The Capitol Fax Blog » Schock roundup and Seals poll

Tuesday, Nov 13, 2007

* OK, so far, we know that state Rep. Aaron Schocks “deeply thought-out” proposal to threaten China with nuclear holocaust if it doesn’t cooperate on halting Iran’s quest for nuclear weapons is deeply flawed on just about every level…

* The United States doesn’t even have any of the missiles that Schock wants to sell to Taiwan to pressure China because those Pershings were all destroyed after Ronald Reagan signed a treaty with the Soviet Union. Ironically, Schock’s spokesman claims that this China gambit is Reaganesque.

* Schock voted for a Sudan pension fund divestment proposal but voted against a similar proposal to divest from Iran’s energy companies, which are developing that country’s nuclear weapons.

* As expected, Monday’s political column in the Peoria Journal-Star doesn’t mention any of this stuff except to use Schock’s spin…

Schock is doing what he thinks voters want, giving details. Thus far, at least, other candidates have only scratched the surface on any issues.

* And then in today’s…

State Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Peoria, is worth somewhere up to $1,245,000, including between $500,000 and $1 million owed to Busey Bank to finance Old Orchard Land trust - an apartment complex, according to reports. […]

He mostly carries investments in real estate, securities and stocks valued between $933,000 and $1,995,000, with income from those assets producing at best $17,600 annually, according to reports.

His annual salary was reported at $132,704, including about $42,463 from the state, $25,000 from Junction Ventures, for which he no longer works, and $65,240 from Peterson Healthcare.

“I think this hopefully demonstrates that while I’m not rich, I certainly know the importance of saving and investing, and I tried to be responsible with the money that I earned and have tried to do the same as a public official,” Schock said.

To which Billy Dennis responds…

Meanwhile, here in the real world, there’s a word to describe people with $1 million: “Rich.”

* On another congressional race, the Politico had this…

Marketing executive Dan Seals holds a commanding lead over former Clinton administration aide Jay Footlik by 52 points for the Democratic nomination to challenge Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), according to a poll released by his campaign.

The poll found that 58 percent of likely primary voters would vote for Seals, while only 6 percent preferred Footlik.

Seals, by virtue of his Congressional campaign last year, tallied higher name identification: 69 percent of respondents recognized his name, while only 24 percent could identify Footlik.

The poll, conducted by Garin-Hart-Yang Research Group surveyed 404 likely Democratic primary voters between November 5-7.

* But commenters over at Team America blog question the wording of the survey.

* More congressional stuff, compiled by Paul…

* GOP candidates to replace Hastert disagree on debate timeline

* New Lenox man running to replace Weller

- posted by Rich Miller

54 Comments

- Anonymous - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 9:28 am:
Any idea what Shock’s “Peterson Healthcare” income is from? I know he twisted arms on nursing home matters from time to time - any connection?

- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 9:32 am:
Aaron Schock’s proposal regarding Taiwan is ridiculous and stupid. The fact that his proposal is not being discussed in the Peoria paper is negligence. The Journal Star is not doing it’s job. If they consider Schock a real candidate, then they need to give him real coverage.

No surprise about Seals. Kirk’s re-election won’t be a surprise either.

- Pat collins - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 9:47 am:
Well, it’s not the assets you own, it’s assests minus liabilities.

I would say an income of 132K in Peoria is very much “upper class”. Hard to say how much equity he has, and that will determine if he’s rich.

Income of 1% doesn’t seem like much on that asset base.

- Captain America - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 9:52 am:
Seals did well enough against Kirk to warrant an unimpeded second shot. Footlik’s candidacy is illegitimate and a waste of precious resources/money that should be used to try to defeat Kirk.

A Democratic landslide is the only thing likely to topple Mark Kirk.

Kirk probably deserves to be defeated based upon his support for the Iraq War/Bush adminstration policies. Objectively he doesn’t seem moderate/centrist to me, but he is a moderate compared to the right wing of the
Republican Party. Kirk is not a real John Porter centrist.

If I were Seals, I’d push KIrk into rejecting the Bush adminstration desire to contimue occupying Iraq indefinitely and try to make the election a referendum on the Iraq debacle,the greatest strategic blunder in the history of American foreign policy.

- Captain America - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 10:00 am:
Shock has succeed in making himself look lke a foreign policy idiot. It would force China’s hand like the Soviet Union did by attempting to install missles in Cuba. I can’t think of nay action that would jepardize Taiwan more than attempting to give Taiwan nuclear armed missiles. What an ignoramous! I imagine Catapiller would frown on Schock’s belligerent foreing policy proposal, since I assume CAT wants to do business with China.

- Team America, World Police - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 10:04 am:
Captain America- by what standards is Footlik’s campaign “illegitimate”? That smacks of back room dealings and party anointments- may work well in Chicago but is rejected by people in the 10th District.

It’s just as legitimate to say that Seals had his shot (and it WAS a Democratic landslide year) and couldn’t deliver, so why isn’t it Footlik’s turn?

BTW, Kirk is rated almost precisely in the center of the House. If he’s not a moderate, no one is.

Finally, the war is not going to be the big deal in 2008 that it was in 2006- see the Team America post re same. Even the national Dems are hedging their bets and working on pumping up their domestic creds.

- Just Observing - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 10:47 am:
The Seals poll is so ridiculous — you have to figure Mickey Mouse would do better than 6%, therefore they released such an unreasonable figure that I immediately discounted that poll.

- bored now - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 10:58 am:
i don’t know, i would have called the comments at the team america blog rampant speculation. questioning the geographical distribution of a professional poll? it’s almost like they don’t know about the requirement of random sampling.

furthermore, i’d question whether anyone over there understands what is a push poll. it’s a rather baseless charge, drawn apparently from ignorance. not one single attribute of a push poll is present, at least not from what we know — nor does anyone actually accuse the poll of having elements of push polling present. it’s obvious that this does not constitute a push poll (if you understand what the term means and how it is used).

finally, the questions about a head-to-head matchup against kirk is just bizarre. one assumes, if this poll has any integrity at all, that it is a poll of democrats or people who say they will vote in the democratic primary. after all, *that’s* what the poll is about (the democratic primary). why on earth would you ask a head-to-head matchup question of partisan voters? the results would be tremendously skewed.

i get the feeling that team america is just looking for angles (and making them up, to boot!) to attack the seals campaign…

- Team America, World Police - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:02 am:
Bored- here’s the wikipedia definition of push poll:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_poll

While the Seals poll appears to have been conducted by a reputable pollster and clearly the Seals camp is taking credit for it, the types of questions and statements made to the respondents make it sound a lot like negative campaigning under the guise of a legitimate poll to me. The Seals camp also did not release other common polling data such as the margin of error, as far as I know.

Whereas many push polls are used to simply spread propaganda, they can also be used to pump up a candidate’s poll results by “poisoning the well” by the clever use of slanted questions, to achieve the desired result.

If the Seals camp wants to refute that, they can release the questions and results. Their move.

Well, actually, it’s Footlik’s move.

- Team America, World Police - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:08 am:
Oh, one more thing, Bored. Your point on the head-to-head for Kirk being out of place in a primary Dem poll would be right, except that in the 10th, which voted for Kerry, there are an awful lot of Dems that vote for Kirk, especially among certain demographics, so it would be telling information if that question were asked. Seals/Footlik need to get these Dems back to the fold, so if Seals is not polling well among the likely Dem voters, that presents a problem, and something I would think they would want to ascertain.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:09 am:
I’d like to see the actual wording before calling it a push poll. The only real push polls, in my opinion, aren’t polls at all but large phone canvasses. You can’t do much damage by just calling a few hundred people.

- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:09 am:
“the greatest strategic blunder in the history of American foreign policy.”

You don’t know much history, do you?

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:11 am:
VM, instead of just hurling an insult, why not point out what you believe is a much bigger strategic blunder?

- Team America, World Police - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:14 am:
“You can’t do much damage by just calling a few hundred people.”

If that’s the accepted definition of “push poll”, I’ll be happy to accept Rich’s correction, as an audience of 404 voters are not going to make or break the election as far as propaganda. But, it may still well amount to negative campaigning (as opposed to testing negative issues) in my opinion, depending on the phraseology of the questions. Any bets on whether Seals will release them?

- Show me the Money - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:19 am:
No seriously, why does Peterson Health Care pay Schock $65,000? What did he do for Junction Ventures? Schock is so out of touch with every day people in his district. His third job in 2007 paid $25,000 while people in his district work 3 jobs and don’t make $25,000 total.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:20 am:
Also, it helps to know when the questions were asked. Often, they’ll do a head to head, then give respondents their messages about both candidates and ask the head to head again to see if the messaging works.

The media is often way too quick to judge a poll as a negative “push” when in fact they’re just questions designed to test an upcoming negative message.

- Greg - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:35 am:
I have no idea how fishy Schock’s income sources are, but objections based on income level itself are pretty silly. If he’s already “so out of touch with every day people in his district” based on that income, then so is every member of Congress immediately upon election–hardly a reason to vote for someone else.

- Show me the Money - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:38 am:
Good point about Congressmen, didn’t think about that. I’m also not saying it’s fishy, but what could Schock do for what looks like a nursing home that would be worth $65,000 a year? I’m just wondering. He already makes good money from the state, why does he need a second job? It makes me made when other Reps also do law work, but I don’t think Schock has a law degree.

- 11Bravo - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 12:19 pm:
The bigger question resulting from the disclosure of Schock’s income is how he cannot feel guilty (or avoid a potential conflict of interest) working for a healthcare provider (Petersen Healthcare) AND sit on the Dept of Human Services House Appropriation Committee. It would seem obvious to me that someone who works for a healthcare provider should not sit on the House committee that writes the state’s checks to healthcare providers. Can anyone shed some light on how he hasn’t been called on this yet?

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 12:26 pm:
11Bravo, as long as the job is legit, we have a citizen legislature and so this is probably no big deal except to people who have little understanding of what a citizen legislature is about. Lots of farmers sit on the Agriculture Committee, for example.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 12:27 pm:
…Adding…

The only exception would be if a legislator interceded on behalf of legislation that specifically benefitted his or her particular business and not others in the same field.

- the wonderboy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 12:38 pm:
Greg-Valid point about the salary and such, but this goes a little deeper. Schock has repeatedly tried to represent himself as a self-made man, yet these numbers seem to indicate a little outside influence at first glance. The other question that needs explanation is how he does not qualify himself as rich. Assets over a million at 26 years old? Doesn’t see himself as rich? That does seem a little out of touch with the typical voter.

My concerns about him are not surrounding his income/assets, however. In the end, this just reinforces my concerns about his maturity and ability to represent the common voter. It’s the sum of the parts which add up to equal a young man who is not prepared to serve in Congress.

- bored now - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 12:40 pm:
i’m not sure where you got the idea that anyone would call a poll a push poll because of what you call “poisoning the well” — but i am assuming that the pollster, given their reputation, asked the matchup question before (as well as after) negative messaging was tested. that’s one reason why campaigns conduct benchmark polls. i suppose, if you were paying for the poll, you could ask any question you want, but polls are priced by the amount of time researchers spend asking questions. questions that return only partial data aren’t considered worth the cost, in my experience.

rich’s “opinion” is correct. you are not. here’s an old answer i posted elsewhere:

the asking of a negative question is not the definition of a push poll. it’s not even close. we have an accepted definition of pushing polling:

A “Push Poll” is a telemarketing technique in which telephone calls are used to canvass vast numbers of potential voters, feeding them false and damaging “information” about a candidate under the guise of taking a poll to see how this “information” effects voter preferences. In fact, the intent is to “push” the voters away from one candidate and toward the opposing candidate. This is clearly political telemarketing, using innuendo and, in many cases, clearly false information to influence voters; there is no intent to conduct research.

push polls are defined by three primary characteristics:

1. instead of a sample, push polls seek to contact a very large universe of the electorate, thus the push poll is a form of telemarketing masquerading as a poll. more akin to telemarketing techniques than survey research techniques.

2. push polls occur within the context of an imminently approaching election. they seek to influence not merely the respondent’s answer, but the conversation and the election itself. Push-polls are designed to shape, rather than measure, public opinion.

3. push polls are short (20-60 seconds long), very pointed, and will not include any demographic questions.

people like yourself, people not really acquainted with the needs and demands of a political campaign, may not wish to understand that the term is also sometimes used inaccurately to refer to legitimate polls which test political messages, some of which may be negative.

cbs has a more detailed explanation:

Not all questions that seem negative are part of push polls. Candidate organizations sometimes do actual polls that contain negative information about the opposing candidate. These polls, which are not push polls, are conducted for the same reasons market and advertising researchers do their work: to see what kinds of themes and packages move the public.

In the advertisers’ case, they want to figure out the best way to reach buyers; candidate pollsters need to motivate voters. Polls done for campaign research are full-length, with more topics than just questions about the opponent, and include demographic questions that allow researchers to categorize respondents. Interviewers won’t ask to speak to anyone by name, but are calling a sample of randomly selected telephone numbers.

A lot of the push poll complaints that come to the attention of organizations like the National Council on Public Polls and the American Association for Public Opinion Research [national associations of survey researchers who try to uphold standards in their fields] are complaints about real candidate polls. The complaints are about the tone and the truthfulness of the questions that are asked.

The polls they complain of are real, although sometimes the questions may include the sort of negative information that are common in push polls and other advocacy telemarketing. The researchers ask hypothetical questions about a person’s vote should they learn particular things about an opposing candidate.

instead, people are complaining about a survey on message. testing message is not only an accepted practice — even when it includes negative questions — it is absolutely essential to the revision of any serious campaign. if a campaign is not testing negative messages on their opponents, it’s highly unlikely they are a serious candidacy in a competitive environment. legitimate pollsters are banned from doing push polling, and no pollster would admit that they did one. celinda lake, just by identifying herself and her firm — including to poll respondents — did not conduct a push poll.

only people who don’t understand campaigns, polling and standard tactics would argue that this is a push poll…

- Team America, World Police - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 12:59 pm:
Bored- enough! I concede the “push poll” definition issue! Although Rich’s correction was enough and I already had posted an update to that effect over at Team America’s Blog. I guess we’ll just have to see how Footlik responds over the next few days. If he is essentially silent over the accuracy of the poll, and he does not counter with his own polling data telling a different story, then he does indeed have a world of ground to make up in a very short time period.

- SoccerDad - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 1:03 pm:
The poll released by the Seals’ team is just the beginning of a negative campaign against Footlick. By not agreeing to debates and by going negative on this poll, Seals is becoming the monster he criticized so much in the previous election. Please get some class Mr. Seals and let Jay Footlick, a member of your own party, have a fair chance at winning the primary.

- True Observer - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 1:15 pm:
Schock at age 26 has made a million and the wonderby says:

“In the end, this just reinforces my concerns about his maturity and ability to represent the common voter.”

This is said with a straight face.

In the wonderboy’s world up is down and down is up.

From the “common voter” perspective, there is no better test of maturity than your ability to make a million by age 26.

- Some Guy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 1:44 pm:
Wait? His name is actually Footlik? Aw, man, you can’t go to Congress with a name like that.

- ModMamma - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 1:58 pm:
Footlik just began cable tv ads and sent his first direct mail piece to Dem primary voters. I’m sure these polling numbers will change dramatically as the Footlik campaign builds more name ID and a positive image. To do this they need money and Footlik seems to be raising it. Seals just wants to take momentum out of Footlik’s campaign by releasing these numbers now. Decent strategy, although I’m sure they aren’t taking the Footlik campaign lightly internally. Let’s see if the Seals campaign releases their polling numbers in December and January. Those will be a much better indicator of the actual campaign mood.

- Marine - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 2:26 pm:
First off, I happen to know that when they polled, they made a bunch of bad comments and mentioned some of Footliks ‘shortfalls’, then conducted the poll. How can you expect that to go any way but the way it did? Not to mention, Seals didn’t even release the whole poll and mention that fact.
Also, did he even mention Kirk in his polls? Of course not, because he’s not winning or even close. If he was he would’ve mentioned that.
Lastly, since Footlik had a big fundraiser just YESTERDAY, this whole thing isn’t even indicative of the true race. I just don’t see how Seals can claim such a win when his facts aren’t even right.

- the wonderboy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 2:30 pm:
“From the “common voter” perspective, there is no better test of maturity than your ability to make a million by age 26.”

Really? I could think of many things that I find more important. My statement had nothing to do with his ABILITY to make the money, however. It had everything to do with his view that being a millionaire does not make one rich. That, my friend, is severely out of touch with the common voter. Severely.

Make the money–great. Think that you are an average Joe when you are a millionaire–absurdly demented as to the definition of the average Joe. Perhaps you are trying to spin my comments, but I actually said that I have no issue with his ability to make the money or be wealthy. Please take the time to read again.

And I said all of that with a straight face.

- True Observer - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:10 pm:
Schock, ahead of the curve -

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Defense Department on Tuesday informed lawmakers about a possible sale to Taiwan of Patriot missile system upgrades valued at $939 million and supplied by U.S. defense contractor Raytheon Co.

- the wonderboy - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:13 pm:
True Observer…are you trying to compare Patriot missiles to nuclear missiles? One is offensive and the other defensive for starters. One is a violation of multiple treaties, the other is not. One saves lives, the other is the most destructive force ever developed by man. Etc…etc…etc…Apples and oranges…apples and oranges.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:17 pm:
Also, those are upgrades, according to the article. It’s not something brand new.

- Rayfan - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:22 pm:
True Observer,

The comparison if a Patriot Missle Defense System to Pershing Nuclear Missles may be the single most ridiculous thing I’ve read in this whole crazy episode. If I were one of the other guys, I’d be hoping you work for Schock!

C’mon!

- True Observer - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:33 pm:
Patriot missiles. Pershing missiles.

The average Joe will understand.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:35 pm:
Only if you lie to them.

- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:46 pm:
—–First off, I happen to know that when they polled, they made a bunch of bad comments and mentioned some of Footliks ‘shortfalls’, then conducted the poll. How can you expect that to go any way but the way it did? Not to mention, Seals didn’t even release the whole poll and mention that fact.

Errr…that’s what an early poll does. Test your weaknesses and your opponents. That’s how polling works for a campaign. You put the generic test up front and then probe what is likely to be both campaigns weaknesses to determine how to determine your strategy.

If you haven’t developed a poll for a campaign maybe this all seems strange, but it’s standard practice and the sample size is typical. There’s nothing out of the ordinary or unexpected.

Footlik has barely been doing any advertising and so his 6% showing isn’t unusual. Actually, the story is different than everyone seems to understand–that Jay has low name recognition is to be expected–that primary voters know Dan well enough for him to break 50% is very telling and essentially it’s an incumbent versus a challenger in this race for the primary. I can guarantee John Laesch isn’t over 50% in his District with primary voters.

- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:47 pm:
“VM, instead of just hurling an insult, why not point out what you believe is a much bigger strategic blunder?”

Really, an insult? Twice today I have heard some over-emotional individual claim that Iraq is the biggest blunder in history. These kinds of claims make me angry because it displays such a utter ignorance of American history.

Where do I begin? Here is just a few dozen…

Sacking of Washington because of wrong usage of ships for naval blockade.
Invasions of Upper and Lower Canada by the US.
Biggest battle occurred two weeks after war ended.
Treaty of Ghent showed that war ended with no winner.
The American Civil War
Bull Run
Pickett’s Charge
Little Big Horn
US ignor’s Japanese threats prior to Pearl Harbor.
The Italian Campaign in WWII, instead of invading France as desired by US military.
Iwo Jima - 26,000 casualties, and Okinawa - 51,000 casualties 30 days before Hiroshima ended WWII.
Truman ignors China’s threat to fight in Korea.
Longest retreat of US military in history, 15000 casualties.
Vietnam
Operation Eagle’s Claw

Iraq? PLEASE open a freaking history book!

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 3:52 pm:
Quite a few of those items are tactical, not strategic.

- True Observer - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:02 pm:
As you walk around the mall safe and secure from suicide bombers and worse, keep thinking about how Iraq is the biggest blunder in history.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:04 pm:
Also, very few of those items turned out horribly after just a few months or a few years. Here are some other thoughts…

The Civil War was an enormous strategic error by the Confederacy, not the North, for instance.

Ignoring the Japanese threat cost us dearly in the short term, but we won and democraticzed Japan.

Truman was worried sick about China. McArthur used faulty, skewed, ideological based intelligence to say otherwise.

Little Big Horn was the last big Indian “win.”

Etc.

- JonShibleyFan - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:04 pm:
From perhaps the greatest Illinoisan, Abraham Lincoln:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:06 pm:
Also, Operation Eagle Claw was a tactical failure, but I wouldn’t call it a strategic blunder. Plus, it begat our Special Forces, which have turned out to be quite excellent.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:07 pm:
Also, that mall post has to be one of the more ridiculous things you’ve ever posted here.

- True Observer - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:10 pm:
“Little Big Horn was the last big Indian “win.”

The Indian Casinos are a bigger “win” and they keep on winning.

- Pat Collins - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:16 pm:
Truman was worried sick about China. McArthur used faulty, skewed, ideological based intelligence to say otherwise

Bad luck, I just finished “The forgotten war” an excellent read.

Actually, Mac had no data at all. Eighth Army had a lot that did imply a Chinese intervention. Mac just ignored it but it wasn’t what he wanted to hear.

Read No Drums, One Bugle to see a former Marine, later State legis. leader dump on Mac big time.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:20 pm:
Agreed. I was referring to his own intelligence chief, not the army’s. Halberstam’s book.

Also, regarding Vietnam, I think the reason it was such a strategic blunder was that the country’s strategic importance was so vastly overinflated. It just wasn’t that “important” in the big picture, other than to show the Soviets to what lengths we would go to stop them from expanding. Which had its usefulness, of course.

- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:33 pm:
One more. Pickett’s Charge was a blunder by the South while in secession, so I don’t count that as an American mistake. Also, it looks more tactical than strategic. Ultimately, though, it handed the USA a huge strategic advantage, so I guess it could go either way.

- Rayfan - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 4:36 pm:
Appears Schock has realized he can’t spin his way out of this one:

http://www.pjstar.com/php/index.php?/news/
peoria_schock_admits_mistake_for_nuclear
_weapons_proposal/

- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 5:20 pm:
I’d highly recommend Mark Bowden’s piece on Operation Eagle Claw–I think the message one would take was it was a operational/tactical failure, not so long term large failure of foreign policy.

- Captain America - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 8:51 pm:
Van Man,

I don’t pretend to be a historian or a foreign polciy expert.Can’t recall the specific source of my quote from papers I wrote last year when taking courses on terrorism and international relations. .

There is in fact a general consensus among the foreign policy establishment and other objective analysts outside the Bush adminstration- not wild-eyed liberals - that the Iraq War has become,in fact, the greatest strategic disaster in the history of American foreign policy. All you have to do is discard your ideological blinders, pick up a book about the Iraq war, and read it. Or maybe ask Colin Powell.

Here’s a represntative quote from a retired general:

“The Iraq invasion was the greatest strategic disaster in Ameican history.”
Lt.General William Odem, Retired
Viet Nam Veteran, June 2005

- Wilmette Life - Tuesday, Nov 13, 07 @ 11:09 pm:
How embarassing is it for Seals to release a poll to the Hotline showing Kirk leading the race among Democrats? We should take another look at Jay Footlik. My sense is that he would not make such a blunder.

- JSF - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 7:21 am:
Wilmette Life, where in the Hotline did Seals poll say Kirk is leading? (here’s a hint - it didn’t)

Why would Seals poll head to head against Kirk in a poll for a Democratic primary?

Go ahead and advocate for your guy, but do so with facts. You’ve seen all of the bad poll analysis and untruths debunked on this post already, why add to them?

- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 9:22 am:
Also, that mall post has to be one of the more ridiculous things you’ve ever posted here.

Huh?

TrackBack URI

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.