Pro-Roskam Slime Machine Starts Up In 6th - Target Democrat Jill Morgenthaler

by: WurfWhile

Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 21:27:50 PM CDT


(Edit by Wegerje: Archpundit has a jpg of the mailer here.)


Congressman Peter Roskam's supporters must fear Democratic Candidate Col. Jill Morgenthaler, because they just mailed a hit piece against her purporting to be from a group called the "Patriotic Democrats of DuPage."  The piece is designed to look like it supports Jill - but then makes accusations designed to attack her and hurt her standing with Democrats.

[Heading of attack piece on Jill Morgenthaler supposedly by a group calling itself the "Patriotic Democrats of DuPage"]
WurfWhile :: Pro-Roskam Slime Machine Starts Up In 6th - Target Democrat Jill Morgenthaler
Illinois Reason detailed just the other day what to expect in the 6th Congressional race from pro-Roskam Republican forces:

"Given the throw-all-the-bullcrap-they-can-and-see-what-sticks m.o. the Republicans had in the 6th district last year in trying to not just defeat but literally smear and stain Major Tammy Duckworth, here are just a few of the despicable tactics that Colonel Morgenthaler can expect:

  * The NRCC and/or other allied groups like a 527 or PAC may toss out a slew of annoying, subversive and downright misleading robocalls which seem designed mostly to sour voters and turn them off from the process rather than actually inform anyone of anything substantive
  * Rather than considering a candidate who is a veteran, the VFW may rely on Republican backroom suggestions instead of actual service records while endorsing her opponent who has zero military experience
  * The Repubs will photoshop pictures of the Colonel to make her look ominous and scarey. Boo!
  * The Illinois GOP will use the memory of 9/11 for political hackery and imply that the Colonel is somehow best buds with that guy that Pres. Bush let escape Osama bin Forgotten
  * Her home phone number will be given out by conserv-o-partisan hacks. No word on whether they'll also encourage their lemmings to breathe heavy on the other end
  * And, if none of those dirty tricks work, the cons may just flat-out lie and lie again … and then your Republican opponent will demean your service and sacrifice to our great nation"

Sounds like this is par for the course.  Tell your Democratic, Independent and Republican friends that this is a hit piece - don't let pro-Roskam Republicans define this campaign through slime.  The fact that they're already attacking Jill Morgenthaler speaks well of her - they fear Jill - and they're afraid to challenge her on the merits of the issues.
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Pro-Roskam Slime Machine Starts Up In 6th - Target Democrat Jill Morgenthaler | 49 comments
yea I got the mailer today. (0.00 / 0)
I think it is a hit piece but the part about Rahm recruited is a little to subtile for the local GOP in my opinion either that or a greater understanding of what pisses off local democrats than I give them credit for.  Also it is addressed to my short first name not my full name as listed on voter regristration documents.  I think this came from someone I gave my name to not churned from voter lists.  In my opinion.
"Patriotic" is a word (0.00 / 0)
used by the Right, but much less so by the Left.

If Democrats were picking the name, I'd expect something more like, "Democrats for Responsible Foreign Policy" or "Democrats Against War Now".

[ Parent ]
Those would be good names... (0.00 / 0)
...for Democratic groups that actually advocated a responsible foreign policy.

These people — if they're Democrats at all, which remains to be seen — are Democrats who want the party to adopt the same wingnut foreign policies of the Republicans, much in the same way the so-called Democrats for Life wants the party to be open to wingnut positions on abortion.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

[ Parent ]
Roskam and Rahm (4.00 / 2)
From the Chicago Tribune (second to last paragraph on page):

"In the general election campaign, Roskam cast Duckworth as a puppet of Emanuel. 'My opponent, in her name-calling, has called me a rubber stamp,' Roskam said during one debate. 'But I challenge my opponent to come up with one issue on which she differs from Congressman Rahm Emanuel.'"

The 'Rahm recruitment issue' is not only well-known in the district, but was a talking point for Roskam.  Whoever did this was trying to split Democrats in their support of the likely nominee - Rahm they knew was a good way to do it.

Its a question that must be asked (0.00 / 0)
Given Rahm's fetish for mucking around with contested Democratic primaries, we need to determine if this is just another of his attempts to push his hand-picked candidate onto IL-06.

And, like most of you, I am quite anxious to find out the Colonel's political positions.  If election day 2008 presents me with a choice between Roskam and a Melissa-Bean-Republican-lite, my decision to stay home that day will be a foregone conclusion.

[ Parent ]
moot point (0.00 / 0)
Rahm Emanuel hasn't been chair of the DCCC since Chris Van Hollen (Maryland) succeeded him in the position last December.  So, it isn't even Emanuel's job to recruit congressional candidates this time around.
[ Parent ]
It wasn't his job to recruit candidates to oppose (4.00 / 3)
progressives when he WAS with the DCCC, so why should things be different?  Despite the hefty losses from Emanuel supported candidates in 2006, he is still in a position of unwarranted influence.
[ Parent ]
In fact (0.00 / 0)
Among the responsibilities of the DCCC chair is recruiting the best candidates to win congressional seats, and Tammy Duckworth came closer to winning in the 6th than any Democrat ever has, so far.  Meanwhile, you'll recall that we flipped the House in our favor last year.
[ Parent ]
Interesting though (4.00 / 2)
none of those flips came in Illinois.  In Illinois, we didn't turn any districts blue: blue districts remained Democratic, red districts remained Republicans, and incumbents held on to their seats no matter what party they were in.  Hmmm.

A lot of work to turn the 6th District blue had been put in by Cegelis supporters for years before Duckworth had even thought about entering politics.  So I'm not sure how much of the credit goes to Duckworth herself or to the work Cegelis had done since 2004 to draw Democrats together in DuPage and let people know it was OK to vote Democratic.  I suspect though that there was some combination of laying the groundwork and then Duckworth being able to capitalize on some of that groundwork (of course, some she ignored) and push it forward to the next step.

[ Parent ]
Everywhere but Illinois (4.00 / 1)
and not in IL-6, in particular.
[ Parent ]
DCCC (0.00 / 0)
I am not saying that Rahm Emanuel deserves anymore particular credit than DNC chair Howard Dean, for example.  But the chair of the DCCC is responsible for recruiting viable candidates in every US district, not just IL-06.

And how many Cegelis supporters stayed home and undid alot of the work we had done (I worked and voted for Cegelis in 04, too) just to spite the Duckworth campaign and the mythical machinations of Rahm Emanuel?  I know some.  And if you all know any more, then it isn't hard to understand how to lose a close race, which it certainly was.

[ Parent ]
Ya maybe (4.00 / 3)
But I'd still like to turn back time and see what a Democrat like Christine would have done with that kind of support and over $1 million dollars.

And how many Rahm picks flipped their district? How many progressives that won their primaries flipped their districts?

In the evironment of 2006, with that kind of support, as the featured race in IL, comming close is not much to brag about. Duckworth should have won easily. Rahm's involvement in the race and unprecidented support in the primary messed that up.

[ Parent ]
Actually Rahm votes pretty progressively (2.50 / 2)
At least by the Progressive Punch standards. He's between Danny Davis and Bobby Rush in Illinois. I don't suppose it would do much good to ask how Roskam might vote differently than Hastert. But maybe we could ask how Roskam differs on issues from Alan Keyes.

Jeff Wegerson
[ Parent ]
Emanuel knows how to game those ratings. (4.00 / 1)
For example, he reportedly convinced Bean to cast the deciding vote in favor of CAFTA. Then he voted against it knowing it was going to pass anyway.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the edit Jeff - I was editing too and yours nuked mine (0.00 / 0)
I updated with what you updated - and also mentioned it was a cross-post.  Thanks for the good thought with the addition though - I should have had it earlier.

Oops. Sorry about that. (0.00 / 0)
I guess I was keeping all my options on the table. (as in nuked ;-)

Jeff Wegerson
[ Parent ]
So... (4.00 / 1)
...maybe it would be a good idea to go through what's claimed in the mailer and list what in the mailer is false or misleading.

Was Morganthaler in fact recruited by Emanuel? Does she favor attacks against Iran and Syria? Did she make the quotes listed at the bottom of the letter, and were any of them taken out of context in a way that would alter their meaning?

Just saying it's a Republican hit piece doesn't refute it.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

I'm seeing some thinking elsewhere (0.00 / 0)
that suggests maybe some anti-war outfit is responsible. Sort of a wonderment out loud. Or maybe it is the Republicans bent on sowing seeds descent within the Democratic alliance.

But your questions are important. Even if she was "recruited" by Rahm, I bet he flies his fingerprints under the radar. (Ok mixed metaphor but you know what I mean.) And this time around I don't even care if Rahm is involved. The bad faith act last time was not the recruitment of Duckworth but the non-support of an existing candidate and local movement of Cegelis.

But Iran and Syria? Big questions in my book as well. I sure hope she's with the wing of the military that is able to recognize that Iraq was an unnecessary war that has devastated the military. Like generals Clark and Odom.

Jeff Wegerson

[ Parent ]
A lot of her talking points (4.00 / 1)
in that mailer are culled from what she wrote while she was deployed in Iraq in her role as spokesperson. That likely had much to do with her writing.
[ Parent ]
The stuff on that site is OLD (0.00 / 0)
from 2004
[ Parent ]
She's no longer deployed in Iraq (0.00 / 0)
In fact, I believe she retired from the military (though I may be wrong).
[ Parent ]
She's been working for the state of IL (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
I very much doubt... (0.00 / 0)
...that it was an anti-war outfit. Such groups are rarely deceptive in this way, and in this case what reason is there for it? If they wanted to try to scuttle Morganthaler's candadicy they could just list the allegations in the letter (assuming it's true) as reasons why people shouldn't support her. That would have the added effect of building publicity for their group, which the phony front group would not.

Peace groups also generally don't have a lot of money to throw around on mailings, and the more extreme ones tend to see the Democratic Party as a complete waste anyway.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

[ Parent ]
I would hope that Rahm WOULD recruit (0.00 / 0)
a candidate this time around, given that the DCCC left the District in such sorry shape after the last go-round.  It would be shameful if he just came in when the pickings were "hot" and left it when it became a fight against an incumbent ... so I tend to think that drumming up a candidate that can generate some interest is a good thing.


[ Parent ]
Political opportunity (0.00 / 0)
I'd be surprised if he didn't too. The GOP is vulnerable, Roskam is joined to Bush at the hip. And at the very least, this race will suck GOP money out of other races.

Just because he recruited her, doesn't necessarily mean she's a bad candidate. Her positions and where she stands on the issues, especially statements she made while PR flacking for the military are more important.

But then again, having a background and experience in PR, she's going to say the right things regardless.

[ Parent ]
The "Source"? (0.00 / 0)
Could it mean something that there isn't even any such organization as the Patriotic Democrats of DuPage?
[ Parent ]
Do we know for sure there isn't? (0.00 / 0)
Not all organizations are officially incorporated. If some Democrats in DuPage get together and decide to call themselves this, then you could say that there is such an organization, at least in some sense.

I do think it means something that the letter didn't include any contact address for the group. If you were starting such a group, wouldn't you want people to know how they could join up? The timing is also interesting. Most people only knew about Morgenthaler's candidacy as of last weekend, and given that, it seems like they got their letter written and mailed awfully quickly.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

[ Parent ]
It almost reminds one of those groups (3.00 / 1)
that pop up in Iraq or elsewhere that claim credit for some terrorist attack or other.

Jeff Wegerson
[ Parent ]
Campaign finance (4.00 / 1)
If this was mailed out, where does it fall on the FEC regulations regarding political advocacy? Is there an address or any records? Can any group drop lit like this?

I couldn't find anything via Google on this group. I'd bet its a "Swift Boat" type group. It really smacks of an effort to divide the Democratic base. Whether or not the claims are accurate, it smacks of political deception being used as a wedge, especially given the timing.

[ Parent ]
If I have to read... (0.00 / 0)
...another word about Rahm Emanuel and how awful it would be if he had "hand picked" Jill Morgenthaler, I think I just might puke all over my computer screen.

Do some of you have that short of a memory? Do you not recall lamenting the lack of a credible candidate in IL-06 as recently as a week ago?

Folks, it's not as if people have been coming out of the woodwork to run against Creepy Pete. And when someone does who looks to be at least halfway credible, so many of you waste no time at all starting a bitchfest. I'm really tired of it.

I don't know where that mailer came from (I didn't get one), but I do know that it's serving it's intended purpose. Divide and conquer. Ya'll are buying right into it.

If you decide that Jill Morgenthaler isn't someone you can get excited about, fine. Hand a vote to Roskam and stay home if it makes you feel better.

But do the rest of us who want to show Creepy Pete the door a favor. Channel your energy towards candidates that interest you and leave IL-06 alone. We don't need any more divisive crap here.

All this from someone who hasn't even met Col. Morgenthaler yet, lol.

If you can see something (4.00 / 2)
that makes her look even half-way credible, then you've seen something the rest of us don't seem to have.

I'm not saying she isn't credible, I'm saying that so far we have no way to judge whether she is or not.

[ Parent ]
disagree (0.00 / 0)
I don't think people are buying into it. I think everyone posting here sees it as something deceptive that is doubtful would be put out by any Democratic group - especially one that doesn't exist.

However questions do remain given Google searches on where she stands on Iraq. There is nothing wrong with questioning that, unless you are arguing "fall in line." That argument didn't hold water last time and is going to fall even shorter given the history here.

Basically she looks to be a very credible candidate that we don't know much about. A challenge to Roskam is wonderful however. I hate to make the "perfect the enemy of the good" argument in this one, but to many Iraq and continuation in any form of Bush's foreign policy is going to be a deal breaker. Asking questions and challenging our own candidates is not divisive crap. It's called the Democratic process. So don't try to shut down dissent. No one is going to go post negative on her. They are just asking questions that I'm sure will get answered in a short amount of time.

That said, I think everyone should just wait until Mergenthaler has a campaign website and can put out some policy statements. I'm kind of shocked she didn't roll out with a website.

[ Parent ]
So even if she is for the war (0.00 / 0)
So is Roskam.  Isn't it better to have more Democrats in the house than Republicans.  At least we control the agenda?

I got this argument last time.  In IL-13 we had a pro-choice Republican against a anti-choice Democrat.  A lot of people told me they either couldn't vote for the Democrat because of that position or they were going to vote for the Republican!  It almost blew my mind.  That choice might have been enough to get her back into the house and allowing her party to bring anti-choice legislation to the floor.

I've said it before, first get rid of the Republicans THEN get rid of the DINOs. 

The Democrats are far more likely to listen to us than a Republican.  And if you are not an elected member of the Democratic Party, why not?  You can't change it from the outside!

[ Parent ]
I disagree (0.00 / 0)
I disagree with you that we shouldn't be active in primaries in order to run the best Democratic candidate. Especially in safe Democratic districts like IL-03.

If there are more than one equally credible Dem candidates running, I think it makes complete sense to pick whom to support based upon very specific issues. But I also think it makes a lot of sense to base your support on a candidate's ability to put together a strong campaign. Issues don't matter if someone doesn't get elected. I'll take a candidate that I don't agree with 100% but who I think can win over someone who can't any day.

[ Parent ]
If that's the case... (0.00 / 0)
...then have I got a candidate for you! You won't agree with him 100%, but you can't deny that he's a proven winner.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone
[ Parent ]
Whatever, Gary. (0.00 / 0)
What the hell is the point of supporting someone's bid for office if there's not a chance in hell they will be able to win and actually make positive changes?

Let me guess...

"It's supporting PROGRESSIVE candidates that matters!"

With no conceivable end to actually accomplish anything...

I would venture to say that supporting "progressive" candidates that are not credible actually hurts your cause.

[ Parent ]
Tell me why you think he has no chance. (0.00 / 0)
You keep asserting he's un-credible but have yet to give us any, er, credible argument to prove it.

I say he has a chance of winning. It isn't likely, but it certainly isn't impossible.

So my way, I have a small chance of gaining something. Your way, you have (maybe) a bigger chance, but even if you win you gain little or nothing because your candidate isn't going to stand up for positive change. Seems like a no-brainer to me.

And yeah, what matters is supporting candidates who will actually make a positive difference if elected. It does us no good to elect Democrats if once they get into office they support the same policies that the Republicans do.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

[ Parent ]
No (0.00 / 0)
We should just elect Republicans by putting up people who aren't willing to do what it takes to win? I guess we're just going to have to disagree, Gary. I think it's a complete waste of time and resources to back someone who very obviously will not win. You think it's worth it to back someone who has a very slim chance while I would rather focus my efforts of races that actually look competitive. Personal preferences, I suppose.

I'm going to that meeting with Jill Morgenthaler tomorrow. If I determine that she's not someone I can get excited about, I won't be going out of my way to do anything for her. It's just that simple. I have plenty of other options to get involved, not least of all for my day job.

Also, I am not even sure that I can get involved in Jill's campaign because of work. Her connection to Blago might be a dealbreaker.

[ Parent ]
I am not... (0.00 / 0)
...arguing for folks to "fall in line". I think that's ridiculous. However, I am asking that folks refrain from bashing on the woman if she's the Dem nominee and she's not altogether horrible.

It's true, we don't know much about her. But I have a very hard time believing that she's even remotely close to being as bad as Roskam.

I have not met Stan Jagla, but I have spoken to his campaign manager, Max. I have received reports from folks I trust who have met him and who think similarly about these things. I have thoroughly reviewed his website and the letter I received in the mail. Based upon what I know about Stan at this moment, I do not think he is the right candidate to beat Roskam.

From some discussions I have been following I have gathered that Jill has not formally announced yet. Apparently she has been out and about introducing herself to local Democrats first. That's a welcome change, isn't it? ;) I believe it was a certain Congresswoman up north and my favorite Senator who suggested that she get right on that before anything else.

[ Parent ]
Anybody know.... (0.00 / 0)
...what the situation is with petition signatures? I met Jagla at the DuPage Dems Open House for the new office in September. He's had at least that long to gather sigs. If he has enough sigs and Morganthaler doesn't how does she get on the primary ballot?
[ Parent ]
If she's still not decided (0.00 / 0)
who is collecting signatures for her?
[ Parent ]
Good question. (0.00 / 0)
If Stan meets the signature requirements and Morganthaler does not, then Stan is the pretty much guaranteed nominee. Morganthaler's only alternatives would be (1) a write-in campaign, (2) challenging Stan's petitions to get him kicked off the ballot, or (3) somehow convincing Stan to voluntarily drop out so that she can be slated by the party.

But somehow I doubt that's going to happen. If (as some people suspect) the Chicago machine is backing Morganthaler, then they'll bring in people from outside the district to do the work of getting the signatures, just like they did for Duckworth. Otherwise, well, we'll just have to wait and see.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

[ Parent ]
Just got an email from Jon Myers (0.00 / 0)
at Dupage Dems:

Two candidates are holding petition drives this weekend.
Other candidates are asking for help.

Time is Running Out.
Local Democrats Need Signatures.

Join Scott Harper, 13th Congressional Candidate
Saturday, October 27th at 10 a.m.
Panera Bread - 2165 75th Street in Darien
Pizza will be served for lunch.

(my note: at 3pm not noon)

Join Jill Morgenthaler, 6th Congressional Candidate
Saturday, October 27th at 10 a.m.
190 N. Swift Road in Addison
(Corner of Swift & Army Trail)

Other candidates are actively recruiting volunteers for signature gathering as well.

Stan Jagla, 6th Congressional Candidate
(Contact Max Havlik at maxjh33@webtv.net)
Gary Nowak, 46th Representative District
(Contact at VoteNowak@gmail.com)
Broc Montgomery, 55th Representative District
(Contact at broc@kdminsurance.com)

Best of Luck to All Candidates!

[ Parent ]
I rhink you are shooting from the hip here. (0.00 / 0)
I'm seeing a lot of intelligent comments about Rahm that recognize how his involvement this time, if it even exists, is neutral at worst and even may be helpful.

Jeff Wegerson
[ Parent ]
I met Ms Morgenthaler tonight.. (4.00 / 1)
at the Addison Township Democratic meeting.  She seems ok and did somewhat alleviate  my inherent distrust of military people.  I know we probably disagree on some single issues but at this time I think she would be someone I could support.  I haven't decided between her and Mr. Jagla and I will wait until I hear more to make my decision.

B.T.W I have never bought into the 'if you don't vote for a Democrat you are just giving a vote to the Republicans' BS.  The lesser of two evils is still evil, it is just now your evil.  Of course I don't think this is the case and whoever wins in the primary will probably be ok with me.

[ Parent ]
In Dupage... (0.00 / 0)
...where Democratic turnout is low, Democrats staying home is an advantage for the Republicans.

In general, I agree with you. This isn't true everywhere. But there is no doubt that low Democratic turnout in DuPage is a plus for the GOP. That was my reasoning for saying that staying home is a vote for Roskam. It's one less vote that he has to turn out and that matters in close elections.

[ Parent ]
I have to ask. (0.00 / 0)
All this from someone who hasn't even met Col. Morgenthaler yet, lol.

So... have you met Stan Jagla? How much have you talked with him before deciding to write him off as "not credible" to the point where you can't even bring yourself to mention his name?

I don't intend to stay home. Unless all the indications that Morganthaler is pro-war turn out to be unfounded, I will be supporting Stan.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone

[ Parent ]
Have you? (0.00 / 0)
Have you anything concrete to report about him?
[ Parent ]
Yes, I've met him (3.00 / 1)
Talked with him briefly at a couple of events. He struck me as intelligent and sincerely committed.

"In order for somebody to win an important, major fight 100 years hence, a lot of other people have got to be willing -- for the sheer fun and joy of it -- to go right ahead and fight, knowing you're going to lose." -- I.F. Stone
[ Parent ]
Pro-Roskam Slime Machine Starts Up In 6th - Target Democrat Jill Morgenthaler | 49 comments
Prairie State Blue
Front Page - Back Page


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

1 User(s) logged on.
Search




Advanced Search

Misc
View
Powered by: SoapBlox