April 16, 2003

60-40 VISION:

Ex-Ill. Gov. Eyed to Replace Fitzgerald (DENNIS CONRAD, Apr 16, 2003, Associated Press)
Within hours of Illinois Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (news, bio, voting record)'s surprise announcement that he will not seek re-election, top Illinois Republicans were courting former two-term Gov. Jim Edgar to become the party's standard bearer in 2004.

"He's clearly our dream candidate," said Bob Kjellander, an Illinois member of the Republican National Committee (news - web sites), who spoke with Edgar early Tuesday before Fitzgerald publicly confirmed his decision.

Edgar, a moderate who has twice rejected party appeals to run for Senate and retired as a popular incumbent in 1999, said the race was wide open and he was not ready to enter it.

"I don't want anybody to think I am doing this at this point. What I have done, at the request of party leaders, is said I would not say no and I would listen," said Edgar, who splits his time as a consultant and a fellow at the Institute for Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana.

Mr. Fitzgerald was the GOP's most vulnerable incumbent, his personal weaknesses compounded by the fact that conservatives weren't going to help him out. If they can get Mr. Edgar to run they stand a very good chance of retaining the seat and an outside chance of getting to 60 seats in the Senate and a filibuster-proof majority.
Posted by Orrin Judd at April 16, 2003 9:50 AM

Wow! I've suspected the Democrats of a fairly pure form of cynicism for some time but the comments about the war are eye-opening.

If there had been more American casualties the Democrat prospects would have been brighter, I suppose.

Remember people, as the democrat opposition to the tax reform proposals grows, what motivates these guys!

Posted by: Tom C., Stamford, Ct. at April 16, 2003 11:00 AM

Reading the comments of the "prominent Democratic senator" induce a vertiginous nausea.

I'm so glad a Democrat was not in charge on 9-11. Imagine it for a moment.

Posted by: DJ Joey at April 16, 2003 11:52 AM

Notice the phrasing in Conrad's article, "Bush Won't end the war" instead of "the war isn't ended" the subtle implication being that this is a war Bush started to distract attention from domestic problems, rather than a war declared by terrorists that much be fought to defend American citizens (there's something about that in the Oath of office isn't there?)

Notice also that 60 Minutes did a big thumbsucker article for Chuckie Schumer showing how heroic he is trying to protect airlines from stingers the same Sunday USA debuted the movie based on Rudy's biography starring James Woods.

Posted by: MarkD at April 16, 2003 8:15 PM