Video: Illinois GOP ad for a special election
posted at 7:55 am on December 15, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Republicans in Illinois have not had much impact on state politics, but the Rob Blagojevich arrest has given them a rally point. Their new ad demands a special election and tells Illinois voters that they deserve no less — and no more corrupt power plays:
Rod Blagojevich embarrassed Illinois. He tried to sell our Senate Seat. And now Blagojevich’s Lt. Governor, Pat Quinn, wants to hand pick our Senator, going back on his word.
The people of Illinois deserve better than another political power grab. You deserve to be heard. You deserve a special election.
Leaders, major newspapers and watch dog groups – agree: it’s time for a special election. Give the “people’s seat” back to Illinois. Call your legislator. Tell them we want a special election.
Actually, the “people’s seat” originally meant the House, not the Senate. Originally, the Constitution called for state legislatures to select two Senators for each state to represent them in DC. Not until the 17th Amendment passed in 1913 did that change to a popular vote.
That would give the expected effort in the legislature to call for a special election a small portion of historical irony. Can the legislature act quickly enough to make it happen? Blagojevich still has the plenary power to appoint someone to fill Barack Obama’s empty seat, and if he resigns, Quinn would immediately have that power and likely would exercise it quickly. If either do, the Illinois GOP may find themselves a lot more relevant as angry Illinois voters will once again look to clean house in Springfield.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
If anyone is appointed at this time, and I mean anyone. You could appoint Saint Jerome and the newspaper editorials would at first make vague reference to and then open reference to the questions surrounding his appointment.
The Democrats have one hope, and that’s a special election, unless they want to be painted with the brush of the culture of corruption that they swing left and right so well.
Snake307 on December 15, 2008 at 8:06 AM
Illinois law says the Governor will select a replacement. So be it. He hasn’t been convicted of anything. Why don’t we agree to follow the law this time?
tgillian on December 15, 2008 at 8:21 AM
I don’t know, Democrats could be strangling puppies in the street, grabbing candy from toddlers and peeping through the stained glass windows at the convent and the morons who vote for them devotedly would probably still keep voting for them in blighted areas like Illinois and New Jersey.
The same poor losers who voted Democrat at 18 grow to be 78 and are still poor losers who vote Democrat.
NoDonkey on December 15, 2008 at 8:24 AM
I agree. The law is the law. We are not a country of emotions and whims. I hope the governor appoints himself. They deserve it.
Marcus on December 15, 2008 at 8:27 AM
It doesn’t really matter because Obama is just the victim in all of this.
BigD on December 15, 2008 at 8:30 AM
if the gov or lt. gov appoints, how long before the next election for that US Senate seat?
kelley in virginia on December 15, 2008 at 8:34 AM
It’s about time that the democrats cross the isle, and say no to party partisanship. Appoint Tom Ryan to Obamas vacated seat.
Tommy_G on December 15, 2008 at 8:35 AM
Obama was elected to the Senate in 2004, there are two years left to his term.
Tommy_G on December 15, 2008 at 8:39 AM
tgillian on December 15, 2008 at 8:21 AM
The Governor will likely “resign” today, as he has lawyered up and has probably been schooled by his legal team in the laws that govern our nation as well as Chicago laws that govern life and death when you get in the way of the mob.
The American tax payer deserves the truth, as well as the opportunity to digest the truth and make future decisions based on factual evidence rather than spin, lies, and fabrications. When an American company such as Walmart is denied the right to open up an outlet in a city (Chicago), something is horribly wrong with those who allowed such thuggery to enforce such acts against honest businesses that decided not to play by the mob rule, but rather to play by the American laws. When a city can say “you are not a unionized store, therefore we will not allow you to operate your business within our city limits”, that city has DIRT-SCUM written all over it!
Keemo on December 15, 2008 at 8:39 AM
BTW folks, it’s minus 29 degrees at my home here in Montana right now. Record low temperatures across the state. I just can’t tell you all how badly this Global Warming is effecting our ability to work-live here in this region. To make matters even more comical, I open up Drudge to see a headline reading “AP going nuts over how Global Warming is causing Global Cooling”….
Crazy lil Liberals…
Keemo on December 15, 2008 at 8:50 AM
Wasn’t everyone here extolling the virtues of gubernatorial appointment back when it looked like Stevens was gonna lose his seat? I distinctly remember people here insisting the crook continue running so that Palin could appoint a successor.
ernesto on December 15, 2008 at 8:57 AM
The governor is going to be dragged out of his office kicking and screaming and his wife will likely stay behind to take all the office supplies. Dude isn’t going anywhere. He’ll probably be able to collect three or four months of his salary and he sorely needs the money.
Illinidiva on December 15, 2008 at 9:02 AM
If I am not mistaken the law also probably says the Governor should not attempt to realize personal gain from the selection of the Senate seat replacement.
In that light this pending replacement is tainted. It should be returned to the people to make the selection and remove that taint.
Yoop on December 15, 2008 at 9:03 AM
Actually Alaska has a special election law for Senate seats because of the Lisa Murkowski situation. Quite a few people were hoping that Stevens would pull it out because he would likely either resign or be kicked out of the Senate and it would go straight to a special election which Palin or whoever she backed would win. Now it is held by a Dem. for six years who will vote party line for laws which most Hot Air readers who aren’t DUmmie trolls are against.
Illinidiva on December 15, 2008 at 9:05 AM
Illinidiva on December 15, 2008 at 9:02 AM
The dude will leave office soon, only question is will he have all of his body parts in tact. The dude may think he has the power of information that will hold back the thugs, but as they say in places like Chicago, silence is golden.
Keemo on December 15, 2008 at 9:09 AM
Oh, then i stand corrected. Here’s to hoping NY comes up with a special election law before stevie wonder over here appoints that butch former president of the teachers union to our damn seat. ::shivers::
ernesto on December 15, 2008 at 9:10 AM
Unfortunately, i won’t be near the computer or tv all day & may miss all the fun.
kelley in virginia on December 15, 2008 at 9:14 AM
More on the subject…
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-blago-main-15-dec15,0,663416.story
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/chi-kass-blago-14-dec14,0,2487119.column
Keemo on December 15, 2008 at 9:15 AM
I love this lil piece…
As everybody knows by now, Dead Meat was caught on federal tape, allegedly trying to sell President-elect Barack Obama’s Senate seat to the highest bidder. So Dead Meat was declared insane.
They pointed to those f-bombs on the federal tape and that crazy hair of his. The other paper in town even ran a hair “expose” on its Page 2, saying the governor’s ample hair helmet proved he was mentally unstable.
But that same day, I diagnosed Blagojevich as quite sane, because all he did was act like just another corrupt Chicago politician. He squeezed people. That’s how things are done in the city that is not Camelot.
Keemo on December 15, 2008 at 9:17 AM
Chicago is corrupt, but it is more subtle than that…
Illinidiva on December 15, 2008 at 9:20 AM
Forty rats, Forty cats, Forty dirty Democrats!
Sorry, saw it, read it, laughed it!
Coastal Paradise on December 15, 2008 at 9:31 AM
You are joking right?
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 9:32 AM
All joking aside… Republican votes rarely count in Illinois, anyway. There are way too many dead people voting on the Democrat ticket. I only vote so I have a right to complain, not because my vote will make any difference.
BoomJunkie on December 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM
As I’ve mentioned-I’m a Chicago Conservative.
I’ve discussed this issue with others in the area…and almost to person they want a special election.
Even the dems are tired of “business as usual”.
annoyinglittletwerp on December 15, 2008 at 9:36 AM
I’m afraid this ad simply crosses the line, my friends.
/maverick
Cuffy Meigs on December 15, 2008 at 9:37 AM
I find this a little ironic…
The driver for the change was a bribery scandal where the senator bough the senate seat from the state legislators.
Anybody want to guess where?
You got it.
CHICAGO.
Nice.
Marine_Bio on December 15, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Why, ernesto, what an interesting parallel you draw.
In Alaska, a senator is convicted for corruption, and you remember some people here, in the the throes of hypocrisy, wanting the corrupt senator to resign so that the governor of Alaska, who is not corrupt, could choose his replacement. (Yes, the actual laws are different, but let’s play along anyway.)
So you see the Illinois situation as being comparable enough that you’d expect people here to reach the same conclusion that they did about Alaska?
So, you think that the Illinois senator that occupied the seat that the Illinois governor was selling had vacated that seat because he was found guilty of corruption? Maybe you haven’t been following the political situation and don’t realize that the Illinois senator wasn’t himself convicted for corruption; rather it’s the Illinois governor that’s the bad actor here.
So, is this a dishonest attempt to draw comparisons where none exist, or,
Is this an example of the actual fuzziness of your thinking, or,
Is this a very revealing slip of how you actually view the ex-senator from Illinois?
ral514 on December 15, 2008 at 9:42 AM
Not at all. He deserves his day in court. The media are jumping all over him – that should be reason enough to let it play out. It’s not like he killed somebody.
tgillian on December 15, 2008 at 9:51 AM
The only person who doesn’t want a special election is Harry Reid, because he knows that there is a good chance the Republicans would win. I’m sure Durbin is now in the doghouse because he opened his big mouth regarding the special election. This is the second time in December that Durbin has given the IL Republicans a nice fast ball down the middle.
Illinidiva on December 15, 2008 at 9:54 AM
You’re right about what should be the logical and legal decision. However, didn’t Blagojevich go into office on the heels of a corrupt governor, who is currently in jail? From that perspective, I can understand why Illinois residents would want a special election instead of leaving it to the same old process.
I think the state lawmakers have a real situation on their hands, and will need to look seriously at changing the law to set up special elections in the event of a vacant seat. Instead of a 1 time exception for this case.
Marine_Bio on December 15, 2008 at 10:01 AM
So, if a Senator who is the cmte chair to an intelligence cmte. was caught selling secrets to Russia, you would still think that he should still carry on his work, even appoint an associate to carry on his “work”?
If a man is ahead of a preschool, and he and his ring of “teachers” were found sexually abusing children, you think he should be able to appoint his successor?
That is where you make your error…you think selling a senate seat is just dandy, not a major event.
You have been conditioned to accept something that is tantamount to treason…you don’t wait for the act to take place to take action.
He not only broke the law, but in such a way that throws suspicion on the most valuable of our rights…the right to have proper, constitutional representation.
He has tainted the process with his actions, nothing he does now can be considered valid…he will have his day in court…meanwhile he needs to step aside, his supporters need to step aside, and let the people decide what to do.
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 10:04 AM
The new standard, ladies and gentlemen. Well, for Democrats, anyway.
Jim Treacher on December 15, 2008 at 10:10 AM
It certainly wasn’t the standard for Teddy boy in Chappaquiddick. When did this new standardization process take place?
Marine_Bio on December 15, 2008 at 10:16 AM
Sure, that was before Senator Al Franken changed the entire concept of the kind of man a senator ought to be.
Slouching towards Gomorrah.
jeff_from_mpls on December 15, 2008 at 10:30 AM
Don’t try to modify my words – I said nothing about spys and sexual abuse. I’m just not sure a crime was committed. What’s wrong with waiting to see what really happened. I’m not so inclined to believe all I hear or read. I made no error.
tgillian on December 15, 2008 at 10:30 AM
I’m still fuming over the rotten HA comments on another thread about Iraqis being anthropologically or mentally not fit for democracy.
We’d better take a good, hard look at ourselves, because this Blago episode suggests that this whole democracy concept can turn into a farce right here in the USA. Compound this with the recent financial meltdowns, the accounting felonies in the early 2000s, and now this massive Madoff fraud, and one could in all seriousness suggest that a hedonist-utilitarian, amoral people like us is unfit for liberty. Without a Judeo-Christian foundation, and a more profound standard of morality than “that which gives the most pleasure to the most people,” I fear we are in our waning days.
Yeah, I went there. Uh huh.
jeff_from_mpls on December 15, 2008 at 10:37 AM
jeff_from_mpls on December 15, 2008 at 10:37 AM
BRAVO!!!!
Let’s all come clean here. American’s had better be look-n within right about now. Some serious soul searching is in order. What have we allowed ourselves to become?
Keemo on December 15, 2008 at 10:55 AM
It is called an “analogy”…now read them again and state to me what actions you would take in the two “analogies”.
Now would you remove the senator on the cmte or let him continue until the courts finished? And would you allow the perp to continue until the courts finished?
Don’t dodge the analogy, what would you do in each case?
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 11:24 AM
Just one thing to add to your rant:
The courts have to get serious about convicting “white collar” crime.
If I received stolen property, I would have to return it, whether I knew about it or not…so everyone that has received money from this Madoff criminal, should return every bit of the money…starting with everyone in his family. Every bit is returned until everyone of their bank accounts are drained, every asset is retrieved, everything.
And the same with Blankface, every sing penny he has received, should be returned, the citizens who voted for him, and gave him money, was under the premise that he was going to honor his oath.
The courts (but they won’t) need to start making a statement that “white collar” crime steals money, which is time…so every “time” stolen needs to be returned or he faces the jail.
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 11:30 AM
No reason to answer, neither analogy fits this situation. I might remind you of the McMartin Playschool case, but your mind is already made up. Screw the facts, screw the law, just hang ‘im.
Why don’t you tell me the laws that he broke and proof?
tgillian on December 15, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Mocking blind people is really the lowest of the low.
Grow the F#ck up or go back to Koz, you heartless bastard!
omnipotent on December 15, 2008 at 11:50 AM
Now be honest with yourself, it is an analogy…let’s try one that is closer to what is happening.
A bank president is accused of funneling large amount of money to an investment firm, and in his contract he appoints his successor, the successor he chooses (after being accused) is ahead of the investment firm…he is accused but not convicted, as a stock holder do you want him to appoint the successor?
You see where the “law” can’t always be so cut and dried…when the process is corrupt, then new laws have to be created.
Now do you understand why there has to be an election?…the system is corrupted.
The answer is in your answer to my analogy…
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 11:55 AM
You don’t have to be convicted of a crime in court to have you retained.
Do you think if you tried to rob a bank, and were caught they would let you walk around until you go to court?
This is more then some “rumor” this is a federal investigation with tapes of conversations…once again, is this who you want making decisions for you? You are comfortable with him running your government?
If it was a babysitter “accused of molesting children” you would still hire that babysitter until he/she was convicted?
See where your process begins to break down when you are personally affected?
But you wont’ honestly answer…you would have to change your mind.
Politicians have to be held to a higher standard…that is their responsibility, to be above all reproach.
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 12:00 PM
Now we have a bank president, bank robber and baby sitter; I’m afraid you’re rambling.
I’ve got one for you – a priest, a rabbi and a minister……
Seriously though, all I’m saying is that you and the media have him tried and convicted. I’m not buying.
tgillian on December 15, 2008 at 12:16 PM
Okay, now you are being dishonest, I asked you in good faith what would you do in three different cases…just tell be what you would do, it isn’t that difficult.
The reason you don’t want to answer, is that you know you would take action with all three.
You would not allow the senator to have any access,nor one of his partisan picks to have access to sensitive materials.
The way you answered the school perp, I don’t know, you may have a soft spot for that.
The bank president, you would not want to have our money tainted or have his “investment” buddy.
So when it gets to your personal life, you would change the rules, but when it gets to some “ambiguous” poltiticia…it’s okay.
I never said it was guilty, but do you think he is above reproach now?
Do you think he should be held to a higher standard?
My “rambling” is your way of dodging a serious problem…do you allow an accused (from the feds with tapes) the same rights as those not accused?
If you think “innocent until proven guilty” means the same rights as someone not accused, you are naive.
If you are accused of a crime of embezzlement (and I know you don’t like analogies, you don’t understand them), I guarantee the bank won’t let you continue working, or making decisions until they find out the “truth”.
Do you understand that analogy?
So why should be allow a politician more rights?
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Please, I was desperately trying to get you to honestly answer…I was trying to get a point across that you could simple understand, I think most everyone on this site has enough intelligence to see the point I was making.
Sorry I offended you, I will try to post my answers to you a little more simply worded…they seem to have you confused.
Let’s start with a simple question:
Do you think elected politicians (leaders) should be held to a higher standard in our society?
You should be able to answer that…
Then I have a follow up question (whatever the answer)…that way we will keep the thoughts simple and one at a time for you.
right2bright on December 15, 2008 at 12:47 PM
Why even bother holding a ‘Special election’ the Acorn folks will make sure a Democrat gets the seat anyway…or if for some reason a Republican would win, they would just steal it ala Al Franken.
BiasedGirl on December 16, 2008 at 10:28 AM
Comment pages: