Skip to main content

I could not bring myself to vote for Bill Foster, for many reasons, and I did not. The biggest reason is that I am tired of the choice between Republican and Republican-lite.

So many people told me, "But, he comes from a Good Democratic Family, and he'll be a Good Democratic Vote in Congress." To which I usually responded, "I'll believe it when I see it."

Unfortunately, I haven't seen it. IL-14 has another Republican representative. The only difference is, he has a D after his name. We have effectively traded Hastert for someone the likes of Emmanuel or Bean.

"But, wouldn't you rather have one of them than Hastert or Oberweiss?" you might ask?

And the answer is no. I knew what I was working with when I had Hastert. Foster's little D after his name does nothing more than get my hopes up, just to see them dashed when it matters most.

My local paper, the DeKalb Daily Chronicle, had an article about him. His first act in Congress was good, I will give him that. He voted for legislation to create an independent ethics panel.

However, then he went on to vote against the House budget. Why?

...he pledged during his campaign to be fiscally responsible and felt the proposed fiscal plan needed more work - especially in its lack of funding for the war.

(emphasis mine)

The article goes on to talk briefly about Foster's communication with Hastert.

He has spoken with Hastert - whom he called a "class act" - and said he hopes to do so again in the near future because Hastert knows so much about the issues facing the district.

I don't trust any democrat who can call Hastert a "class act" with a straight face and then go to him about advice on issues facing the district. Why not talk to those who know that subject best - YOUR CONSTITUENTS! Be a representative! Talk to the people. Hold town hall meetings. Find out what we really care about and need!

I'm afraid that George W. Foster (yes, that's his real name, as he was fond of saying at the beginning of EVERY campaign speech) will be just as out-of-touch with our needs as our former "representative".

Rahm and the DCCC have failed the Democratic base yet again by interfering in a race where a true progressive had a real shot at winning, and the netroots got behind him simply because of the D behind his name and the cash in his pockets. When will we learn?

Originally posted to flautist on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:05 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  So tired of Purists (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      red moon dog, greenearth, ipsos

      Judging by your #'s you are far more liberal than I'll ever be.

      Just because someone doesn't support what you do 100% of the time does not mean they're bad or in bed with the Bush. It's that kind of purist thinking that leads to Democratic losses.

      If you want purity, go to Nader or Gravel or somebody.


      My vote goes to Barack Obama, but my heart still goes to John Edwards.

      by SouthernFried on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:49:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  actually, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        llbear, AmericanRiverCanyon

        I'm an Obama supporter. I was an Edwards supporter.. neither of whom I agree with 100%, but they are okay. However, if either of them said that they wanted Americans to carry biometric ID cards and that wealthy people deserve and should get better healthcare than homeless people, I would not be supporting them, either. Those positions are simply frightening.

        •  Y'know, I've got news for you (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Everyone in our political system says that wealthy people should get better healthcare than homeless people.

          I'm not an expert, but I don't know of a western country that doesn't have some private track with extra healthcare services available to the wealthy, no matter how generous and comprehensive the coverage for the average person - or the disadvantaged one.

          Biometric IDs seem like an odd issue to be obsessing over. I do hope you have additional issues that move you.

          And I still have no idea what exactly your problems with Foster in the actual Diary are.

          •  I suspect her issue is (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Warren Terra
            her passionate support for John Laesch who didn't win the primary on the Democratic side. I understand  that, but I hope she will give Foster a chance. I agree biometrics is an odd idea to obsess over, and I think we all need to understand that there is no perfect progressive politician out there. I worked very hard to elect our current governor who I liked on 90% of the issues but HATED his vote for the bankruptcy bill. I just figured 90% is pretty damned good.

            We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14:

            by anastasia p on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 03:46:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I understand and I know it's frustrating (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Warren Terra
      especially with you being a John Laesch supporter. But we need a dose of reality and a little patience. Foster has not even served a full week so it's premature to be bewailing him. And one also has to take into consideration a district's composition: I would be happy with a progressive Democrat in every Democratic district and a smaller group of blue dogs in Republican districts. I got pretty annoyed when people not from Ohio were suggesting that Zack Space in Oh-18 be "primaried," as if they really thought a Dennis Kucinich clone could get elected in that district. Of course, I don't agree with Space's votes nearly as often as I agree with my own congresswoman's in my plus-33 Democratic district (and yet, I've seen people here talk about primarying HER because he supports Hillary! Come on, people) but he is in a Republican, rural district -- and has done so much to make the people there happy that the Republican party no longer has Oh-18 as its top take-back target; they've essentially ceded it to Space.

      Meanwhile, you have a great opportunity to pressure Foster: to call his office, to write him, even to drop in and visit him and make your concerns known. Congresspeople often get a little bolder when they understand that you've got their back.

      We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14:

      by anastasia p on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 03:43:31 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oh lord, here we go again (22+ / 0-)

    sometimes I even wonder why politicians seek out our support.  It seems that after one vote, or comment that we don't agree with, everyone is ready to turn their back on a dem.

    The fact that he voted for an independent ethics panel alone makes him better than Oberweiss and Hassert.

    Full Disclosure: I'm an Obama Supporter

    by smash artist on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:09:42 PM PDT

    •  it wasn't just one vote or comment (5+ / 0-)

      it was a pattern with him throughout the campaign. He never took strong positions, and what weak positions he did take left plenty of room for capitulation. His position on immigration (a "REAL ID" "with biometrics if ncessary") flat out scared me. His comment on health care after the DeKalb debate simply pissed me off.

      So essentially what you have to do is make a transition on the low end, where the homeless person who has no means can get something, and it's not going to be great, and then if you're very wealthy you should be able to buy the best health care...

      So, forgive me if I "turn my back" on this particular Dem.

    •  Foster did a little pre-November campaign tour .. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...yesterday, stopping at local Jewel stores, touting his votes on and independent ethics panel, and the FISA vote. Let's look at these votes.

      Ms. Pelosi could have revived the panel over a year and had Don Young and Hastert and Jefferson (to be fair) called to answer questions in open hearings. What stopped them?

      The FISA vote is another example of an impotent move, since 1) the Senate has overwhelmingly passed the bill that Bushco. wanted, and whatever the House passes will be watered down in conference,
      and 2) Bushco. will veto it...

      What's missing is the face-slapping truth that the Bush administration BROKE THE LAW. How does this Dem-controlled Congress chose to act? By crafting a new law? How about enforcing the old ones first? (and FISA has revised since 1978, why are the Dems letting these guys get away with saying otherwise?).

      This Congress would rather not DO THEIR PRIMARY JOB... to uphold the Constitution. They've put up all kind of legislative window dressing to shield the fact that, outside of a few brave individuals trying to get to the ugly truth about this destructive administration, this Congress has not come close to doing the right thing: demanding compliance with the law and the truth from Bushco. - and impeaching them if they refuse.

  •  ...what. (15+ / 0-)

    He voted against a bill on the grounds that it assumed magical money would pay for Iraq, and he complimented the man who's seat he's won. You ALWAYS compliment the person whose seat you've won.

    ...and that makes him a Republican.


    jaiapprovedthis - what I lack in classiness I make up for in being right.

    by Jaiwithani on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:11:10 PM PDT

  •  Are you serious? (23+ / 0-)

    "But, wouldn't you rather have one of them than Hastert or Oberweiss?" you might ask?

    And the answer is no. I knew what I was working with when I had Hastert. Foster's little D after his name does nothing more than get my hopes up, just to see them dashed when it matters most.

    This kind of stuff drives me up the wall.

    Foster was a huge victory. He is a Democrat. His vote was the one that passed that ethics bill.

    If he wasn't there, it wouldn't have passed!!! Next time, we can have another victory and elect someone who is more progressive than Foster. And then we can do it again. But there is simply no ambiguity about whether or not Foster is an improvement over Hastert or Oberweiss. He is.

    Sometimes...the people we love disappoint us.

    by jenontheshore on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:11:11 PM PDT

  •  He just got there... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenearth, hideinplainsight, Lujane

    Listen, I know that this looks bad, but he just got elected!

    I would examine the body of work, rather than the few decisions he has made...

    If he is the wrong choice, then we only have him until November! He will have to answer to you and others!

    But make sure you voice your displeasure!

    "I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in." - George McGovern

    by IraqVeteran on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:12:45 PM PDT

    •  He has to run again in a Red district! Get a grip (9+ / 0-)

      He can't go around insulting the people that kept this a Red district for 22 years and get reelected in Nov.

      I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. Barack Obama

      by hideinplainsight on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:16:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  You miss the point... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        greenearth, hideinplainsight, Lujane

        Transformation does not happen overnight and YOUR overreaction is not helping him!

        As I stated, I urged patience and understanding because of his recent election and that, he has to answer to all citizens in his electorate!

        One Vote can tip the balance in his district and he will be held accountable for his actions! Remember, OBAMA campaigned for him and he will be looking to him again in November and I am sure he does not want to be discarded for his record!

        "I'm fed up to the ears with old men dreaming up wars for young men to die in." - George McGovern

        by IraqVeteran on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:37:41 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  If he keeps voting with Republicans on budget (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        flautist, llbear

        ... stuff on close votes it's not going to entice Democrats to vote for him, either.

        This is a list of who voted what on this 2009 Budget resolution.  Only 16 Democrats voted against it with 191 Republicans.  It required a simple majority of 210 votes to pass out of 419. It got 212 votes. Speaker of the House Pelosi had to vote to get it to pass, she ususally doesn't unless she's the tiebreaker.

        No Republicans voted for for this bill.  Repeat, no Republicans voted for this bill.

        This is an extremely legitimate diary, and it shows how far the quality of the commentary has sunk here for anyone making snide comments along the line of "so what he's a Democrat."  Right out the gate Foster is sucking up to the Reepers.  This is why he "won" his primary by such a razor thin margin. Because he equivocates.  And equivocators don't stand for anything in the public's perception.

  •  We should never support anyone unless (7+ / 0-)

    we agree on every issue! That will be an effective strategy for changing the political narrative.

    Listen, I understand your concerns. In fact I share them. But you've got to work with what you've got, striving to make incremental change after incremental change -- and never giving up. That's what Kos preaches, and he's correct.

    •  You are asking us to vote strategically... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      And I agree. There has rarely been a candidate that I've been excited about, and even those few had issues with which I disagreed. As late as November 2006, I held the position that it was necessary to vote for Dems, ANY Dem over any Repub, regardless of how distasteful.

      Not this time. In 2006, we gave Conyers, Leahy and Waxman the chairs of their various committees. I think that is about all we accomplished. Over a year later, we are no closer to extracting ourselves from Iraq, no closer to staunching the bleeding out of our Treasury, no closer to fixing our Judicial system, no closer to solving any domestic problem from healthcare to the credit crisis.

      And we are no closer to holding the Bush administration accountable for their criminality and abuse of power. On the contrary, this Congress has voted to reward Bushco. with even more Congressional and Constitutional slack.

      The addition of Mr. Foster will do nothing to change the direction of this country. He will pose no serious challenge to the Dem leadership, or do anything to disrupt the <15% approval rated performance of this Congress.</p>

      If one were to vote blindly Democratic, that's what one got, and what one should continue to expect. However, if you believe that something is terribly wrong with this country, and that it has been a joint production of a criminal Repub administration and an enabling, gelded Democratic "opposition", you would step back and see that all voting in Mr. Foster did was to keep out a progressive voice that would have openly challenged the Party on every single issue I mentioned above. If Oberweis had won, we would have had an atrocious Repub on display: a singularly hideous example of the core "values" of that party - and would have also changed absolutely nothing of any consequence. And maybe this "Blue Dog" Dem would be relunctant to spend another $2M of his fortune barely beating out a strong progressive in the next primary.

      In the long term, we would have all been better off. But that would be playing chess, not "chutes and ladders".

  •  Okay let's see (28+ / 0-)

    Foster is one of the big reasons that Dems got a spine on FISA. His first vote was to ban torture. He was the deciding vote to create the office of ethics.

    I am sure Oberweis would have done all of that.

  •  Nonsense! (10+ / 0-)

    After FIVE YEARS Bush still can't present a budget which accounts for this stinking war.

    That's all Foster is after, transparancy.

    Rich white people run America, as far as I know.

    by Inventor on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:16:03 PM PDT

  •  On the other and, thank you for helping bring (10+ / 0-)

    back the old Daily Kos fights.

    Since the Clinton-Obama fights began in earnest, there's been a depressing lack of Vichy Dem diaries.

    •  I'm not sure that's helpful. (10+ / 0-)

      As I'm sure you may know from flautist's many diaries, she has been an avid supporter of Mr. Laesch. No doubt some of this is sheer disappointment about what should have been, from her point of view. So?

      I don't see any harm in being watchful and critical of a representative - even a Democrat. The diary may be over the top in spots, but I appreciate the point of view.

      I for one appreciate a diary about an actual congressional representative voting on actual issues affecting the country right now. That's worth a recommend from me, whether I agree on all points or not.

      The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4

      by vox humana on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:22:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Understatement of the day, right here.:) (3+ / 0-)

        The diary may be over the top in spots

        Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar. Edward R. Murrow

        by Pager on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:59:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, and I'm certain Mr. Laesch voted for Foster. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        vox humana

        But in any case, I was actually being kind of serious. I've missed those diaries.

      •  Very good comment, except that ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        vox humana

        there was nothing in the Diary about 'an congressional representative voting on actual issues' - the only complaints made in the diary were (1) that the Diarist simply didn't understand a fundamental budgetary bookkeeping, honesty, and transparency issue Foster was (quite unobjectionably) raising, apparently thinking it was about Foster wanting More War; and (2) Foster failed to execrate the name of Dennis Hastert, because Foster needs to hold on to some people who used to vote for Hastert. These weren't substantial issues to complain about.

        Now, somewhere in the Comments someone brings up a budget bill that passed by the slimmest of margins with no R votes and with Foster one of sixteen D's to oppose it. That would seem to be a valid sign of concern for Foster's Dem bona fides, and an example of 'an congressional representative voting on actual issues.' But that was not in the Diary.

  •  Where were you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    when this election started? Did you sign up to run? Did you advocate for a better candidate or do a grassroots effort for anyone?

    You didn't even vote.

    And you're complaining now. Good job.

    •  Do you know who you're talking to? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ... of course not.

      Next december or january or february, if he wins re election,  and this joker starts thumbing his nose at other stuff everybody "thought" he would vote for, because he has that little "d" behind his name, some of you might start to catch on.  But I'm not going to hold my breath.

    •  I worked my ass off in this election (7+ / 0-)

      and would have also worked hard for Mr. Stein hadhe been the nominee. I have been working this district since John Laesch first inspired me to politics in 2005, in his first run against Hastert. But, I can't vote for someone who wants to give us all biometric ID cards and uphold pay-to-play healthcare. (see my post upthread for sources)

    •  Yes, she did (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      llbear, AmericanRiverCanyon
      She was an avid, hands-on supporter of Foster opponent John Laesch. She could, I suppose, be criticized for "sour grapes" (although I fully understand her disappointment and agree that Laesch was the better candidate) but she absolutely cannot be criticized for not doing anything herself to get the best candidste possible.

      We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14:

      by anastasia p on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 03:53:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Many of us have been here a long time.. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Supporting Dems against overwhelming odds.
      Many, particularly Mr. Laesch, worked a long time to recruit and build up a Party where it had barely existed. Did Mr Foster EVEN VOTE in the general election in 2006 - let alone give any support whatsoever to Mr. Laesch against former House Speaker Hastert? I believe that answer is NO.

      Okay, so this is a career builder for Mr. Foster. What does that mean for us? He will do NOTHING to rock the boat or challenge the Dem leadership. He will be so polite, he would never dream of bringing up impeachment or single payer or the fact that the generals who valued their additional stars above all may NOT be the ones you want to listen to in Iraq.. - exactly what the DCCC wanted when they looked at him and his money back in 2007.

  •  Could you please explain the outrage here? (5+ / 0-)

    As I read it - and there doesn't seem to be more in the article than in the pullquote - all Foster seems to be saying is that funding the war off-budget with supplementary resolutions, rather than doing the honest thing and including it in the official budget, is bad practice. Which it is.

    I'm not well-informed about Foster, so I don't know his position, record, and rhetoric on the war. But this doesn't seem to tell me anything about that - just that he is upset at the absurd way the budgetary details of funding the war have been arranged thus far.

    And the Hastert stuff is boilerplate:  there is no reason for Foster not to say he's happy to talk to knowledgeable people of all party affiliations and ideological stripes, and every reason for him to say so. He's won, so he can afford to be magnanimous; and there's no reason to pointlessly antagonize his voters who eighteen months ago reinstalled Hastert by, what, twenty points?

    Again, what is the concrete reason for all your outrage?

  •  Refine your logic, please. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    greenearth, DemocraticLuntz

    You need ways of drawing your lines that don't transform votes for Nader into victories for Bush.


    You seem to vacillate between uncertainty about which way Foster will go on individual issues (sometimes good, sometimes bad) and your certainty that "the only difference" is the D behind his name.

    I don't have an opinion about Foster or a prediction about his future performance but I'm pretty confident that he'll be quite different from Hastert.

  •  More Laesch sour grapes. /eom (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  Evern since CPUSA (pro-Albanian) (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    party got defunct I was looking for a party to join, and I even considered Democrats, but after looking at this Foster fella (can you believe that he proudly uses W for the middle name) I said: naay, naaaaay, naaaaaaaay.

    May I suggest Monster Loony Party, a progressive outfit with a sense of humor?

  •  Dumbass (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Emmanuel isn't in charge of the D-trip any more. It's hard to take anything you have to say seriously when your blaming someone who had nothing to do with what you're blaming him for.

    Also, I see very little in the way of evidence for your wild accusations about Foster. He's been in Congress less than a week. Hardly enough time to prove what kind of Democrat he'll be.

    This is a lame diary, and is not to be taken seriously.

    •  He may not be in charge of the DCCC (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pager, llbear

      but he does still hold influence there, and holds a lot of influence in Illinois politics and the Chicago machine because of his former position.

    •  Rahm is still very much involved with the DCCC (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      llbear, Downtowner

      In a DCCC press release dated January 29, 2008, DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen said

      The aggressive leadership overseeing our Red to Blue Program allows us to stay on the offense. Congressmen Braley is a wonderful addition to a team consisting of Chairman Emanuel, Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz, Congressman Davis and Congressman Crowley.

      The press release went on to say

      In addition, Chair Van Hollen announced Representative Dennis Cardoza (D-CA), a member of the Blue Dog Coalition, will join Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) and Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz in chairing the Frontline Program. ... "Congressman Cardoza is a great addition to our outstanding Frontline leadership team of Congresswoman Wasserman Schultz and Congressman Emanuel."

      If you believe that Rahm Emanuel simply handed Van Hollen the keys to the DCCC and walked away to attend to other things, you don't understand Emanuel at all.

      And if you think that Emanuel, and Steny Hoyer, as well, didn't actively intervene in the IL-14 primary, you don't know anything about about how Bill Foster was elected, either.  It is a matter of public record that both of them made signficant financial contributions to Foster during the primary campaign, for starters.

  •  At the very least, please consider the math. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eternal Hope, greenearth

    I could not bring myself to vote for Bill Foster, for many reasons, and I did not. The biggest reason is that I am tired of the choice between Republican and Republican-lite.

    Not voting for the Democratic candidate in a reliably republican voting district does not help us achieve the majority we need, and possibly contributing to a victory by the odious Oberweiss (by not voting for Foster) is an act 12 short of a dozen, in my opinion.

    •  We already HAVE a majority... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...and what have they chosen to do except to be enablers of the worst president in history.. and lend a tone of legitimacy to some blatantly illegal (and immoral) policies?

      •  Not a veto proof majority- big difference n/t (0+ / 0-)
        •  These are excuses.. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The Dems have failed to be an oppositional minority... they are failing to be an oppositional majority. Funny how the Repubs never needed 60 votes to get what they wanted.. Reid allows them to fillibuster just by saying so -instead of making them stay up all night and telling the American people exactly why they are fighting against children's healthcare, looting of our treasury, breaking our law and international law..
          Reid and Pelosi have allowed horrible bill, the Senate FISA legislation as an example, to come up for a vote.

          The House should have been dragging Miers and Bolton down to the Congress in handcuffs for contempt. But they behave as if there isn't flagrant lawbreaking going on all around them. And these are the people who we want to be in the leadership to fix this mess?

  •  Go with Nader then. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Have a good trip.

    It rubs the loofah on its skin or else it gets the falafel again.

    by Fishgrease on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 02:34:03 PM PDT

  •  Foster is from a Republican majority District (3+ / 0-)

    Cut him some slack. Or we will be a permanent minority of purists.

  •  Oh for chrissake (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RunawayRose, DemocraticLuntz

    a real progressive had no shot at this Republican district; Foster's win was quite remarkable.

    His win has the Republicans terrified, the Democrats jubilant.  

    If you'll only vote for Democrats who are sterling, leftist, progressives to the core, then you will get Republicans forever.  Unfortunately, so will I and the rest of us.

    So, if you're going to do that, at least move to a district where your vote makes no difference at all, or where a progressive has a chance.  That will at least diminish the population in a Republican district.

    •  This district (4+ / 0-)

      is turning bluer and bluer almost by the day. DeKalb county, the county I live in, is now controlled by Democrats. The party organization in DeKalb is progressive. So is Kendall's. These were formerly two of the most republican counties in the district. We have worked to form a PDA chapter for the 14th. Kane County elected a progressive Dem as Sheriff in the last cycle, and they are by far the largest county in the district. A progressive has a real shot in this district! If we keep saying that progressives don't have a shot, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

      Case in point: I met SO MANY people on the campaign trail who's hearts were with John, but said they were thinking about voting for Foster because they thought he had a better chance at winning. If those people had went with the candidate who they agreed with instead of the one that the media annointed as the front-runner, would we now have a progressive in that seat? Foster won the primary by less than half a percent, despite outspending his progressive opponent almost 20 to 1. I think that says something about the way this district is trending.

      •  It says something about the Democrats in the (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Warren Terra

        district.  It says nothing about the balance of Democrats and Republicans.

        Let's see:

        IL-14 went for Bush by almost identical margins in 2000 and 2004.  Hastert won easily, but that's not such a good test.

        Let's look at the state legislature in IL.
                    In 2006:        In 2004:
        Senate:     37D  22R          32D  27R  
        House:      66D  52R          67D  51R

        interesting that the Senate got a lot bluer but the House didn't

        The problem is, I can't find a list of state reps or senators by county.  Oh well.  That would seem to be a good indication.

        In any case, my main point that Foster is better than a Republican

    •  You usually get this stuff right. Not this time. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      plf515, Downtowner

      Every County Chairman in IL-14 was on board and delivered for John Laesch except one. The Mayor of Yorkville [Hastert's hometown] - a Republican - supported John Laesch in aq big and, for her, politically risky way.  These ain't wild-eyed liberals we are discussing.

      John made one mistake in the last days of the primary - and it turned out to be a fatal one.  He didn't send out a mailing the last weekend.  Foster won this district with cross-over Republican votes in Kane County.  Those folks absolutely hate Oberweis. That wasa smart & good for him. They are primary voters and will have little effect in the general election.  That's why Oberweis isn't dropping out - at least for now.

      Oberweis will spend a lot of the summer making sure everyone knows that Foster is beholden to Rahm Emmanual - and that for many Democrats as well as every Republican in this District - is tantamount to sleeping with Satan.

      If we have local bank failure [unlikely, but possible], then Foster has a chance.

      Jerry Northington [aka Possum], Gilda Reed: We need you in DC. John Laesch: you made me proud of you.

      by llbear on Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 01:00:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I would disagree.. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      llbear, Downtowner

      Mr. Laesch could have beat Oberweis... which is the LAST thing that the DCCC wanted to have happen.

      For all the money that was spent, the turnout was only 22%.

      Sadly, our votes are going to mean less and less as big money pushes out anyone that would challenge the current Dem leadership.

  •  Nader supporter thinking (0+ / 0-)

    The Democratic candidate isn't perfect. So we might as well let the Republicans win.

    Besides, what good is a Democratic majority if they aren't all liberal? The last thing we need is for some Democratic congressmen to disagree with each other some of the time.

    Take the fight to them. Don't let them bring it to you. - Harry S Truman

    by jgoodfri on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 03:09:15 PM PDT

  •  You don't like the guy you didn't vote for? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Warren Terra, Asherd

    'Magine that.

    I think I'll give Foster at least a couple of months before I make a pronouncment on his behaviour.

  •  oh goody (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    the sanctimonious purity brigade rides again.  You people make me gag.

    two cheers for democracy

    by ClaryinVT on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 03:25:20 PM PDT

  •  Prickles (0+ / 0-)

    But don't worry.
    It's part and partial to free speech.
    So keep speaking up. We just get a little tougher skin after awhile.

    Looking for Good Reason

    by Clzwld on Sun Mar 16, 2008 at 04:18:27 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site