIBERAL Democrat. He got where he is by being appointed by Daley. His office, Chicago Public Schools CEO, is notoriously once of the poorest run political institutions in the nation. He and Arne Duncan have nothing to be proud of.
Granted, we don't have many good options here. Crook County has over 5 million people and I think we would be the 18th largest state in the nation or something if it were its own state. Like most urban areas it is overwhelmingly Dem and the lack of Republicans here directly led to the statewide downfall of the GOP. We're not going to get a Republican mayor of Chicago any time soon so the only option is County Board Chairman Vallas, if elected "Republican" Chairman (technically Cook County Board President, as the county leader has far more powers than the chairs of other countries), would be Chicago's version of NY's Bloomberg and LA's Riordan.
The other choice is running the McCain-like Tony Percica again (being that he's 70-80% conservative and is pro-life, pro-family, anti-tax-and-spend, etc., but he's also a huge backstabber who has made tons of conservative enemies along the way). At least Peracia is anti-combine, but the fact he helped Topinka win the nomination for Governor makes it hard for me to stomach him in the primary. Vallas vs. Pericia....ugh not a fun choice.
Then there's State Senator Matt Murphy. There's a good choice -- beat a RINO in the primary, one of the FEW Republicans to buck the trend and win election to an open senate seat in 2006 (granted, in one of the most Republican parts of Cook County), smart, charismatic, excellent track record, integrity. The problem is he'd face a huge uphill battle trying to get elected President of an overwhelmingly (70%+) RAT county, and running him for this office would end the possibility of running for State Treasurer in 2010, an office he'd probably win and be better suited for (an excellent suggestion from Phil Collins)
So I will never support RINO Paul Vallas in the primary, but I'm torn. I really fear we will never win Crook County. Last time around the Dems ran the worst candidate ever, Todd "Urkel" Stroger, and he still managed to get in via huge vote fraud and massive black turnout, even though Percia won about 15 out of 50 wards in Chicago (compared to Bush's 1 of out 50, and McCain's 0 out of 50). If we can't defeat a pathetic joke like Stroger, who can we beat?
I agree that we should welcome politicians who switch, from democrat to republican, if they agree with the principles of the republican party. About two months ago, Lake Co. Sheriff Mark Curran switched from Democrat to Republican. He said that he wants to enforce immigration laws and that he’s pro-gun rights and pro-life. He also said that, after then-Gov. Blagojevich was arrested, Curran didn’t want to belong to the governor’s party.
If you agree with me, that St. Sen. Murphy should run for state treasurer, please email him at senatormattmurphy@sbcglobal.net. He might not win, but that race would be a good way to increase his name recognition, in case he runs for Congress, in 2012 or ‘14. Because of the 2010 census, the legislature will redraw the district lines, in 2011, so no one knows the boundaries of his 2012 congressional district.
I’m also torn about whom I should support, in the county board president primary. I hope that a conservative county commissioner or former state legislator will run. I asked my county commissioner, Greg Goslin, to run, and he said that he’ll run for re-election.
“. Their used to be a graphic posted here of Bill Clinton saying “Ya mean all I gotta do is put an R next to mah name and loads of freepers will support me? Golly! Where do I sign up?””
LOL. I’d love to see that.
Paul. Vallas? Is pulling a Bloomberg? I is surprised.
I attended CPS during his reign (as you can tell from my above poor grammar) Would Cross ask a Jew to vote for Goebbels? Cross is a clown. Imagine Mark Kirk
He was the best rat in the 2002 primary for Governor at least in term of personality which is not saying much (Blago, Burris).
I’d rather take another shot at Stronger with a real Republican. Peraica if imperfect is a world better than Vallas.
2006 was a bad year. 2010 could potentially be a good year in Illinois that could grant the few extra % points needed to beat Urkel. If I were the rats I’d pass a law and move the election to Presidential years to eliminate even the scantest chance for a Republican victory.
I guess I’d vote for Vallas (or a potted plant) against Stronger in the so-called General Election if he were the nominee, but if he’s the only candidate in the primary I’m undervoting next March.
“John N. Kennedy (the RAT state treasurer of Louisiana, not the former President),”
A actual conservative LA party switcher in Rodney Alexander. I guess he found DC rats unpalatable.
“Imagine Mark Kirk”
What I was gonna say is imagine Kirk or Mike Castle as GOP House Minority leader. That’s what Cross is. It’s a joke to have him as leader.
I hope that St. Rep. Cross will run for a statewide office. If that happens, he’ll lose the primary to a conservative, and he won’t have any political job.
If he doesn’t run for re-election, in 2010, who should the house Republicans choose, to be their leader, in 2011? Who should run for Cross’ seat? I think that his district includes Plainfield, Shorewood, and western Joliet. I hope that area has a conservative county commissioner, township official, and/or mayor, who will run.
Renee Kosel the Assistant Leader is a conservative isn’t she? How about her.
Kosel isn’t as conservative as I am, but she’s okay. These are some of her latest interest group ratings: United Republican Fund, 90%; U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 89%; NRA, B; AFL-CIO, 17%; and Planned Parenthood, 0%.
Kosel is not really a reliable conservative, more of a squishy right-of-center candidate. She had a more consevative primary challenge in 2002 with Jill Stanek. I think Stanek lost because her campaign was pretty much a single issue pro-life focus though.
The IL RCC is corrupt to the very core.
It needs to be flushed out from top to bottom.
Period.
L
Oh I remember Stanek sure was nurse or something. Possibly I confused her and Kossel.
It seems they have several “assistant leaders”
The “deputy leader” and #2 is Bill Black who pulled an Elton Galleglly and ran again after initially retiring.
I agree with you, about the state party leaders. Before the 2008 primary, the majority of Illinois Republicans should have known that they shouldn’t support Dr. Sauerberg because the IL GOP has a record of supporting the wrong candidates. Before the 2006 governor election, many party leaders endorsed then-Treasurer Topinka. She won the primary, and, in the general election, she won about 38% of the vote. In 2004, after Jack Ryan resigned from the U.S. Senate race, the IL GOP State Central Committee chose Alan Keyes, to be the nominee. In the general election, he received 27%. Before the 2002 U.S. Senate primary, many party leaders endorsed St. Rep. Durkin. He won the primary, and, in the general election, he received 38%. In Dec. 2007, as soon as IL GOP Chairman McKenna and the State Central Committee endorsed Dr. Sauerberg, all republican primary voters should have known that they should support a different candidate.
I agree that IL GOP needs to be improved. We should ensure that, in the 2010 primaries, only conservatives are elected to be republican committeemen. If that happens, they’ll elect conservatives to the IL GOP State Central Committee.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt.
I hope that means that you agree with me.
In which congressional district do you live? Who should run for the IL GOP SCC, in your district? I live in the 10th Dist. In 2006, that district had three candidates, two conservatives, Ray True and Ruth O’Connell, and a RINO, Tolbert Chisum. The conservative vote split, helping the RINO win. I hope that, in 2010, only one conservative will run, in that race, but I don’t know of anyone who should run.
Served 3 terms as a Committeeman in Bloomingdale Township back in the day. The only thing in IL uglier than Dem corruption up close is Repub corruption up close.
We're supposed to be the good guys, dammit.
L
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.