March 12, 2006

Dispatch/Argus endorses Jacobs

Putting their editorial fingers to the wind and hedging their bets, the editors of the Dispatch/Argus praise Rumler to the moon and then endorses the likely winner, seemingly impressed by the fact that he finally acknowledged making some mistakes.

The Dispatch/Argus firmly supported the Republican candidate for Moline mayor as well.

Watch for the Jacobs camp, who absolutely trashed the paper and it's editors as hacks, and accused them of making up news stories, to now praise the paper. Maybe the paper did this to avoid further temper tantrums by the candidate who thinks he's entitled to postitive press no matter what he does or says.
Along the way he’s made more than a few less-attractive headlines (one comparedg his efforts on riverboat gambling to Rosa Parks’ battle to ride at the front of the bus) and often appeared unapologetic about them. That’s why we were pleased when, during a meeting with our editorial board, he acknowledged both having made freshman mistakes and recognizing that he still has much to learn despite the years he spent at his father’s side and as a political consultant in his own right. He is right when he says he’s not the typical freshman. He says he knows where the bathrooms are, and he also knows how things get done and that’s invaluable when there are things that need doing.

Though we do not rarely give political parties advice about their business – they’ve done fine without us for a number of years – we can’t fail to think Rock Island County Democrats would be foolish if they fail to keep people like Mr. Rumler active and interested.

We have no doubt Mr. Rumler would be an excellent representative for the Quad-Cites in Springfield once he learned the lay of the land. However, we’re convinced that we need someone who understands what is needed and has the experience and connections to make it happen. Time is critical if we are to get the WIU project and others in the works going, particularly with the economic challenges that continue to plague the state.

At the end of the day, Mike Jacobs will need to emerge from his father’s shadow and become the leader the Quad-Cities desperately needs in Springfield. He is clearly eager to do so and he says he has spent 20 years preparing for that moment. We hope he succeeds. We recommend giving him the chance by returning him to the Statehouse.


At 3/12/2006 5:40 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dope, could you please advise me to where I should look to find the comments from Jacobs where he absolutely trashed the paper and it's editors as hacks, and accused them of making up news stories. I would like to see that.

At 3/12/2006 6:17 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

I'll do that as soon as you advise me where I should look to find me saying that Jacobs left any of the comments, though it's entirely possible he was the one behind the many comments left here and at John Beydler's blog lashing out at Beydler and the paper.

Just one place you can find them is in comments to this post at Beydler's passing parade.

Mouse over the commenters name at the bottom of comments and you'll see that they were dumb enough to include their e-mail address... the e-mail address of Sen. Jacobs.

Hope that clears things up for you.

I said the Jacobs camp was responsible, and I stand behind that assertion.

It's also widely reported that Jacobs stormed into Dispatch Springfield reporter Scott Reeder's office and launched an obscentity laced tirade at him for his reporting on Jacobs' Rosa Parks moment.

I suggest you ask Jacobs himself if it's true. See if he answers.

At 3/12/2006 6:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to believe that Jacobs positive mail pieces are helping his cause. He has never once mentioned Rumler in them, and talks about issues he's addressing (and wants to address). I got a Rumler door hanger today and it was also positive. Congrats to both candidates. I think voters are tired of petty attacks.

At 3/12/2006 7:21 PM, Anonymous Bojangles said...

"For a freshman lawmaker, Mike Jacobs' performanc has been remarkable. He has championed his district aggressively, gotten lawmakers to make funding a Western Illinois University in Moline a priority and pushed for more transportation funding.

In fact, he has shepherded 16 bills that he was the main sponsor for into law during his first year.

That's impressive feat for someone new to the General Assembly, especially when one considers that some veteran lawmakers go years without passing legislation."

- Scott Reeder
March 11, 06

Through all the mud thrown by John Bydler, the Dope and the Rumlerlites, Senator Mike Jacobs accomplishments shine through!

On election day Mike Jacobs will be an elected Illinois state Senator, and the Dope will remain the DOPE!

At 3/12/2006 7:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congratulations Sen. Mike Jacobs. I agree with the D/A that Mike Jacobs is the best man for the job at hand. I applaud John Beydler for not letting his petty personal problems with Sen. Jacobs get in the way of the D/A endorsement.

At 3/12/2006 7:50 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Nice one Junior. But you fail to realize that I'm not running for anything. If you weren't so shallow you'd realize that I'm not in this race. Jacobs can win or lose, and I'll still be around.

So, as they say, suck on it. haha!

And you're saying Jacobs will win? What a shock!! Now there's some big news. The only people that seem absolutely terrified that he might lose is people like yourself, which explains your behavior.

Sometimes his supporters are the absolutely stupidest, dim-witted twits I've ever had the displeasure to endure.

But while we're quoting Reeder, you left off what he said next:

"But some contend his own worst enemy is his own mouth.

For example, the Chicago Tribune editorial page had this to say of Jacobs' candidacy:

"Incumbent Democrat Mike Jacobs of East Moline took over daddy Denny Jacobs' seat and has performed ably, even with occasional flashes of independence. Where he runs into trouble is when he opens his mouth -- last year he likened his efforts on behalf of the gaming industry to Rosa Parks' contributions to the civil rights movement."

And flashes of his temper have been witnessed."

That last sentence might answer to the anonymous commenter at 17:40 as well.

I for one can't wait for the primary to be over. Then maybe this gang of juvenile morons who think they're Jacobs' "posse" who cling to Jacobs like some giddy groupies and act like a bunch of drunken, lunk-head frat boys will go back to hanging at bars and greeting each other with "wassup!" while acting like they're really cool because they "know" Mike.

And they can revert to spending their time online looking for porn instead of gracing us with their political wisdom here.

Won't it be nice??

At 3/12/2006 8:36 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

20 years preparing for the statehouse?

I guess the years he spent drawing a large salary on the public dole while occupying the patronage job of regional coordinator for drivers license facilitys or something phony like that was a great chance to prepare. After all, I dont' think he even had an office and so essentially had all day, every day, to prepare for being a senator, all at a salary and benefits that millions would die for.

I'm sure that being the son of a senator had nothing to do with his getting this do-nothing patronage job, so I won't suggest that.

But how hilarious is it to then hear his jackals here suggesting that it's just terrible... TERRIBLE, I say, that Rumler is "unemployed". What a riot!

Too bad he doesn't have a no-show gig like Mikey had.

Mike couldn't get a legitimate job if real life if his life depended on it. Period.
Yet they whack on Rumler for working in D.C.?? These guys are AMAZING.

At this point, I couldn't care less about 16 meaningless bills that Jacobs passed or the fact that he knows how to find the bathrooms in the statehouse. Anyone who has no morality, no sense of decency, and who's overriding philosophy is "the ends justify the means", in other words, do whatever nasty, dishonest, thuggish crap you have to do to win, doesn't deserve to be our representitive.

That doesn't reflect the way most people think, and it sure the hell shows that he's interested in one thing, and one thing ONLY, and that's getting and retaining power.

If he gets in, I can guarantee you that he'll never get out, thus guaranteeing us another few decades with a Jacobs in office. How very refreshing.

At 3/12/2006 8:48 PM, Blogger Tom Benson said...

Each Senator has exactly one vote for legislation that is brought to the floor. The experience of Paul Rumler will give him the same one vote that Mike Jacobs currently has for our District.

The difference with a distinction is that Mike has the respect and ear of other Senators, the Senate President, the Governor and the Speaker and can propose and sponsor legislation that helps our District and get it enacted into law. Without the support of the leadership and your peers in Springfield, legislation never makes it out of the Rules Committee.

Mike never asked to be held up to the impossible standard that you and the Jacobs haters try to hold him to. He speaks his mind, he sometimes embellishes the facts, just like we all do. He is stepping out of his father's big shoes and is his own man. Mike is also very passionate and he has many misguided and passionate supporters who visit your site. But Dope, you are in control and have chosen to ignore all of the garbage that you claim is sent in by them. But every once in awhile you let something through that gives them hope of being published again.

Bottom line is that Mike is an effective Senator and is the best choice to represent our District. I support Sen. Mike Jacobs and already voted early for him and as a person who has worked by his side in Springfield I can assure you that Mike is going to get WIU built and fully open the Thomson prison and will continue to bring jobs and investment into the 36th District.

At 3/12/2006 9:01 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Tom, you officially get your brownie points.

But... you write:
"Mike never asked to be held up to the impossible standard that you and the Jacobs haters try to hold him to. He speaks his mind, he sometimes embellishes the facts, just like we all do."

I've never held him up to any impossible standards! To expect the truth... is that unreasonable? To suggest that's an impossibly high standard says something about your view of politics.

Secondly, no... Jacobs hasn't just "embellished the truth"... he's blown it up beyond recognition, and on far too many occasions to just brush it off as you do.

And secondly, we all may embellish the truth from time to time, such as saying a your mother-in-law's meat loaf was unbelievably good, but none of us is running for office. And I'm not so sure all of us have done so to the extent or the degree that Jacobs has.

The term "Blow Hard" comes to mind.

Sure, maybe it's all rookie mistakes, and that's fine and should be taken into account. But don't say he's been held to too high of standards.

The standards he's set, he's set HIMSELF with all his bluster and promises.

At 3/12/2006 9:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

For Jacobs whom you claim attacked Reeder and Beydler verbally, to get that kind of glowing review by Reeder and to get the D/A endorsement shows that Jacobs is a realy strong candidate that they feel can get the job done. They are to be comended for looking objectively at this issue.

At 3/12/2006 9:21 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Yeah, they should be patted on the back due to the fact that they could easily be forgiven if the comments of the Jacobs camp or Jacobs himself caused them, with good reason, to dislike Jacobs himself.

It's really big of them to separate the loathsome, vile, and dishonest hissy fits that Jacobs supporters and the candidate have pitched and decide, wrongly in my view, to decide that disgusting personal behavior doesn't have anything to do with worthiness for office.

Jacobs could have stopped all the vile antics at any time, but didn't, nor has he disassociated himself from them. And now that he gets away with it, the same clowns come around to gloat.

What a bunch.

The fact that these scumbags even associate with Jacobs or support him is to my mind, an excellent reason to not vote for him.

Guilt by association? Yes. But not just one rotten egg, but many of them who have demonstrated the willingness to lie, distort, smear, and act like dim-witted children in their stupid, gross, and dishonest efforts to prop up their boy.

White supremicists and hard-core racists all support a Republican candidate, let's say, even though he has never uttered a racist word in public, but neither does this candidate say a word to dissassociate himself from the racists.

Should that be considered when you decide which person to vote for? It's up to you.

Idiots, liars, and dim-wits who don't give a damn about issues or helping people and are only concerned with how much money he has, and all they have to add to the debate is lies and false smear attempts, support Jacobs. Should that make a difference? Again, it's up to you. But it sure does to me.

At 3/12/2006 9:27 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am confused. The Jacobs campaign has been positive. Read their mail? Read their comments in the press? The Dope and other Jacobs haters are confusing anonymous posts on his blog with the campaign, which has been by and large positive. Two distinct animals that shouldn't be blurred together. My two cents respectfully submitted. No name calling - let's leave that to the right-wingers as they have mastered that in their politics.

At 3/12/2006 9:39 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

That's true. The overt campaign, the mailings, etc. have been pretty clean. I've never said anything about them or referred to them at all. So why even bring them up?

I have always referred to the comments left here and elsewhere and the attitude displayed in them here.

But a few mailings doesn't have any bearing on the matter as far as I'm concerned, because I'm aware of what kind of garbage has been pushed here in comments for many months, as is any regular reader.

If the public doesn't know about it, fine, but I'm well aware of it, as are many regular readers here, and that's what informs my opinions and views on the matter.

The mailings don't make any difference.

And nice try picking up on the ROVE smear term "Jacobs haters". Sounds like the rabid right using "Bush Haters" to refer to anyone who disagrees with him.

Resorting to that term, as you have about 5 times tonight in other comments which were dumped, proves you're as slimy as Rove.

I certainly don't "hate" Jacobs, and you can take your cute little slogans and stick them where the sun doesn't shine.

At 3/12/2006 10:46 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dope, do these people think we don't know where these comments come from? He already got busted out on Beydler's blog. All but admitted to posting on this site in a D/A article the one that he mentioned that he felt it was wrong to "out" anonymous posters. Anyone that has been around this blog for a long time know that this term "out" is something that he uses on here a lot. There are several phrases that appear all to often here, and then all of a sudden turn up in the paper as a quote from Mike Jacobs. "I for one" comes to mind, and there have been others. Maybe it's just me and the dope that notice that sort of thing, but after reading hundreds of these incoherent posts you develop a sixth sense for spotting them a mile away.

At 3/13/2006 9:23 AM, Anonymous Ned Schneebly said...

Now that the D/A has endorsed Jacobs I would have to imagine that his head has gotten so big it is becoming difficult to fit thru doorways. This election is definitely going to come down to the wire. I have a feeling that voters in the mid twenties to early thirties age range will have significant impact. If Jacobs manages to fend off Rumler I can see the headlines now:

Mike Jacobs states "When I jump into the pool, I don't get wet, the pool gets Mike Jacobs'd."

"Only Mike Jacobs can prevent forest fires"

At 3/13/2006 9:37 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I saw Mike Jacobs in a a tavern in Morrison this weekend. He was very nice and met everyone there. He is such a dynamic person one on one. It was nice to have someone from the Cities come out here and visit with us like a local. He has gained at least one new supporter.

At 3/13/2006 9:53 AM, Anonymous Sigmund said...

If I might put on my shrink hat here, I'd say Jacobs' bragging and seeming egotistical behavior is likely just compensation for the deep, deep insecurity he must feel. He likely knows he's out of his depth, and must often feel like a fraud, especially due to his being appointed and standing in the shadow of his larger than life father.

Not every politician gets plugged in as a state senator when only months before he was a decidedly average guy with little responsibilities or public attention.

It would be natural for nearly anyone to feel insecure, but Jacobs deals with it by overcompensating and going too far to the other side, appearing overly confident, blustery, and somewhat arrogant as a sheild against displaying his inner fear.

Slice him open and I wager you'd find a very scared, very insecure person who wonders every day whether people will find out that he's just a kid from East Moline, not some big senator at all.

Much like a performer who suddenly finds himself taken from small time to getting great attention and performing before huge audiences, the fear of failing and being revealed as a fraud in front of millions is a very scary thing indeed.

Many established performers have related that they still have this fear, despite their enormous sucess, that it will all fall apart somehow and they'll be shown to be a fraud. Kind of like the nightmare of finding yourself in front of a large crowd naked or in your underwear, only in real life and in a very public way.

Again, not that this is necessarily unusual for someone in Jacobs' situation.

But Jacobs bluster, swagger, and big talk might very well be his way of masking his deep, deep insecurity and fear of being a exposed as a fraud.

It's most definitely a high-wire act without a net, and the tension has got to be great.

I've suggested before, and I still believe, that if Jacobs put what was best for himself and his family ahead of what is being expected of him, NOT by this blog or the press, but by his own family and supporters, he'd throw in the towel and go on to make a good living being a lobbyist, where he could still trade on his knowledge, connections, and experience, but wouldn't be put through all the indignities and stress of being an elected official.

At 3/13/2006 9:57 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ned, or like the old joke ....

What's the difference between God and Mike?

God doesn't think He's Mike. (rimshot)

Not that that's true, necessarily... just wanted to get the joke in there somehow.

At 3/13/2006 10:06 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I love how the D/A tiptoed around on this article. If you read the article, and missed the last paragraph, you'd think they endorsed Rumler. So they throw him a bone that way, in case he wins. Then they make the safer pick to throw Jacobs a bone, in case he wins.

This is going to be a close one. Hopefully the false abortion phone calls won't skew this unfairly.

At 3/13/2006 10:14 AM, Anonymous fortunate son said...

Ned, good stuff.

Possible other headlines could include.

"Jacobs can slam a revolving door"

"Mike Jacobs claims he can win a game of connect four in only three moves"

"Jacobs will attain statehood in 2009. His state flower will be the Magnolia"

There's my two cents.

At 3/13/2006 10:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey everyone, Tom Benson is back.

Hey Tom, you're a smart guy, maybe you can answer this. Do elected officials have to fill out conflict-of-interest financial disclosure forms (similar to what federal employees have to)?

I would be interested to see what personal holdings some of our officials have.

Just looking at their contribution sheet it's obvious that there could be a conflict of interest. Jacobs has taken money from RJ Reynolds (and voted against a bill to ban smoking in dorm rooms), taken money from many, many Casino's and gambling related entities (we all know how high he jumps for gambling), and he took money from Riverstone (just before the Pig Plant news broke).

I guess my biggest question is this:

Is Mike Jacobs "the best choice to represent our District", or is Mike Jacobs the best choice to represent big business in our district?

I just don't feel like Mike really represents my family. We have not been so fortunate.

At 3/13/2006 11:15 AM, Anonymous BigBopper said...

"Guilt by association. Yes"

- The DOPE

Is what is good for the goose, good for the gander?

At 3/13/2006 11:16 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are a sick bastered. I know who you are.

At 3/13/2006 12:38 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

great old joke anonymous and fortunate son made me laugh tee hee

At 3/13/2006 4:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I feel that the D/A did the right thing to endorse Jacobs. Henot only knows where the bathroom is but he Knows where the mailbox is also. If Rumler can't find one of those in the city he grew up in then he just might not find the bathroom in Springfield..

At 3/13/2006 8:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I believe that Jacobs will win handily - congratulations on the endorsement!

At 3/13/2006 9:39 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have noticed that all of the blogg candidates have done awful so far. It looks like the old machine politics of people and organization has been the key for most of these web less candidates.

At 3/13/2006 10:57 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

To the above anon and all the other dumb-ass anons whose comments I've deleted, and I use the term dumb-ass having fully thought of whether it applies. And it truly fits. I'm sure that if readers here had any clue of the insane comments that routinely hit the garbage can where they belong, they'd more than agree.

I posted your comment to give sort of a all purpose reply to you and the other meat-heads who insist on leaving comments as if The Inside Dope is somehow a candidate website, a campaign website, as if I'm running for something and will win or lose.

First of all, you're dumb-asses or you would realize this isn't the case. Second of all, it's never been my intention, or my goal, to set out to influence an election one way or another.

This isn't a campaign site, and if you weren't such a bunch of wankers you'd realize that. You accuse me of thinking the reader polls I've taken are somehow perfect reflections of voter opinion, which shows what dim-wits you are.
Secondly, you act as if I think that because I think all the knuckle-dragging morons who support Jacobs in comments here, and everyone knows the type, are not worthy of serious attention, much less having so much as a single rational point, and because I personally think Jacobs is cynical, out of his depth, and would probably be much better suited to some other profession, that somehow I think Jacobs will lose and Rumler will win.

Again, nice try, but as usual, you're not even close.

I've said it all along, and I'll say it again, Jacobs is going to win. He's simply got too large of an advantage. Not in ideas or personal talent, but in campaign cash, support from all the establishment party hacks, and a 10 to 1 money advantage, not to mention name recognition by virtue of birth.
As some defenders note, and it's no doubt true, Jacobs wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but as Ann Richards famously said of Bush I, he was certainly born with a silver foot in his mouth.
I think she said something else about Bush that might apply to Jacobs as well, that he was born on third and thinks he hit a triple.

At any rate, I don't think I'm some political big-wig, never have, never will. I've never set out to sway any elections, nor do I think I could if I wanted to.

So all you dirt monkeys can lay off the Mountain Dew or whatever it is that gets you into such an excess of energy and shortness of thought.

Jacobs wins. Like the guy in the Visine ads says, "wow."

Way to go team.

And as I've said before, if he wins in anything less than a commanding landslide, it will be because of his own misteps and blunders and maybe a little to do with their exposure and discussion here.

I stated long, long ago that this race was Jacobs' to lose, and that fact still remains. He's managed to turn it into a contest, and it's certainly not due to any strong showing by Rumler. So what can you say?
He should win with a commanding majority, and anything less will be due to backlash against what he's done and said and what it's revealed about him.

At 3/14/2006 8:55 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...

I saw Mike Jacobs in a a tavern in Morrison this weekend. He was very nice and met everyone there. He is such a dynamic person one on one. It was nice to have someone from the Cities come out here and visit with us like a local. He has gained at least one new supporter.

13/3/06 09:37

I think Mike's confused. Buying drinks for the house is what lobbyists do....maybe he's practicing for the inevitable? At any rate, I doubt anyone from Morrison wrote this in....more like Moline/East Moline. It's really laughable.....

At 3/14/2006 2:47 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mikey buying drinks for people in a bar to "win" their vote gets the person that falls for it two things, a headache the next morning and one in Springfield for the next several years. Who REALLY pays the tab?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home