Would Rauner gain politically from a strong Walker presence in Illinois?

Back in 2008, Barack Obama’s presidential aspirations gained an early boost from his caucus victory in Iowa, and part of the reason he won there was the fact that politically-aware Iowa voters knew of Obama because he was a senator from neighboring Illinois.

WALKER: Looking to Land of Lincoln?

Which makes me wonder if Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has hopes that his own presidential dreams in next year’s election cycle will gain some support from Republicans in neighboring Illinois.

WALKER IS IN the Chicago area on Thursday, making appearances at a pair of fundraisers. One of which will be at the Peninsula Hotel – giving it the potential to attract the extremely-wealthy amongst us who can afford to pay several thousands of dollars for tickets.

Those who can’t quite afford that (but will still pay a bit more than pocket change) can support Walker at Carlucci’s Restaurant in suburban Downers Grove – where the state Republican Party can still cough up GOP votes in significance.

But how much of a difference will it make?

Despite the partisan split that currently exists, the Democratic Party structures in Illinois are stronger than those of the one-time Party of Lincoln.

GOV. BRUCE RAUNER may be using his personal wealth to prop up the Republican Party because he wants stronger caucuses to vote in his favor on his pet issues (particularly all those anti-labor union measures he desires). Whether he’s willing to prop up a Walker campaign financially is a different matter.

Although you have to admit that Walker is probably the governor that Rauner wishes he could be! He could use a political ally, someone with some muscle to fight back against the “might” of Michael Madigan.

RAUNER: Needs a partisan ally

Walker gained his national reputation when he took on organized labor in his own state and managed to undermine the unions. Just like Rauner wishes he could be.

Now this isn’t support for Walker. I know plenty of Wisconsinites who are appalled at their inability to undermine his partisan fight. If I lived in the land north of Rockford, I’d probably be one of his opponents.

I’M SURE THEIR Illinois counterparts are among the ones quietly cheering on the Illinois House speaker as he thwarts the efforts of Rauner to impose his partisan agenda to benefit the financial bottom lines of his corporate-type allies.

DURKIN: Allied to Rauner and Walker

Which could make a Walker win in Illinois some sort of political blow to the people who are preventing him from being able to easily achieve his desires in our home state

How strong is the Walker campaign in Illinois? Probably about as much as any other campaign amongst the nearly dozen-and-a-half Republican presidential fantasizers! Except maybe former Texas Gov. Rick Perry – who already has stopped paying his campaign staff because he can’t afford to.

All those people who claim real estate developer Donald Trump is kicking butt are downplaying the fact that three-quarters of Republican partisans who have been polled want somebody (anybody) else to be their party’s presidential nominee.

THIS IS A political free-for-all. Who’s to say who will be at the head of the Republican pack come the March primary in Illinois?

Wis. vs. Ill. usually competitors, not allies

Walker, however, does have a state chairman in the form of James Durkin – the Illinois House minority leader and the theoretical GOP counterpart to Madigan. Walker may be the closest Illinois Republicans have to a “favorite son” in this election cycle.

Although whether that is enough to win is questionable. Walker’s anti-union stances have enough support amongst the hard-core GOP partisans that those voters may actually give the Wisconsin governor a few minutes of consideration.

Whether he could get the backing of the people who want an ideological stance on the social issues (abortion, gay marriage, etc.) is less certain. For the same reasons that Rauner isn’t “cleaning house” with ease in Illinois – sensible people see through the partisan rhetoric, just like they may with Walker as well.

  -30-

Ooh, I feel sooooooo special!

I’m still chuckling from the sight of my mail on Friday.

In addition to something from AT&T, I got a letter from the Democratic National Committee, along with a survey I’m supposed to fill out that is supposed to aid President Barack Obama and party leaders in Congress to figure out what their policies should be through the end of 2016.

AT WHICH POINT, we’ll have a new president whom I’m sure could care less what Obama thinks about anything – regardless of what political party they’re from.

Do we really have political leaders who have no sense of self that they need to be told what to think? That doesn’t say much for their sense of self; particularly since I believe government officials ultimately ought to do what they believe is right.

If that action winds up costing them re-election in the future, then so be it. You can’t please everybody, and I don’t trust someone with no sense of what they believe.

But should I be honored that, according to a letter signed by Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., I am one of a “select group of party leaders from around the nation” whose opinion is being sought?

THEN AGAIN, LET’S be real. The survey with 15 questions and some space for comments has a conclusion that brings to view the real purpose of this survey – a solicitation for campaign contributions.

For as little as $25, I can become a member of the Democratic National Committee, although a little asterisk tells me that the preferred donation is $35 or more. Perhaps in excess of $100.

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: My ideas, or my $

Does this mean that my opinion only counts if I’m willing to cough up my checkbook, or provide access to a Visa, MasterCard, American Express or Discover card?

Yes, I am inherently cheap. I reluctantly spend money. I’m still recovering from the several hundred dollars I shelled out this week to purchase a new laptop computer – my old one frizzled out after having its keyboard hit with one of the most devastating substances known to computer equipment.

COCA COLA!!! AS in the real thing, and not one of the non-caffeine, non-caloried alternatives.

OBAMA: Does he really want my thoughts?

So since I’m not willing to make out a check to the party (I may be politically interested, but that doesn’t extend to donating money to candidates. Which isn’t an act of political speech, no matter what the conservative ideologues think – although that’s a topic for another day), my guess is that the party won’t be terribly interested in having me fill out their survey.

Although to tell you the truth, anybody who has ever read this weblog would already know what I think of many of the issues they’re trying to bring up.

I’d say “yes” to whether I agree with Obama’s plan to use executive action on issues ignored by Republicans, such as immigration reform. It may be political hardball by the president, but the GOP is playing its own hardball. It’s nice to see Obama try to address an issue whose resolution really is long-overdue.

I’M ACTUALLY “UNDECICED” about increasing the federal minimum wage (because it’s likely Illinois will remain better than the national average) because I could see how someone forced to live at the minimum wage is going to be struggling, no matter how much they’re paid.

As for whether Republicans/Tea Party types will consider cooperating with Obama during the next two years, or continue with political obstruction, I’d have to mark the option saying the GOP will “escalate their obstruction efforts.” Then again, I can see how such a question is worded in a way that would make people think the Democrats aren’t exactly interested in bipartisan cooperation.

EMANUEL: Nation following our lead on higher ed?

Those are just a few of the points Dems want us to think about in their survey. Although I have to admit to finding some humor in the question about whether I support the Obama initiative encouraging community college education for all who are interested.

That’s so similar to what Mayor Rahm Emanuel has offered in Chicago (free tuition to any Chicago Public School graduate with a “B” average or better) that I wonder how long it will be before Rahm takes credit and accuses the president of ripping off his idea for the nation.

  -30-

There’s no accounting for taste; why would people pay for political time?

I spend a lot of my work time associating with political-type people, what with trying to learn more about their ways so I can write more intelligently about them.

It doesn’t mean I necessarily want to associate with them on my free time. Which is why I find it confounding to think that certain people are willing to pay significant sums of their own money in order to be with them.

PERSONALLY, I’D JUST as soon keep my cash, or try to find some worthy charitable cause to donate to, rather than give it to a political person’s campaign fund.

Because that is what ultimately becomes of the money spent in ways such as reported on recently by the Washington Post. It seems that when singer Taylor Swift appears in concert in Washington in July, there are going to be several members of Congress in attendance.

Including Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Ill., of our very own state’s delegation. Although she’s not a Chicago-area type, she’s from the Quad Cities along the Mississippi River.

What caught the Post’s attention, and later the Chicago Sun-Times’, is that those members of Congress have blocks of tickets that they’re selling to people who want to go to the concert with them.

I’M SURE CHERI Bustos is a nice person. But I can’t say that the idea of spending an evening with her at a concert with anyone is my idea of a thrilling experience.

Especially since the going rate seems to be $2,500 per ticket. That’s a lot of cash. There has to be more practical things the money could be used on.

Although the Post points out that Rep. Steve Stivers, R-Ohio, is offering tickets for $1,500 each, or $2,500 for a pair so you can bring a friend who can forevermore testify to the fact that you spent the night with Stivers while listening to Swift sing!

The very thought gives me some mental shivers. It’s not my idea of a good time. I just don’t comprehend the idea that we’re supposed to spend a lot of money so we can have a pretend personal experience with one of these political people.

WOULD THESE ELECTED officials even give us a second glance if we weren’t opening up our checkbooks (or offering up our credit card numbers) to make a donation to the funds that will pay for their re-election bids in the future?

I suppose they would if it were actually Election Day and they saw us within proximity of a polling place where we could go to actually cast a ballot on their behalf!

Otherwise, all of this just comes across to me as a phony attempt to create an experience.

If I were going to a Taylor Swift concert (and let it be known that I have never had any desire to do so), I think I’d rather go with people whom I really know and for whom a shared experience would mean something.

I JUST DON’T get the appeal of this event. It almost comes across as a bit too creepy, which is sort of how I remember a Chicago White Sox game I once attended more than a decade ago.

It was a mid-week day game on a day I had off from work, and I wound up discovering a large gathering of political people who had the same thought as I did. They were sitting one section away from me.

I still remember the site of a legislative chief of staff in a concessions stand line waiting to buy a round of beers for the group, and former Illinois Senate President Phil Rock wandering around the stands in mid-game. Then at game’s end while waiting in a restroom line to relieve myself, I happened to look up and see that I was sharing that experience with none other than the high-and-mighty powerful Speaker of the Illinois House himself.

If nothing else, I’d pay good money if I could forget that image!

  -30-

Illinois GOP wants votes so bad, they’re willing to celebrate Cinco de Mayo (in their own way, of course)

I didn’t make it out to any events this year celebrating the May 5 holiday about Mexicans showing their national pride and ability to stand with the major powers of the world.

SANGUINETTI: GOP's "big" May 5 name

But there was one event I wish I could have made it out to – the one in which the Illinois Republican Party took a shot Monday night at praising Mexico – while also using the party at the River North neighborhood Hub 51 club to raise money for their political candidates come Nov. 4.

NOW MY DESIRE to have been there isn’t so much that I wanted to see Republican political types make fools of themselves while plopping sombreros on their heads and trying to chance “Viva Mexico!” without sounding too lame.

Democratic politicos are just as capable of being ridiculous when they do those things to try to get Latino votes.

What caught my attention was that their Cinco de Mayo event was being used as a political fundraiser. Yet as far as I could tell, none of the “top dog” candidates of this year’s GOP ticket were bothering to show.

Not Bruce Rauner, the gubernatorial nominee. Nor James Oberweis, who is theoretically the ‘top of the ticket’ with his bid for the U.S. Senate. Of course, with Oberweis’ past record of talking about immigration issues, his presence would have created too much potential for saying something stupid – even if he now claims he regrets that “commercial” in a decade old campaign for public office.

THE ONE WHERE he flew over Soldier Field and talked about how all the dreaded “illegal aliens” could fill the stadium each and every day?!?

Were Republicans focusing on that long-ago battle near Puebla ...

Actually, the best they could get was Evelyn Sanguinetti.

Before you say “Who?!?,” she’s Rauner’s running mate. She’s the lieutenant governor nominee. She’s also of Ecuadoran and Cuban ethnic origins, and raised amongst the Cuban exile community in Miami. Not exactly the perspective of the bulk of Illinois’ 2 million-plus Latinos.

... or consuming too many of these?

Which makes it appear as though Republicans value the governor backup as the person who goes to the events they’d rather not be seen at. Although there is the fact that Sanguinetti does speak Spanish (remember her phrases from the Election Night victory speech?).

SO MAYBE SHE was able to say something that wasn’t silly, while other Republican partisans drank margaritas and wrote out sizable checks to give Republican candidates some cash with which to campaign (so that Rauner doesn’t have to self-fund 100 percent of this year’s election cycle – even though he could afford to, if he had to).

The list of people who were hoped to attend did include some Spanish-tinged names, which makes me think Camp Rauner wants to create the image he’s appealing to some Latinos in the way that he’s trying to appeal to the African-American vote.

Which is more geared toward getting a few black people to vote for him, while many others just wind up deciding they could care less about this year’s election cycle.

Anything that cuts into the potential vote tally for Gov. Pat Quinn is a benefit to him.

IT IS THE reason that Rauner began running a series of television spots (although I have to confess to not having seen any of them on an actual television set, but only through the Capitol Fax newsletter’s website) whose common theme is that the people featured in them are not white.

SANCHEZ: Is his grudge universal?

One of them gives us Manny Sanchez, who identifies himself as the former co-chair in Illinois for Latinos for Obama, then says Rauner is, “the right, and the perfect, and the optimal” candidate for Illinois governor this year.

He doesn’t mention the fact that he was the guy who got dumped on by Quinn a couple of years ago when Quinn wanted to shift control of the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority to himself and Sanchez stood in the way.

I get the fact that Sanchez is peeved, potentially feels a grudge, and would be looking for a way to undermine the governor. He’s being legitimate when he speaks about not supporting Quinn.

WE JUST SHOULDN’T presume that his view in any way represents a sizable share of the Latino electorate in Illinois.

And Republican operatives shouldn’t presume that because the party used a Mexican holiday to try to raise money for themselves without sending the big-name candidates that the Latino electorate is on the verge of making a massive shift in support away from the Democratic Party candidates.

It’s going to take a lot more than that to win over significant numbers of Latino voters – much more than I believe the GOP would ever be willing to offer.

  -30-

Emanuel needs Austin (as in Texas) money because Austin (as in Chicago) residents likely aren't among his fans

When I first learned that Mayor Rahm Emanuel planned to be in Austin on Monday and to include a significant fundraiser, my first reaction was something along the line of, "What the ....!?!!"

But I quickly figured out that Emanuel's "Austin" was the state capital of Texas, and not the West Side neighborhood.

EMANUEL PLANS TO lead a Chicago delegation to the South By Southwest festival, and the people who organize the Lollapalooza festival every year have a fundraiser set to help add to the Emanuel re-election fund.

Some might want to claim this is the reward for Emanuel because the city extended the group's contract to hold Lollapalooza in Grant Park through 2021. Although if it were that blatant a trade-off, I'm sure the U.S. Attorney would be involved in seeking an indicment against Hizzoner.

What a better political trophy for a federal prosecutor than the mayor himself!

It might seem odd for a Chicago mayor to be seeking political money while roaming around Texas. Although our mayor these days has a higher national (and international) profile than most political people.

DO YOU REALLY think Robert Redford and CNN would be doing a series about Chicago if Emanuel were just some typical municipal schlep?

All of this is part of a strategy by Emanuel as he prepares to seek re-election come the 2015 election cycle. The Chicago Tribune reported that he has about $6.2 million as of now -- which is about the same amount that gubernatorial candidate (and Emanuel friend) Bruce Rauner has spent on his own Republican primary campaign thus far.

The Rauner strategy thus far has been to outspend everyone else into oblivion so that the challengers become insignificant and can't keep up with his attempts at self image-making.

EMANUEL: Campaign-fund wealthy

Which likely is what Emanuel also wants to do -- if anyone winds up having the nerve to take him on. There are plenty of people who are willing to bad-mouth the mayor, but no one willing to say they're willing to challenge him.

EVEN KAREN LEWIS, the Chicago Teachers Union boss who doesn't hesitate to trash Emanuel's professional abilities, has said she doesn't want to be mayor. The same goes for Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle -- whom some consider the best-qualified challenger to Emanuel.

So all of this fund-raising may be for naught -- except to the degree that Emanuel's big-bucks will scare off everybody except for the Tio Hardimans (as in the Democrat with dreams of beating Pat Quinn in next weeks' primary) of the world.

Of course, about the only reason that Emanuel might be even remotely vulnerable is because of the fact that his actions, particularly those meant to get involved in the Chicago Public School system, have ticked off the African-American segment of the electorate.

Rahm's challenger

There are those black would-be voters who felt willing in 2011 to back Rahm because he was a former chief-of-staff (and ally) to Barack Obama. They feel sold-out.

WHICH IS WHY the idea of Emanuel holding a fund-raiser in the Austin neighborhood, with its heavily-African-American population, would be so absurd.

Now if only those voters could find a way to unite behind an Emanuel challenger, then perhaps he'd have a real need for all the money he's going to raise Monday, and at future events throughout the upcoming year.

-30-

Hide your checkbooks!!!!! Presidential candidates are coming to town

Perhaps we should feel “blessed” this week. The presidential hopefuls are coming to visit us.

OBAMA: He wants cash for his 'birthday'



Not so much because they’re all that concerned about us. It’s just that the campaigns have just over three more months to make it through before the Nov. 6 elections.

THEY NEED MONEY to pay for all those sound systems so we can hear them speak at rallies, and those campaign fliers they want us to see and (most importantly) all those television spots they’re going to air to tell us just how wretched their opponent truly is!

So we’re getting both President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney in town during the next few days, hoping that the cult of personality they can offer will encourage us not only to cast a ballot for them, but also to write out a check for a few hundred dollars.

Got to keep those nasty campaign ads flowing!

Yes, I’m a bit cynical when it comes to these events, which usually get staged as though they are once-in-a-lifetime events that we just have to be present for. History in the making, they want us to believe. The Obama fundraisers to be held this weekend are being billed as local celebrations of the president’s birthday – which was last week.

ALTHOUGH THE REALITY is that this probably won’t even be the last time in this election cycle that the candidates will ask us for our cash.

Barack Obama will have a “Happy Birthday!” if we write him out checks totaling in the millions of dollars so he can let us know how out of touch Romney is with real people.

Just as Romney will be equally pleased if we give him all those checks come Tuesday when he speaks at Acme Industries in suburban Elk Grove Village, then has two downtown fundraisers – one of which will feature manufacturing officials.

ROMNEY: Somebody must pay for nasty ads

They’re the audience who will probably buy into all the Romney rhetoric that Obama is a “subversive” who will undermine everything they like about this country.

THEY’RE CERTAINLY THE only audience that can afford to pay up to $50,000 per ticket to get into Romney events to be held in the city – although it seems that money raised will be shared by the Romney campaign and the Republican National Committee.

After all, the RNC needs money to elect allies for Romney – although I suspect what they really want is a president to be allied with a Congress of their choice. Romney as a rubber stamp.

Not that I think the Obama campaign is any different. Some people will actually get into the Obama manor at the Hyde Park/Kenwood neighborhood border, while friends Marty Nesbitt and Barbara Bowman (the latter is the mother of Obama adviser Valerie Jarrett) also will host events.

It will give us the feel that we’re getting to see the inner circle of the Obama lifestyle – if you can afford the high price of a ticket. Although we're not getting anything on the scale of the fundraiser Obama had Monday night (at the Connecticut -- as in suburban New York City -- home of televison producer Aaron Sorkin, with Catwoman-like visions of Anne Hathaway also present).

IT’S NO WONDER that some candidates who have a conscience feel like they’re “whoring” themselves out to raise money to run the campaigns that maintain their positions within government.

Do you feel the need for this?



Most of us, of course, can’t afford these kind of prices. Not that they’re really missing out on much. All political events tend to have a rehearsed quality about them. So overly staged that they bear little resemblance to reality.

Besides, I find myself very amused by the Obama campaign, which has consistently sent out e-mails to alleged supporters, asking for tiny donations and usually offering up some trinket in return. The most recent one I am aware of offers us a chance to get a genuine car magnet bearing the Obama logo.

Just $10, and it’s all yours. You can drive your car around and show your political allegiance, and three years from now you won’t have a tattered, weather-worn sticker on your bumper to remind us of whom you voted for on Nov. 6.

  -30-

What to get Obama for his birthday? He wants cash, as in campaign contributions

By the time you read this, Barack Obama will have slipped into and out of Chicago.

He celebrates the big 5-oh on Thursday, officially having been alive for half a century. But the public portion of his birthday celebration was done last night at the Aragon Ballroom.

IT WAS A concert. Obama himself returned to his home city to make an appearance at the concert – which featured such Chicago-native talent as Jennifer Hudson and Herbie Hancock.

Yet before anyone gets the impression that Obama is a man of the people who likes to party hearty, keep in mind that this was a political event just as much as any other he would have attended.

For the tickets to get into the Wednesday night fundraisers went from anywhere from $50 each to $35,800.

People who paid the top price were provided with some food and also likely had some direct access to the president himself. People who paid a little less probably can say they were in the same room with Obama, and saw him in the flesh – but didn’t get any chat time with the Leader of the Free World.

AND IF YOU were cheap enough to shell out merely $50, it means you can say you were in the same building as the president – but you didn’t get anywhere near to him.

Which means you might as well have been one of the masses around the country who took part in what were called “grassroots meetings” that allowed people the chance to pretend they were celebrating the anniversary of the date on which Ann Dunham in Honolulu gave birth to a son by her collegiate boyfriend (Does anyone still seriously believe that’s not true?).

If it sounds like I’m mocking the Aragon event and the smaller meetings, well actually I am.



Former Gov. Jim Edgar's 50th birthday/fundraiser in 1996 gave us a Marilyn Monroe-moment (actually, former state Budget Director Joan Walters). Barack Obama had to settle for a birthday song from Jennifer Hudson (albeit, the real thing, not an impersonator). Photograph provided by Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum.



Somewhere in my collection of tacky junk I have accumulated from political people throughout the years is a birthday party “invitation” from then-Gov. Jim Edgar.

THIS CARD WAS issued to announce a very similar event – a reception held at the Illinois State Fairgrounds meant to celebrate Edgar’s 50^th birthday (he turned 65 two weeks ago). I kept the card because of the photograph on the front – an old childhood picture of Edgar, wearing pajamas with the name “Jimmy” printed all over them.

Yet when one looked closely at the card, it was merely an invitation to a political fundraiser. Pay some money, and you can be “included” in the Edgar birthday festivities.

Which was a similar situation to what took place Wednesday night in Chicago for Obama -- although I'm sure the passage of time and inflation and scale of elective office means that Obama was shooting for much more cash than anything Edgar ever hoped to raise that night some 15 years ago.

Barack endured the company of all those people Wednesday night out of a professional obligation. He was raising the money that will help him get re-elected president in next year’s election cycle, and also will help others raise money so that they can get re-elected as well.

IF ANYTHING, THE latter function might be more important. Obama needs allies in government if he’s to be able to accomplish much of anything (I’d say he needs friends, but a political “friend” is really something cheap and worthless – even more-so than a Facebook “friend”).

Political allies come at a price. What did Obama do to help them get elected? Help with finances usually is a good start.

That is what Wednesday night was truly about. It certainly wasn’t about any legitimate birthday celebration – which I would guess Obama will do in the comfort of the White House on Thursday (although I understand there was also an after-concert dinner for up to 100 Obama backers, which also had its political motivations).

Which is why I was somewhat amused to see that the Republican National Committee felt the need to publicly criticize Obama for partaking in a birthday celebration event in Chicago.

“I SUPPOSE THE White House is thinking (Obama) should stick to the part of his job he really likes,” was what came from the lips of a GOP spokeswoman.

The last I knew, fundraising was a legitimate (and essential) part of any elected official’s job, which makes the spokesman’s statement sound like sour grapes that she wasn’t invited to the birthday celebration event.

I only wish these could be billed purely as fundraisers, instead of pretending there was a human touch to the events, such as those people who will now claim that the Aragon Ballroom’s “history” includes a presidential birthday concert.

Actually, I can’t help but think there could be one sure-fire way to raise money with minimal effort off of an Obama birthday tie.

I COULDN’T  HELP but notice a week ago when I shopped for a birthday card for my father the large number of holiday cards that depict Obama, usually offering up some pseudo-holiday greeting.

I’m sure the people using those Obama images are coming up with stock photos or generic drawings for which they don’t have to pay the president a dime. Just think, however, of how much revenue could be generated if every single purchase of such a card kicked in a dime to the campaign coffers?

  -30-

Bill Clinton comes to Chicago to create cash, backing for Emanuel campaign

A month ago, it was a big political stink that William Jefferson Clinton would deign to set foot in our fair city on behalf of the mayoral aspirations of his one-time senior advisor, Rahm Emanuel.



Bill Clinton picked ...



But now, one of the people who was all bothered by Clinton’s promised presence in Chicago isn’t even in the race anymore. As for Carol Moseley-Braun (who also was a part of the Clinton presidential administration as an ambassador to New Zealand), she can scream “outsider!” all she wants.

THE REALITY IS that I doubt many people care much what she thinks about this particular point. It comes off too much as sour grapes that Clinton picked him over her when it came to support someone for Chicago mayor.

So Clinton is coming to Chicago on Tuesday, appearing mid-day at a public rally (although tickets are being issued to control the size of the crowd) at the Chicago Cultural Center. Later in the day, he will be attending a fundraising event meant to bring in even more money to pay for those expensive television spots that will try to neutralize Emanuel’s reputation as a foul-mouthed, hard-headed politico and a partisan to the extreme.

The latter event is the one that really matters, because it will give the corporate types who have been more than satisfied with Richard M. Daley a chance to reinforce Rahm’s chances of winning, not only on Feb. 22 but also on April 5.

Not that the earlier event hurts. After all, Bill Clinton standing side by side with Emanuel. Maybe the presence of the former president will even get Daley himself to turn out for the event.

IT’S NOT EXACTLY a mayoral endorsement. But it would create an image of heavy-weight politicians in Clinton and Daley, with Emanuel being the one person running for mayor who deserves to be thought of in their league.

In short, the images could make the rest of the mayoral field look like a batch of local lightweights. So no matter how much Moseley-Braun screams “outsider endorsing an outsider,” keep in mind that not everybody will perceive it that way.

... his senior adviser ...



Personally, I thought it was stupid politically when the officials who complained about Clinton did so publicly. It’s not like they were going to change his mind into coming to Chicago. If anything, all they did was put up a bit of a barricade between themselves and the former president, whose help they may wind up asking for in some future campaign.

Also, I don’t think anyone’s opinion is changed seriously by this event.

THE KIND OF people who are inclined to look down on Emanuel and say they’re voting ABR are going to cast that ballot for anybody but Rahm BECAUSE of the fact that he has ties to Bill Clinton.

Back in 2002 when he first ran for that Northwest Side congressional seat, these people were disgusted with Clinton and were determined that anybody who had any ties to him should be forevermore finished in politics.

Emanuel’s victory was a stake through their vampiric hearts.

Now, many of these same people are disgusted because Emanuel also has ties to Barack Obama. They want to believe that is a kiss of political death – even though anyone looking at various polls in recent weeks can’t help but notice that Obama’s favorability ratings are slowly starting to go up.

THESE PEOPLE AREN’T so much about electing anyone as mayor as much as they are about dumping on Emanuel.

Which is why I can actually respect the Somos Republicanos group. Based out of Arizona, they exist to try to get Latinos to take the Republican Party seriously.

Their leaders are taking an interest in Chicago’s mayoral campaign, and they are honest enough to admit they just don’t want Rahm to win. They cite the failure of Obama to do anything with immigration reform during his first two years of office, which is an issue they could use to stir up Latino voters at large.

But they also admit they’re not pushing for any specific candidate. They’re not for Gery Chico or for Miguel del Valle. They don’t mind Carol Moseley-Braun (mostly because I suspect they already have their file folders out and ready to start using tidbits from the past to trash her rep, should she get elected mayor). They will take any of them.

... over his ambassador.



IT’S ALL ABOUT Emanuel, whose failure they would try to spin into a sign that even Chicago rejects Clinton/Obama.

I must confess. All of this is why I can’t quite write off Rahm in my own mind. A part of me keeps in mind that people whose best interests aren’t with Chicago at all are the ones who most want us to be outraged by Emanuel, or by the fact that Clinton will make his first visit to our city since just before the November elections – back then, he was just trying to convince Democrats in Chicago to turn out to vote.

Which they did! There was a respectable vote in Chicago proper, which was the reason why we still have a Democrat as governor and in most of the state constitutional offices, and Democrats running the Illinois General Assembly.

If the Clinton influence continues, maybe we will get “Mayor Emanuel” – no matter how much some people want to engage in ridiculous rhetoric.

  -30-

Why is Barack Obama so politically active in this year’s Chicago election cycle?

President Barack Obama made yet another appearance in Chicago earlier this week to help tout the campaign of Democratic Senate hopeful Alexi Giannoulias, which amuses me because of all the pompous rhetoric we got earlier this year from conservative political pundits who wanted to believe that Obama wouldn’t come anywhere near Illinois during this election cycle.

The spin those political gas-bags put on Obama was that he was toxic, and that Giannoulias wouldn’t want to have anything to do with his one-time basketball buddy trying to campaign on his behalf.

YET WHILE SOME Democrats of more conservative ideological bearings have gone out of their way to maintain distance between themselves and the sitting president, Giannoulias has not.

The president appeared at the Drake Hotel for a private dinner that allegedly raised nearly $800,000, of which half went to the Giannoulias campaign and the other half went to the national committee that is working to elect Democrats across the country to the Senate – primarily by coming up with incredibly nasty campaign ads against their GOP opponents.

It would seem that the conservative ideologues were wrong about how much Giannoulias would want help from Obama, and how much Obama would be willing to help his buddy who wants to move up from Illinois treasurer to the U.S. Senate.

So now, we’re getting a new line of rhetoric from the ideologues – why is Obama coming to Illinois so much, unless he realizes that his buddy is a loser in need of anything to give him a jolt.

ILLINOIS GOP CHAIRMAN Pat Brady (no relation to gubernatorial nominee William) went so far as to say Obama’s repeated presence was evidence that he fears a Republican “landslide” in elections across the nation.

Yet I’m just trying to imagine the kind of rhetoric we’d be hearing from Brady if Obama wasn’t showing his face in his home city – it would probably be something along the lines of “Obama is in hiding because he’s afraid of the Republican ‘juggernaut’” that they think they have amassed.

In short, it is merely evidence that some people are determined to put a nasty spin on Obama, and aren’t particularly interested in what kinds of facts they use to back up their political venom.

If anything, I am inclined to think that Democratic political operative David Plouffe is correct when he says that Obama wouldn’t be spending any time in Chicago, let alone Illinois, unless they thought that it could influence enough people to remember who they loved two years ago, and to turn out enough Democratic votes to win.

THAT WOULD SEEM to coincide with the polls that show the various campaigns tightening up in support – although when one considers how much the Chicago metro area dominates the state, it is truthful to say that anything other than a Democratic blowout should be embarrassing for the party.

The fact that Republicans are running competitive in a state that is rigged against them says something. Although it doesn’t necessary say what the GOP operatives want to think it says.

So when Obama told the big-money crowds that, “most of the polls say the same thing, Alexi will win, Pat Quinn will win, the entire ticket will win,” I will be the first to admit he is exaggerating.

Anybody with sense knows that a few Republican candidates will get their act together and take back some influence within Illinois state government. The real significance is will the Republican gains be sufficient that their partisan officials can demand some control over public policy.

I’M NOT ABOUT to try predicting who will win the Nov. 2 general elections in Illinois. Like I have written on other occasions, it will depend on the Chicago and surrounding suburbs voter turnout.

This election cycle truly is in Chicago’s hands. A strong turnout here negates any of the ridiculous rhetoric we have been hearing for the past several months. A weak turnout means that people here didn’t care enough, and perhaps should not be complaining about anything that gets done to them during the next two to four years.

Which is why it was significant to learn that the Chicago Board of Elections reported this week there are 60,000 fewer registered voters within the city, compared to increases in the collar county suburbs where people are most likely to identify with the Republican Party as the entity that will stand up to Chicago Democrats on their behalf (I’d argue that they are the people most likely to hold Illinois back, but that is a debate for a different day).

It is more evidence that the people who are taking this election cycle most seriously are the ones who want their own perception of society to prevail – those who are inclined to think that Obama and his election two years ago was a step in the wrong direction. Which means that Obama sticking his two cents in to tell us otherwise is probably the least he should be doing in this election cycle.

  -30-

Obama bears gifts on his “birthday” trip

Barack Obama turned 49 while visiting us in Chicago. Yet the reality is that he is using his trip to give gifts to the people he needs as political allies if he wishes to get anything done in the next couple of years.

The president made a two-day trip to the Second City, and while he is making an appearance at the Ford Motor Co. plant in and near the Hegewisch neighborhood, the bulk of his day Thursday will be his attendance at fundraising events.

THAT SEEMS TO be how he’s spending his time these days, as he did some time in Atlanta earlier this week to help raise money for would-be Democratic allies.

Of course, this activity is giving us a lot of cheap rhetoric from Republican partisans who want to claim that Obama is somehow corrupting himself by helping to raise money for other people they want to portray as corrupt.

Those of us with common sense recognize such rhetoric as tacky, and best ignored. But there are those of us who might actually be inclined to believe that what is happening Thursday is somehow unique.

There is a political risk. What happens if the jury currently locked in a back room at the Dirksen Building decides that they can reach a verdict in the criminal case against Rod Blagojevich on Thursday?

TESTIMONY THAT CAME out of the former Illinois governor’s trial indicated, to me at least, that the two men didn’t think much of each other – no matter how much GOP partisans want to spin the two as somehow connected at the hip.

How quickly will Obama go into hiding if a verdict is reached on the same day that he happens to be in Chicago for the first time since the Memorial Day rainout at the Abraham Lincoln Cemetery for military veterans near Elwood, Ill.?

Because we all know reporter-types in Chicago will show just how wimpy their White House press counterparts with their new briefing room seating configuration can be when it comes to persistently grilling a man about a subject on which he’d rather say nothing.

I can’t help but think Obama would rather have to take the cheap shots about providing financial help to corrupt politicians, rather than have to say Word One about Blagojevich.

FOR THE RECORD, Obama’s involvement on Thursday will be attendance at three fundraisers – one of which is meant to boost the campaign fund of his one-time basketball buddy, Alexi Giannoulias, who is running for U.S. Senate.

With people paying up to $2,400 per ticket to get into that event at the Palmer House, I’d hope the president has something substantial to say – rather than the usual campaign babble.

Yet that’s the relatively cheap event. Those willing to pay up to $30,000 a person will get to attend a party at a Democratic loyalist’s home at which the president will attend. They can pretend for a few moments to be intimate friends (although my guess is that we will learn whom the Obamas’ true friends are a few years from now when daughters Sasha and Malia get married).

Then, there’s the cheap event. For $250 a ticket, one can be allowed to set foot inside the Chicago Cultural Center at Michigan Avenue and Randolph Street at a time when the president will be nearby.

THEN, HE LEAVES Chicago and will engage in similar stunts in California and Texas in the next couple of weeks, although the reports that came out of Atlanta earlier this week indicated many local Democrats who preferred not to be seen at the Obama events in that city.

Yes, there is a sense to which I think the Obama events on Thursday are cheap (in quality, not in price) and tacky. Yet I think it is a cheap shot to believe that Obama is the only political person who behaves in such a manner.

Let’s not forget earlier this year when former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (an ideological darling to a segment of the GOP partisans) made her appearance in suburban Rosemont. Her fundraiser charged $25,000 for people who wanted to be able to say they once sat at the same dinner table and engaged in chit-chat with Palin.

Could it be that the Republicans’ real gripe is that their opposition's head guy can command a higher fee than their own so-called partisan star?

OR THERE’S THE upcoming event (scheduled for Sept. 18 and affiliated with the United Republican Fund) called Right Nation, which purports to be a fundraising rally “all converging on President Obama’s hometown,” even though the reality is that they’re not setting foot in the city. Instead they’re going to the Sears Centre Arena in suburban Hoffman Estates.

Some have tried making hay of the fact that such establishment Republicans as Illinois House Minority Leader Tom Cross, R-Oswego, and state Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, are partaking in an event that is featuring Andrew Breitbart.

Remember him? He’s the guy who operates various websites that give us conservative spin on the news, and is being threatened with lawsuits by Georgia-based Agriculture Department official Shirley Sherrod on account of those decades old video snippets that talked about how race impacted her ability to do her job. If anything, I’d be more offended at the thought of being part of a group that likely will treat Breitbart like a conquering hero. But that is the level of partisanship these types of events always reach.

Which makes the bottom line one of people shouldn’t be too quick to smack about Obama for his political activity, because it really isn’t any different than anything the other side is doing as well.

-30-