March 25, 2005

Boland seeking support
for state senate run

The Inside Dope can report that Rep. Mike Boland is telling allies that he will not seek re-election as state representative and intends to challenge Sen. Mike Jacobs for the 36th District senate seat.

It is not known when Boland will make a formal announcement of his plans.

This would pave the way for what will likely prove a very bruising and divisive race in light of long-standing personal and political animosity between the Jacobs' and Boland. The ugliness potential for this contest is off the charts.

It would also ignites jockeying among those eying a run for the 71st representative district seat left vacant in the wake of Boland's move.

Mentioned as potential Democratic contenders for this position are Porter McNeil, long time staffer and consultant for national, state-wide, and local Democratic candidates, and Dennis Ahern, who ran a strong campaign against Boland last cycle. Speculation has also included Savanna realtor Tony McCombie, and Lane Evans aide Jerry Lack.

It would set the stage for intense political activity and ensures an upcoming campaign season filled with enough chills and spills to satisfy even the most hardened political junkie. Stay tuned.

Thoughts? Comments are wide open again.

49 Comments:

At 3/25/2005 9:17 AM, Blogger anonymight said...

something tells me this is a massive hoax

 
At 3/25/2005 9:42 AM, Anonymous corn husker said...

Dope, you must be Mike boland to be so sure.

 
At 3/25/2005 9:55 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

A source had told me this was 100%, but on further thought, I realized that just because a candidate says he is going to do something, it doesn't necessarily mean that he will do it.
I've adjusted the story accordingly.

 
At 3/25/2005 10:07 AM, Anonymous chubby said...

Just when it looked like our local legislators were uniting. This is going to be one messy campaign. I hope that eveyone can keep this above board, but remembering the previous Jacobs-Boland race it will be down right nasty. Aint' that a shame?

 
At 3/25/2005 10:15 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

While the race isn't chisled in stone, it is shaping up that way.
It has the potential to get really ugly, but... anything is possible. Maybe if the race happens, it will end up being one that the candidates and public won't be ashamed of. A guy can dream.

And yes, it would pretty much blow that glimmer of cooperation out of the water.

 
At 3/25/2005 10:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Boland truely cared about our area he would stay where he is to be the Senior legislature in our area... why does he want to hurt our area? Moving to the Senate does nothing for our community... only for Mike Bolands personal vendeta against the Jacobs'..... Maybe Mike Boland should look at what is best for the area for once in his political career and not at what he wants to do out of revenge

 
At 3/25/2005 10:36 AM, Blogger bygump said...

Momma said that the Boland part was to remind me that sometimes we all do things that, well, just don't make no sense.

 
At 3/25/2005 10:45 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

other likely candidates for Boland's house seat would include Steve Stockton of Savanna who was a Labor Union lobbyist in Missouri - and Steve Ballard former UAW CAP Council Chair -

have also heard rumors that Boland's current Chief of Staff Mike Huntoon will throw his hat into the already crowded field as well - Huntoon being a well known name in the Quad Cities - don't know if that's just him blowing smoke or not - apparently he'd be counting on riding the family name and his boss's coat-tails -

as for Mike Jacobs - the people of Western Illinois are disgusted at the political maneuvering that put Mikie "lite" Jacobs in his daddy's seat and it's a breath of fresh air to hear that Boland will commit to taking on the Jacob's machine once again.

just like back in the day when Boland was a founder of the Citizen's Utility Board - he will continue doing the work of the people and not the "power-brokers." - Mike Boland's daddy didn't hand him anything - he earned his seat which is more than can be said for his next opponent! so this writer says - more power to MB in his upcoming race - it will undoubtedly be a case of "movin' on up!"

 
At 3/25/2005 11:20 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

when's the retraction coming, dope?

 
At 3/25/2005 11:21 AM, Anonymous Brad Fisher said...

QCT is preparing a Sunday story that puts a new spin on this item. Be ready to be surprised.

 
At 3/25/2005 11:24 AM, Blogger bygump said...

Now the secret to this game is, no matter what happens, never, never take your eye off the ball. That is what Mr. Boland is doing. Ping pong ain't for everyone.

 
At 3/25/2005 11:52 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

not the QCTIMES Sunday story AGAIN!

 
At 3/25/2005 11:53 AM, Blogger latinv said...

Dope: Why would Boland jump? MJ has access to dads 180K plus (though now he is sitting on 76K)he will raise a whole heck of a lot more. Boland is sitting on 111K, he can't raise another 100K by himself in less than a year. The spigot of Madigans money will be turned off if he bolts to Senate. McNeil and Ahern are the Dems best choices by far. They just better hope the former East Moliner La Hood does not get the Repub. nod for Gov; that would help Haring in the fall... but I doubt it will be enough. If we are allowed to make predictions: IF Boland jumps, he loses. If the vacany occurs, say hello to Rep McNeil or Ahern 71st voters.Best of luck to all of them

 
At 3/25/2005 12:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gump:
All candidates who have hoped this vacancy to occur (Porter, Lack, Ballard, etc.etc.)do not instill much confidence to people like myself- an average voter. The proverbial candidates need to make the tough decision to run or not.I think any of the men mentioned has what it takes to make the decision to run or not; others will need to prompt them. They may be good candidates, they may even win, but they aint leaders.

 
At 3/25/2005 1:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The dope finally exposed. dopester you finally got caught by your own blog. Representative Mike Boland is "the dope".....Who else would consider giving up a safe Representative seat to the republicans " I am the only democrat who can win this seat" paraphrasing your comments Mike in your last campaign. who else would consider giving up an "Angel" like Mike Madigan who has invested well over 1/2 million dollars to keep your seat democrat. Who else would give up 12 years seniority in the house to come to the senate as a freshman without seniority. Who else would give up an important committee chairmenship in the house with potential leadership possiblities to come to the senate without good committee assignments and no way for a committee chairmanship. Who else would do all these things ( for saking the good democrates who put you in the house for this many years) strictly for the purpose of revenge and for the detriment of the democrat party. Who else would create a devicive democrat primary for no good reason against Mike Jacobs who, whether the dopster Boland likes it or not is the encumbant Senator.. Who else except a man who professes to be a strong union advocate yet quit his union as a teacher working a number of years as a SCAB!! Who else will benefit, if in fact the dopster Boland, decides to take on the Sitting incumbent Mike Jacobs other than you Mike Boland and your ego. Most certainly the democrat party will only be split and will receive NO benefit. The answer is clear only Mike Boland can be "the dope" the so called "Leaked " information points directly at "the dope" - Mike Boland!. If in fact I am wrong and the Boland is not "the dope" I apologize to the real dope but the facts heretofor mentioned remain the facts.

 
At 3/25/2005 1:48 PM, Anonymous corn husker said...

It's a new fangled and different generation of politicians coming up. The old ways are going by the wayside. Ya just need someoone who knows the system.

 
At 3/25/2005 1:51 PM, Anonymous corn husker said...

Boland ain't smart enought ot run a blog

 
At 3/25/2005 2:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

what happened to the Mike's pulling in the right direction for our area? I for one am disappointed in Mike B.

 
At 3/25/2005 2:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please Rep. Boland, don't risk your political future on the roll of a single pair of dice. Ecspecially when you are so close to the end of your poilitcal career.

Remeber when you lost the state Senate race to Denny Jacobs in 1986. Imagine spending the remainder of your life hashing and re-hashing details connected to losing election to yet another memeber of the Jacobs' Family.

For the record DOPE, I think you stirring up trouble between the Bolands and the Jacobs to get a story.

Thus far, Sen. Mike Jacobs has done everthing in his power to work hand-in-hand with Rep. Mike Boland. I for one, have seen none of the "long stading personal and political anomosity" that you claim Sen. Mike Jacobs' has show towards Rep. Boland.

In fact, I've exactly the opposite. Sen. Mike Jacobs has made every possible attempt to work with Rep. Boland. For instance, earlier this week Sen. Mike Jacobs extended a gracious invitation to Rep. Boland to join him at a press conference. At the press confrence, I noted that Sen. Mike Jacobs moved aside and let Boland take the microphone. In addition, last week I noticed that Sen. Jacobs picked-up two of Rep. Boland's bills in the Illinois Senate. Does that sound like the action of a man with "personal and political anomosity" towards Mike Boland?

While it's true that early in the appointment process Boland made several negative public comments about Sen. Mike Jacobs, but thus far Jacobs has kept his word to make Boland part of the legislative team in Springfeild.


If I was advising Mary Boland (Mary is Mike's wife, and the politcal boss behind the Boland Machine), I'd direct her to steer Rep. Boland towards re-election, or retirement. Afterall, Mike suffered a massive heart attack not to long ago, and he doesn't need another!

Running against Sen. Mike Jacobs, the entire Democratic Party structure, every elected offical in the region, and without Speaker Madigan'$ money, is more than Rep. Boland should take on at this stage of his life.

 
At 3/25/2005 3:14 PM, Anonymous corn husker said...

very well thought out and put anonyemous.

 
At 3/25/2005 3:20 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just received a piece of mail today and was astonished to see that the Boland's were sending out a flyer to reelect his wife Mary Boland and Their son-in-law.. How many more Bolands do we need in the area... PLEASE>>>>

 
At 3/25/2005 3:35 PM, Blogger theheadusher said...

i'd point out that the last time boland took on a member of the jacobs' family that he lost. i recall the election of 1986, when denny jacobs handily defeated mike boland. after losing the democratic primary to denny jacobs, mike boland joined hands with republican governor jim thompson, turned his back on the entire democratic party, held a press conference and publicly endorsed the local republican candidate for state senate.

as for mike boland and CUB, what did you pay for your last utility bill? from my perspective, the only people that benefited from the creaton of CUB are mike boland and pat quinn; as boland and quinn used CUB to launch their lucrative political careers. if that's not the truth, what is boland doing with all that money from the Utility Lobby in his campaign fund?

if boland runs, i bet we hear a lot about the aformentioned issues.

and yes, that is mike boland's wife, Mary, and son-in-law. i can't belive boland is putting his wife in this post and his son-in-law. now that is "daddy" taking care of his own isn't it? the boland's just can't seem to get enough of our tax dollars, can they? how many taxpayer financed pensions can Mike and Mary Boland possess? does anyone know how many public pensions Mike and Mary boland have accumulated thus far?

 
At 3/25/2005 3:49 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think boland will have to take a step back on Jacobs' son replacing him then won't he? I haven't seen the mail piec yet but am anxious to. he isputting his wife on as rep? what about the son in law?

 
At 3/25/2005 4:00 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

A couple responses.
First, Anonymous number.. whatever. (this is why I'm BEGGIN' you to please take one second to at least click "other" and fill in a name)

I don't think I'm pulling the anymosity between Boland and the Jacobs out of thin air. It's been in open evidence for many, many years now. I would point out though, that in my comment above I do say that IF the race occurs, they both may surprise us and run a pretty clean campaign. I am not rooting for a mutually destructive effort by the two.

And to Anonymous number whatever (grrrr) I accept your apology for thinking I'm Boland, but forgive you for using the rhetorical device to make your points.

And to Anonymous number other.. (damn it!) there will be no retraction. This is a fact.

When I originally got the tip, I thought "Wow, Boland's saying he's gonna go for it." and thought it was a big story.

Then I thought a little. (the pain, the pain!)

Though I would have loved to report it as a "take it to the bank" mortal lock that Boland is going to go for the senate, I had to realize that Boland telling people he's going to run for senate is only Boland telling people he's going to run for senate. Like other pols, this doesn't mean he won't say something else to someone else tomorrow or next week.
So I had to climb back down a little.

Excellent comments!! And the anonymites are even behaving. It's all good.

 
At 3/25/2005 4:07 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

And to anonymous number... the one that added some potential contenders to the list...
(PLEASE use a name, any name.)

Thanks for the excellent analysis and info.

 
At 3/25/2005 4:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

it pays to have your facts straight, dope

 
At 3/25/2005 4:46 PM, Blogger thinkpink1 said...

Mary Boland isn't running for State Rep but she is running for re-election for Township Clerk or trustee.... The son-in law is running for which ever one she isnt must be nice to have every single person in your family running for something.... Maybe their dog can run for something to... LIke new owners.. HA

 
At 3/25/2005 5:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This whole thing with Boland and Jacobs should be put to rest. Boland is going to run for Treasurer. He's cut the deal with Judy Topinka and the guy if he stops too quick will get Boland's nose up his you no what--Pat Quinn

 
At 3/25/2005 5:48 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Let me set this straight.

First, Mike Boland runs against Senator Mike Jacobs?

Next, he appoints his wife, Mary Boland, to his seat in the Illinois state House.

Next, Boland's son-in-law takes over for his mother-in-law, Amry Boland, and is appointed South Moline Township Trustee.

And please, let's not forget Mike Boland's not-all-together-so-unattractive daughter, who just lost her first race for Democrat precinct committee person, what pray tell will Daddy and Mommy Boland do for her?

I know, maybe Mike Boland could put her Congress?

Just think of all the taxpayer financed mail that the Mike and Mary Boland will be able to send us.

Thinkpink1,

Your line about Boland's dog is very cleaver. That poor bastard (or not)!

 
At 3/25/2005 6:08 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

To the anonymous poster who implies I don't have my facts straight... My facts are perfectly straight.
If you feel the need to suggest that I don't have the facts straight, at the very least you need to tell us what I've written that has not been factual.

Please fill us in.

And I would hardly believe that Boland could or would appoint his wife to his state rep seat. I think such speculation can be safely dismissed.

She's apparently running for some county position.

 
At 3/25/2005 7:36 PM, Blogger Dissenter said...

The facts have been accurately related here.

 
At 3/25/2005 10:16 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MY DEAREST DOPE,

It's not that your facts are crooked, it's just that throughout the day you changed them.

In regards to Mike Boland's plans to install his wife, Mary, into the House seat, I say watch.

For there is no way in hell, Mike Boland is going to run against Sen. Mike Jacobs, unless and until his House seat is well protectd (and not with Mike Hutton).

What better way for Boland to keep his seat warm than to fill it with his spouse?

If Denny Jacobs can appoint his son, Mike, to the Illinois Senate, why can't Mike Boland appoint his loving wife, Mary, to the Illinois House?

Hummm DOPE?

Cat got your tongue?

Don't take things so personal DOPE, I am just having a little fun at your expense!

 
At 3/25/2005 10:59 PM, Anonymous Frank Sinatra said...

Mike Boland has four options:

1) Run for Senate, spend all of his campaign fund, get beat and retire poor without a chance of getting a high paying lobbying gig because all of his bridges will be burnt.

2) Fuel speculation long enough and increase the interest in his house seat causing a competent, well funded, well spoken, good looking opponent like Porter McNeil to jump into the race to beat the crowd and join the ranks of Pat Welch and Ricca Sloan as involuntarily retired legislators.(In case you didn't think long-term incumbents could lose.)

3) Retire in good health, keep his well earned Special Interest money in his campaign fund, ink a few lobbying deals and enjoy a semi working retirement with his family.

4) If he is not ready to retire his only option is to run for State Treasurer, it will be a big Democratic Year and maybe he could fool voters in the rest of the state like he has been fooling them here for years.

Option four is his only chance to stay in Springfield unless he ends the speculation right now and announces that he will seek another term in the House. Short of that he will think he has a better chance at beating Mike Jacobs than Porter McNeil and an even better chance at winning State Treasurer than beating Mike Jacobs. By process of elimination we have it "Boland for Illinois." "Treasurer" just needs to be tacked on to the bottom of his current sign inventory. In Judy baar's poll leaked on CapitolFax Blog, one cross tab that was not published was a head to head matchup against Mike Boland and she loses 58-42, that is the real reason she will run for Governor. It's a Domino Theory that never ends.

 
At 3/26/2005 1:18 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Anonymous... I modified the text of the story once, early this morning. And the facts didn't change. So you're still off base with your charge.

And glad to hear your little condescending potshots are just good fun. Forgive me if I'm not convinced.

I'd also bet a sizable amount of money that Boland's not going to appoint anyone to anything.

You ask why Boland couldn't appoint someone to succeed him since Denny Jacobs appointed his son Mike.

Well, for starters, technicallly, Denny didn't appoint Mike. That decision is made by the Democratic County chairs of the counties covered by the district with proportional votes alloted to each according to how many votes were cast in each county.
This in effect made the decision John Gianulis' to make, and he picked Mike Jacobs.

I'm not pretending that Denny Jacobs didn't have a lot to do with it, but the fact remains that Denny technically didn't have the power to appoint his neighbor's cat.

To be honest, I'm not certain what the replacement process works for Boland's seat. I'd imagine it's similar or the same as the process for senate seats, though I'm not sure.

So if the scenario you seem to favor so strongly were to happen, Boland would have to have enough pull with whomever makes the decision to cause them to go with Boland's pick.

Can anyone provide a definitive answer to how the process works?

 
At 3/26/2005 3:08 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i AM SORRY dopeSTER!

hOPE i DIDN'T BRING YOU DOWN.

i SWORE YOUR fRIDAY a.m. HEADLINE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "bOLAND TO RUN FOR SENATE." iN ADDITION, i THOUGHT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT "BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT" -- "100% CERTAINTY"?

lATER IN THE DAY, i NOTED YOU RETRACTED YOUR BOLDEST HEADLINE EVER AND CHANGED TO "bOLAND SEEKS SUPPORT TO RUN FOR sTATE SENATE."

sORRY IF i NOTICEDED THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE dopester, BUT FROM MY VANATGE THE HEADLINE INFLECTION CHANGED THE WHOLE TONE OF THE STORY.

pERHAPS i'AM OLD SCHOOL.
TOO MUCH OF A STICKLER.
mAYBE I NEED TO ADOPT A MORE FLEXIBLE APPROACH WHEN GATHERING MY FACTS.

hEY dopeESTER, WHO NEEDS SILLY THINGS LIKE CONSISTENCY ANYWAY?

fOR THE RECORD dopeSTER, mIKE bOLAND SLOBERING ALL OVER HIMSELF AT PHIL BANAZSIK'S COCKTAIL PARTY HARDLEY CONSTITUTES A REAL STORY.

bEER TALK IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO GO ON. yOUR NEW HERE dope, SO wE'LL CUT SOME WELL-DESERVED SLACK. hOWEVER, iF YOUR GOING TO CALL 'UM JUST MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND 'UM! oTHERWISE YOUR TITLING WINDMILLS AND CAUSING NEEDLESS STRAIN ON REAL PEOPLE.

i UNDERSTAND THAT mIKE bOLAD WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WHEN HE LEARNED OF THE STORY, AND mIKE jACOBS FELT BETRAYED BY YOUR INNACURATE ASSESMENT OF BOLAND'S TRUE INTENTION. sORRY dope, BUT THEM IS THE FACTS!

wITHOUT DOUBT dopeSTER, YOU AND i ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, HOWEVER, MY SEAT IS CLOSER TO THE RING.

iF YOUR GOING TO SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION HERE dopeSTER, BETTER LEARN TO ROLL WITH THE PUNCHES. iN POLITICS, fRAGILE EGOS PARISH QUICKLY. hARDY EGOS GO WITH THE TERRITORY!

iF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAT dopeSTER, i SUGGEST THAT YOU FIND A NEW GIG. pERHAPS JACKS, 4-square OR JARTS. eITHER WAY, WE ALL LOVE YOU HERE hUTTON!

 
At 3/26/2005 3:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i AM SORRY dopeSTER!

hOPE i DIDN'T BRING YOU DOWN.

i SWORE YOUR fRIDAY a.m. HEADLINE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "bOLAND TO RUN FOR SENATE." iN ADDITION, i THOUGHT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT "BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT" -- "100% CERTAINTY"?

lATER IN THE DAY, i NOTED YOU RETRACTED YOUR BOLDEST HEADLINE EVER AND CHANGED TO "bOLAND SEEKS SUPPORT TO RUN FOR sTATE SENATE."

sORRY IF i NOTICEDED THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE dopester, BUT FROM MY VANATGE THE HEADLINE INFLECTION CHANGED THE WHOLE TONE OF THE STORY.

pERHAPS i'AM OLD SCHOOL.
TOO MUCH OF A STICKLER.
mAYBE I NEED TO ADOPT A MORE FLEXIBLE APPROACH WHEN GATHERING MY FACTS.

hEY dopeESTER, WHO NEEDS SILLY THINGS LIKE CONSISTENCY ANYWAY?

fOR THE RECORD dopeSTER, mIKE bOLAND SLOBERING ALL OVER HIMSELF AT PHIL BANAZSIK'S COCKTAIL PARTY HARDLEY CONSTITUTES A REAL STORY.

bEER TALK IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO GO ON. yOUR NEW HERE dope, SO wE'LL CUT SOME WELL-DESERVED SLACK. hOWEVER, iF YOUR GOING TO CALL 'UM JUST MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND 'UM! oTHERWISE YOUR TITLING WINDMILLS AND CAUSING NEEDLESS STRAIN ON REAL PEOPLE.

i UNDERSTAND THAT mIKE bOLAD WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WHEN HE LEARNED OF THE STORY, AND mIKE jACOBS FELT BETRAYED BY YOUR INNACURATE ASSESMENT OF BOLAND'S TRUE INTENTION. sORRY dope, BUT THEM IS THE FACTS!

wITHOUT DOUBT dopeSTER, YOU AND i ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, HOWEVER, MY SEAT IS CLOSER TO THE RING.

iF YOUR GOING TO SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION HERE dopeSTER, BETTER LEARN TO ROLL WITH THE PUNCHES. iN POLITICS, fRAGILE EGOS PARISH QUICKLY. hARDY EGOS GO WITH THE TERRITORY!

iF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAT dopeSTER, i SUGGEST THAT YOU FIND A NEW GIG. pERHAPS JACKS, 4-square OR JARTS. eITHER WAY, WE ALL LOVE YOU HERE hUTTON!

 
At 3/26/2005 3:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i AM SORRY dopeSTER!

hOPE i DIDN'T BRING YOU DOWN.

i SWORE YOUR fRIDAY a.m. HEADLINE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "bOLAND TO RUN FOR SENATE." iN ADDITION, i THOUGHT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT "BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT" -- "100% CERTAINTY"?

lATER IN THE DAY, i NOTED YOU RETRACTED YOUR BOLDEST HEADLINE EVER AND CHANGED TO "bOLAND SEEKS SUPPORT TO RUN FOR sTATE SENATE."

sORRY IF i NOTICEDED THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE dopester, BUT FROM MY VANATGE THE HEADLINE INFLECTION CHANGED THE WHOLE TONE OF THE STORY.

pERHAPS i'AM OLD SCHOOL.
TOO MUCH OF A STICKLER.
mAYBE I NEED TO ADOPT A MORE FLEXIBLE APPROACH WHEN GATHERING MY FACTS.

hEY dopeESTER, WHO NEEDS SILLY THINGS LIKE CONSISTENCY ANYWAY?

fOR THE RECORD dopeSTER, mIKE bOLAND SLOBERING ALL OVER HIMSELF AT PHIL BANAZSIK'S COCKTAIL PARTY HARDLEY CONSTITUTES A REAL STORY.

bEER TALK IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO GO ON. yOUR NEW HERE dope, SO wE'LL CUT SOME WELL-DESERVED SLACK. hOWEVER, iF YOUR GOING TO CALL 'UM JUST MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND 'UM! oTHERWISE YOUR TITLING WINDMILLS AND CAUSING NEEDLESS STRAIN ON REAL PEOPLE.

i UNDERSTAND THAT mIKE bOLAD WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WHEN HE LEARNED OF THE STORY, AND mIKE jACOBS FELT BETRAYED BY YOUR INNACURATE ASSESMENT OF BOLAND'S TRUE INTENTION. sORRY dope, BUT THEM IS THE FACTS!

wITHOUT DOUBT dopeSTER, YOU AND i ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, HOWEVER, MY SEAT IS CLOSER TO THE RING.

iF YOUR GOING TO SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION HERE dopeSTER, BETTER LEARN TO ROLL WITH THE PUNCHES. iN POLITICS, fRAGILE EGOS PARISH QUICKLY. hARDY EGOS GO WITH THE TERRITORY!

iF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAT dopeSTER, i SUGGEST THAT YOU FIND A NEW GIG. pERHAPS JACKS, 4-square OR JARTS. eITHER WAY, WE ALL LOVE YOU HERE hUTTON!

 
At 3/26/2005 3:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i AM SORRY dopeSTER!

hOPE i DIDN'T BRING YOU DOWN.

i SWORE YOUR fRIDAY a.m. HEADLINE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "bOLAND TO RUN FOR SENATE." iN ADDITION, i THOUGHT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT "BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT" -- "100% CERTAINTY"?

lATER IN THE DAY, i NOTED YOU RETRACTED YOUR BOLDEST HEADLINE EVER AND CHANGED TO "bOLAND SEEKS SUPPORT TO RUN FOR sTATE SENATE."

sORRY IF i NOTICEDED THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE dopester, BUT FROM MY VANATGE THE HEADLINE INFLECTION CHANGED THE WHOLE TONE OF THE STORY.

pERHAPS i'AM OLD SCHOOL.
TOO MUCH OF A STICKLER.
mAYBE I NEED TO ADOPT A MORE FLEXIBLE APPROACH WHEN GATHERING MY FACTS.

hEY dopeESTER, WHO NEEDS SILLY THINGS LIKE CONSISTENCY ANYWAY?

fOR THE RECORD dopeSTER, mIKE bOLAND SLOBERING ALL OVER HIMSELF AT PHIL BANAZSIK'S COCKTAIL PARTY HARDLEY CONSTITUTES A REAL STORY.

bEER TALK IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO GO ON. yOUR NEW HERE dope, SO wE'LL CUT SOME WELL-DESERVED SLACK. hOWEVER, iF YOUR GOING TO CALL 'UM JUST MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND 'UM! oTHERWISE YOUR TITLING WINDMILLS AND CAUSING NEEDLESS STRAIN ON REAL PEOPLE.

i UNDERSTAND THAT mIKE bOLAD WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WHEN HE LEARNED OF THE STORY, AND mIKE jACOBS FELT BETRAYED BY YOUR INNACURATE ASSESMENT OF BOLAND'S TRUE INTENTION. sORRY dope, BUT THEM IS THE FACTS!

wITHOUT DOUBT dopeSTER, YOU AND i ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, HOWEVER, MY SEAT IS CLOSER TO THE RING.

iF YOUR GOING TO SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION HERE dopeSTER, BETTER LEARN TO ROLL WITH THE PUNCHES. iN POLITICS, fRAGILE EGOS PARISH QUICKLY. hARDY EGOS GO WITH THE TERRITORY!

iF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAT dopeSTER, i SUGGEST THAT YOU FIND A NEW GIG. pERHAPS JACKS, 4-square OR JARTS. eITHER WAY, WE ALL LOVE YOU HERE hUTTON!

 
At 3/26/2005 3:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i AM SORRY dopeSTER!

hOPE i DIDN'T BRING YOU DOWN.

i SWORE YOUR fRIDAY a.m. HEADLINE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "bOLAND TO RUN FOR SENATE." iN ADDITION, i THOUGHT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT "BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT" -- "100% CERTAINTY"?

lATER IN THE DAY, i NOTED YOU RETRACTED YOUR BOLDEST HEADLINE EVER AND CHANGED TO "bOLAND SEEKS SUPPORT TO RUN FOR sTATE SENATE."

sORRY IF i NOTICEDED THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE dopester, BUT FROM MY VANATGE THE HEADLINE INFLECTION CHANGED THE WHOLE TONE OF THE STORY.

pERHAPS i'AM OLD SCHOOL.
TOO MUCH OF A STICKLER.
mAYBE I NEED TO ADOPT A MORE FLEXIBLE APPROACH WHEN GATHERING MY FACTS.

hEY dopeESTER, WHO NEEDS SILLY THINGS LIKE CONSISTENCY ANYWAY?

fOR THE RECORD dopeSTER, mIKE bOLAND SLOBERING ALL OVER HIMSELF AT PHIL BANAZSIK'S COCKTAIL PARTY HARDLEY CONSTITUTES A REAL STORY.

bEER TALK IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO GO ON. yOUR NEW HERE dope, SO wE'LL CUT SOME WELL-DESERVED SLACK. hOWEVER, iF YOUR GOING TO CALL 'UM JUST MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND 'UM! oTHERWISE YOUR TITLING WINDMILLS AND CAUSING NEEDLESS STRAIN ON REAL PEOPLE.

i UNDERSTAND THAT mIKE bOLAD WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WHEN HE LEARNED OF THE STORY, AND mIKE jACOBS FELT BETRAYED BY YOUR INNACURATE ASSESMENT OF BOLAND'S TRUE INTENTION. sORRY dope, BUT THEM IS THE FACTS!

wITHOUT DOUBT dopeSTER, YOU AND i ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, HOWEVER, MY SEAT IS CLOSER TO THE RING.

iF YOUR GOING TO SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION HERE dopeSTER, BETTER LEARN TO ROLL WITH THE PUNCHES. iN POLITICS, fRAGILE EGOS PARISH QUICKLY. hARDY EGOS GO WITH THE TERRITORY!

iF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAT dopeSTER, i SUGGEST THAT YOU FIND A NEW GIG. pERHAPS JACKS, 4-square OR JARTS. eITHER WAY, WE ALL LOVE YOU HERE hUTTON!

 
At 3/26/2005 3:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

i AM SORRY dopeSTER!

hOPE i DIDN'T BRING YOU DOWN.

i SWORE YOUR fRIDAY a.m. HEADLINE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "bOLAND TO RUN FOR SENATE." iN ADDITION, i THOUGHT YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT "BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT" -- "100% CERTAINTY"?

lATER IN THE DAY, i NOTED YOU RETRACTED YOUR BOLDEST HEADLINE EVER AND CHANGED TO "bOLAND SEEKS SUPPORT TO RUN FOR sTATE SENATE."

sORRY IF i NOTICEDED THE SUBTLE DIFFERENCE dopester, BUT FROM MY VANATGE THE HEADLINE INFLECTION CHANGED THE WHOLE TONE OF THE STORY.

pERHAPS i'AM OLD SCHOOL.
TOO MUCH OF A STICKLER.
mAYBE I NEED TO ADOPT A MORE FLEXIBLE APPROACH WHEN GATHERING MY FACTS.

hEY dopeESTER, WHO NEEDS SILLY THINGS LIKE CONSISTENCY ANYWAY?

fOR THE RECORD dopeSTER, mIKE bOLAND SLOBERING ALL OVER HIMSELF AT PHIL BANAZSIK'S COCKTAIL PARTY HARDLEY CONSTITUTES A REAL STORY.

bEER TALK IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO GO ON. yOUR NEW HERE dope, SO wE'LL CUT SOME WELL-DESERVED SLACK. hOWEVER, iF YOUR GOING TO CALL 'UM JUST MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND 'UM! oTHERWISE YOUR TITLING WINDMILLS AND CAUSING NEEDLESS STRAIN ON REAL PEOPLE.

i UNDERSTAND THAT mIKE bOLAD WENT THROUGH THE ROOF WHEN HE LEARNED OF THE STORY, AND mIKE jACOBS FELT BETRAYED BY YOUR INNACURATE ASSESMENT OF BOLAND'S TRUE INTENTION. sORRY dope, BUT THEM IS THE FACTS!

wITHOUT DOUBT dopeSTER, YOU AND i ARE ON THE SAME PAGE, HOWEVER, MY SEAT IS CLOSER TO THE RING.

iF YOUR GOING TO SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION HERE dopeSTER, BETTER LEARN TO ROLL WITH THE PUNCHES. iN POLITICS, fRAGILE EGOS PARISH QUICKLY. hARDY EGOS GO WITH THE TERRITORY!

iF YOU CAN'T TAKE THE HEAT dopeSTER, i SUGGEST THAT YOU FIND A NEW GIG. pERHAPS JACKS, 4-square OR JARTS. eITHER WAY, WE ALL LOVE YOU HERE hUTTON!

 
At 3/27/2005 1:52 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

I've explained why and how I altered the story. As I've said, I didn't change any of the facts. I said it was 100% because it was 100% that Boland has told serious people he is running for the senate, OK?
The original post was up from about 1 a.m. until 9 a.m. I don't know if that could be considered "later in the day" as you say, but I know not many people saw it.

I'd think an old pro such as yourself would be commending me for realizing a politician's word doesn't mean shit when it comes to them telling people what they intend to do.

And before you start popping off, you ought to check yourself before you start making assumptions about what my sources are. I can safely say that it wasn't some cocktail party. Far from it.

The rest of your comment certainly offers nothing of value. You have no idea if your "seat is closer to the ring" than mine, though it's obvious your ego is closer to the size of Montana.

Since you are convinced you're a real player who knows what's going on, how come you haven't offered anything here or by e-mail?

Of course, since you choose to be one of the dozens of anonymites, there's no way of telling if you've posted anything of interest anyway.

What really made me laugh was you proceeding to make a mess of the entire comments page by typing with your caps lock on and inadvertently posting SIX times.
and then saying you'll cut me some slack because I'm "new" here. HA HA!

My taking heat here is not a problem. I wouldn't have done this if it was. But obviously, my taking heat doesn't mean I'm going to take it like a fire hydrant takes a dog.

People who have nothing to contribute but incessant snipeing on imagined errors and similarly miniscule complaints annoy the hell out of me and others, mainly because they don't contribute a damn thing to the discussion or to the site in general, and in fact, take away from it.

I'm all ears for constructive criticism or suggestions. I've asked for it several times in posts, comments, and in the sidebar.

But though I get crap like yours in comments, no one seems to be able to figure out how to click on the mail link and send their suggestions there.

If you wanted to try to help the site, you would have done so. But that's not your purpose evidently.

If you're such a big muckety-muck and have information of interest to the public to share, why not start your own blog, rather than spending your time throwing spit-wads around here? I think that would pretty much be the American way, don't you?

Lead, follow, or get out of the way, right?

And to anyone out there, any predictions on whether Boland will indeed stick to his word and run for the senate?

 
At 3/27/2005 3:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay dope,

It was your erroneous post, not mine. Thankfully, you recognized and correct it.

Second, please tell which "serious insiders" said Mike Boland told them he was running against Sen. Mike Jacobs? ?

Third, the assertion that all politicans are liars is absurd. Limit your analysis to Rep. Mike Boland, I will readily agree.

Fourth, Mike Boland is running for re-election. To suggest anyhting else is irresponsible.

Boland doen't enjoy enough support in the state to run statewdie. Nor does Boland enjoy enough support to take on Sen. Jacobs in a Democrat Primary.

If Boland did, why didn't the leadership of the Democratic Party appoint him to the state Senate seat instead of Sen. Mike Jacobs?

In the end, Sen. Mike Jacobs is a better candidate than Mike Boland. Mike Jacobs has a furture. He's tall, young, articulate, handsome, educated, seasoned and comes from a rich family tradition steeped long in local Democrat politics. Some might say that Sen. Mike Jacobs was breed to run.

In addition, Mike Jacobs enjoys wide-spread political support. He's already gotten support from the following key politcal figures;
United State Senator Barack Obama,
Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich,
United States Cong. Lane Evans,
IL Senate President Emil Jones, IL House Speaker Michael Madigan, Evan's Chief of Staff Phil Hare,
RI Co. Board Chairman Jim Bohsack, IL State Rep. Patrick Vershoore,
DNR Director Joel Brusnvold, former Senator Denny Jacobs,
the five Democrat Party Chairman that comprise the 36th District (including Democrat County Party Chairman John A. Gianulis), RI Co. Recorder Pat Veronda,
RI County Treasurer Lou Ann Kerr, RI County Auditor Diana Robinson, RI County Cornor Sharon Anderson, 23 of 24 RI County Board members,
Rock Island Sherrif Mike Grchan, State's Attorney Jeff Terronez, United Auto Workers, AFSCME and Building Trades.

In contrast, Mike Boland has little if any Democrat Party support beyond his family. What's more, Boland has accomlished little in Springfield. Moreover, Mike Boland quit his union and worked as a SCAB for two years. In addition, Mike Boland turned his back on the entire local Democrat Party and publicly endorsed a Republican for state Senate. And finally, Boland is just too darn old and unable to raise the money necessary to mount an effective campaign against a rising politcal star like Mike Jacobs.

Dope, although I am pleased to hear that your willing to take a little heat, the way to avoid "heat" is to source your work. From my perspective, second-hand comments from un-named associates of Mike Boland that report to understand the inner workings of Mike Boland's twisted mind, hardley constitues facts.

Now if got the comment from Mary Boland, I would belive it, as Mary runs the politcal show. But to take gossip from a second hand source seem problematic at best!

Now don't get all defensive Dope, We still love you! It's just that you wield a prety mighty pen. One that should not be unseathed without much forethought.

Keep up the good work oh great dope!


Sixth Dope, here is something your readers may not known ---
MIKE BOLAND WAS BORN AND RAISED IN IOWA! While one can't hold that against him, it does explain a lot about Mike Boland's inability to get along well with others.

Sixth, I would love to start a blog. However, I am swamped. That's why we are all so appreciate of your daily effort here DOPE!

And finally, in response to you direct question. "No, Mike Boland is totally incapable of keeping his word." Taht's why Boland's friends in the Illinois House gave him the nickname "Squish."

Don't belive me Dope? Ask anyone that has ever worked for, with or anound Mike Boland in any capacity. Trust me Dope, Mike Boland has never, nor wiill he ever keep his word. (NOW DOPE THAT'S A FACT YOU CAN TAKE TO THE BANK.)

How do I know? Let me count the ways. First, Mike Boland was my grade school teacher. Next I worked for him and Mary Boland! Trust me Dope, these folks are creepy and totally untrustworthy!

Don't take my word for it. Call Mike Hutton or his wife at home. Ask them how Boland stiffed them on election day!

The simple fact is, Mike Boland is incapable of making friends with anyone. He is a user! Period!

 
At 3/27/2005 5:54 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Anonymous, I stand by every word of the story. But thanks for providing your opinions on things.

I will not, nor will I ever, reveal my sources if they wish to remain anonymous.

I don't have to remind you, Anonymous, that articles in major national papers and other media routinely cite un-named sources.

Yes, this is a little dicey, but I have to make a judgement as to whether to report something on a case by case basis. In this particular case, I'm completely convinced it is reliable information and have no reason to believe it's not.

There is a little oddness to two of your contentions though, ANONYMOUS. One is that the story is likely true as I reported it, but Boland can't be taken at his word, so anything can happen. This is essentially why I changed the tone of the story early on. You believe he's going to run for his seat again.

Then you say that I should be careful with my facts, and I should name my sources, one assumes this is because you're not convinved the information is correct and if I provided a credible source, you'd be more likely to believe it.

So you've argued as if the information is true, then argued that it's not reliable without a named source, Anonymous. Which is it?

The fact remains Anonymous, that like any news reporting, it is ultimately up to the reader to judge whether the information is credible or not. (or somewhere in between.)

That said ANONYMOUS, I hasten to remind you and others that I do not hold myself out as an investigative reporter for a news organization. I'm not. I'm a guy that reports the facts as I get them and report what I feel is credible and worth reporting.

There have been others who have done the same thing, and far from being hounded off the internet, they are now making muliple millions and are credited with breaking some of the largest political stories in the past decade. I'm referring of course to Drudge, though I certainly hope to exceed his standards for truth here. (and I have NO illusions this will even pay for itself, let alone make me millions)

As I have said before, I am not going to be calling candidates and other sources and questioning them about this or that. I don't intend to do reporting and investigations directly like that mostly because I can't and still retain my anonymity.

I would hope, ANONYMOUS, that if candidates, politicians, or their (your) staff wish to get some views or corrections out, they'd take advantage of getting in touch with me via e-mail. If they're valid, Anonymous, I'd have no problem publishing them on the site.

But as yet, Anonymous, this hasn't happened.

What I can do is attend events, talk to people, report what I see and hear, things found in research and digging on the web, and what I get through news reports and credible sources.

I stand by this story, Oh Great Anonymous, and I would not have reported it unless I felt it was safe to do so.

The facts as I've reported them will remain no matter what Boland ends up doing in the end.

As to Boland himself, I have no real feelings one way or the other, and wish to remain as neutral as possible.

Obviously ANONYMOUS, you have intensely negative opinions of him and are happy to state them, which you're welcome to.

But ANONYMOUS, I hope you're not doing so out of a belief that I'm a Boland partisan, as I'm not. I'm blessed (or cursed) by not leaning towards any candidate in this situation.

I hope others might have some thoughts on the rest of your comment.

 
At 3/27/2005 9:55 PM, Blogger Dissenter said...

I have read these posts with intense interest. The following comments are directed at the last "Anonymous" blogger, and at Dope.

The original story, as printed by Dope, is absolutely accurate. I know this, because it was based upon information known directly and personally by me.

Anonymous, your comments and observations are very detailed, possessed of a tremendous degree of political insight which is consistent, if not greater, than that which I have. I have no doubt that you consider yourself to be a "serious insider" and, frankly, based upon your observations, I suspect that you are indeed a political insider. No words of mine should be construed by you or by anyone to imply that you do not know what you are talking about. Quite clearly you do.

But I will tell you that Dope's story, as related, is absolutely accurate. It is a story subject to corroboration by multiple witnesses. It is a story which was only printed after Dope was fully aware of the specific identity of his source, and the specific circumstances under which that source obtained the reported information. Boland confirmed that he would be running for senate. I and others personally heard him confirm it.

As I have read the posts on this story, and there were as anticipated a lot of them, it seems to me that most of them suggest that the story must be inaccurate because 1. Boland would be foolish to run; or 2. Boland can neither be trusted nor believed. But stop and think about this for a moment: neither of these responses attack the credibility of the facts as reported by Dope. Rather, they attack the ultimate credibility of Boland himself, and of his indication that he will run for higher office.

Before anyone else raised the issue, Dope recognized that it would be inaccurate to print that Boland WILL run for state senate. Rather, it was accurate to print that Boland CLAIMED that he would run for state senate. Maybe Boland's statement was mere political puffery. Perhaps it was an early trial balloon. Or maybe he really intends to run. Dope did not purport to know. He merely reported the statements attributed to Boland.

Boland may never actually run for Senate. But if he doesn't, it will not change the accuracy of the story.

Anonymous, I share your concerns about Boland. In fact, I rather dislike and distrust him myself.

And I, like you, do not have the time or, quite frankly, the ability to run a blog of this nature. But I agree with you that it is what we local political enthusiasts need. And I join you in the expression of my sincere appreciation to Dope for his willingness and his commitment to do this dirty job for us.

 
At 3/28/2005 9:33 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

diseenter and dope are the same person - anonymity killed the cat!

 
At 3/28/2005 9:33 AM, Anonymous Mike Boland said...

You don't know me Dope - get your facts straight!

 
At 3/28/2005 11:45 AM, Blogger Dissenter said...

To my knowledge, no one has ever seen Dope and I together at the same place at the same time. Then again, since I do not know his identity, perhaps we have met each other. Though I suspect it is unlikely.

In any event, as I have conclusively proven in my earlier posts, Dope is actually fitness guru Richard Simmons. I am not Richard Simmons. Therefore, I am not Dope.

 
At 3/28/2005 5:04 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Hi "Mike", welcome to the show. I have my facts straight. Thanks anyway. Do I have to "know" you to report on you? That's a novel idea.

Let's see if you do what you're telling people you will do.

And I'm not Richard Simmons, damn it! I'm that guy from the Menard's commercials.

 
At 3/28/2005 5:17 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mike Boland will not run for Senate. One of the reasons is that he has not cultivated anyone he likes to take his spot, and who will work with him in the next election. The two most qualified- Ahern/McNeil- Boland won't work with. He may hope Ballard runs, that could help him, but after running afoul of his union brothers, as well as those at WQPT, when he was on the board of BHC, not likely. Boland could work with Banzakek, but how many jobs do we need to give the republican? His chief of staff he could work with, but that would be a disaster for our area. No Mike Boland will not run. He does not possess the political tools, nor can he work with a Represetative candidate to form a team. No wait, I take that back, Stockton from Savanna is a weasel, just like Boland... that may be the ticket...

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home