by michael in chicago, Fri Feb 24, 2006 at 12:02:40 PM EST
Putting aside 'electability', which is a stupid insider metric, Duckworth is a great candidate but basically untrustworthy when it counts. Cegelis is a real progressive. And note that Michael has done paid graphics work for Cegelis. - Matt
This just came through one of the groups I'm on. I think it's safe to say that most of us reading this oppose the renewal of the Patriot Act. So where do the candidates in IL-06 stand:
The three candidates in the Democratic Party primary election for the 6th Congressional District were recently interview by the *DailyHerald in an endorsement session. All three were asked if they would have voted in favor of the compromise bill reauthorizing the Patriot Act.
Lindy Scott answered first: Because Democrats are in the minority, from a practical perspective, the compromise bill was probably the best deal that the Democrats could get, he said. He said he was still concerned about privacy issues and would push to ensure greater protections in the future, but he would have voted for the compromise bill.
Christine Cegelis said she agreed with Sen. Russ Feingold, the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Library Association, and others who opposed the reauthorization as embodied in the compromise bill. "I would have voted no. Period," she said. She also said that one of the problems with U.S. intelligence gathering is that agencies "have too much information -- they're overloaded with information" and their computer systems can't effectively process it all or coordinate it between agencies.
Tammy Duckworth said she, too, had reservations about privacy issues, but she would have voted for the bill and then would push for additional changes in the future. She also noted, however, that if information derived from electronic eavesdropping or other forms of intelligence gathering would have prevented 9/11 or "saved the life of a single soldier," that benefit would outweigh privacy concerns.
Cegelis agrees with Feingold, the ACLU and the ALA, and would have "voted no. Period." Duckworth said she would have voted for it, and sees value in trading privacy rights off for government eavesdropping's benefits. Scott thought the bill was the best we could do and would have voted for it.
Is there any question which candidate is the true progressive, the one that would fight for Democratic principles, stand up for us, and that we should support in this race?
by michael in chicago, Sun Feb 19, 2006 at 06:39:42 AM EST
I just took the opportunity to re-listen to the District 6 Candidate's Roundtable, broadcast yesterday on Chicago Public Radio's "Eight-Forty-Eight" program. You can listen to it here.
At around 15:00 Scott asks Duckworth:
"Why would you volunteer to run in the in the Sixth Congressional race where it was already contested when you live in the 8th?"
"I looked at the sixth district and I realized we needed some leadership. I realized we needed someone who was going to be able to beat Pete Roskam, and someone who could really connect with the voters, such as myself, who understood those key issues..."
She then goes on to progress through a laundry list of items resting on her AMT speech before being interrupted by the host who asks her "So what's your solution."
This quote demonstrates why the local Democrats in the Sixth are so incensed by Duckworth's campaign. It typifies how the Duckworth campaign and it's backers think they know the district well enough to actually have Duckworth say she saw a lack of leadership in the district and chose to fill the void herself.
I guess that's why her staff is provided by one of her backers, her fundraising network by her backers, and her publicist by her backers. I guess that's why only 2 of her donors (itemized) and three of her petition passers live in the district. That's filling a void alright. But I don't think the void is in the district's leadership.
by MHS, Tue Jan 31, 2006 at 06:14:29 AM EST
While this topic has been done before on MyDD, I wanted to hit it again now that Christine Cegelis has released her Fourth Quarter fundraising numbers. I'm going to do three things in this entry: look at the numbers by themselves, compare those numbers to other Illinois candidates, and compare them to other candidates nation-wide.
by michael in chicago, Mon Jan 30, 2006 at 06:15:06 PM EST
I missed the York Township Democrats candidate forum yesterday held in Villa Park. There is only so many times I can hear the candidates say the same answers to the same questions. But again, I picked the wrong one to miss as there seem to have been some good questions on deeper issues.
One of the most eye opening ones, in my opinion, was the questions directed at the candidates regarding depleted uranium used in Iraq. The question showed quite a difference in the candidates, especially given specific responses by Cegelis, Duckworth, and Scott.
Details after the jump...