Thursday, March 29, 2012

The Professor and the Fibbin' Fisherman

Despite strong evidence of invalid signatures, the statutory panel -- including, disappointingly, AG Tom Miller -- left improbably primary challenger Joe Seng on the ballot yesterday, buying his All Participants Get A Ribbon argument that he should get credit for trying: “It really sounded bad that I have a felon and people from Illinois and stuff like that, but that happens in every one.”

No it doesn't, Joe, and your scatter-shot organizational skills don't bolster your"qualifications."

And Paul McAndrew makes a big point:
McAndrew, the attorney who filed the challenge questioning Seng’s petitions, suggests the decision is inconsistent with the Republican secretary of state’s call for requiring Iowans to show a photo I-D when they vote.

“We are continuing to allow lesser protections and safeguards in this setting while we shout that we have to protect the election hall,” McAndrew said via phone during the panel’s meeting.

Imaginary voter fraud? Let's photo ID everyone! Rounds of drinks for petition signatures? I guess it's OK if you're an anti-choice, Obama-bashing "Democrat" in a nuisance, resource-wasting primary. Perhaps I'm being harsh. Yes, as he asserts, Joe Seng has the right to run for Congress. That doesn't mean he IS right to run for Congress.

So now 2nd CD Democrats have a choice between an Obama-basher and a man who has stood with the president since before the 2008 caucuses.

The best detail of this whole thing is the site of the shots for signatures scandal: the Fibbin' Fisherman. That's Seng's new nickname; personally I prefer bearded professors. It's going to be good sport the next couple of months, trying to get to the bottom of who's behind planting this idea in the egotistic head of Mister Double Honorific, Senator Doctor Seng.


Todd Versteegh said...

Wow John..a little bitter are we this morning?

Apparently you missed the part about why McAndrew's challenge was found to be invalid.

From the DSM Register article--

In the end, however, the panel did not make their decision based on McAndrew’s allegations in Wayne, Scott and Wapello. Rather, they focused on petitions from two other counties – Davis and Van Buren – that the Secretary of State’s threw out prior to McAndrew’s complaint.

The errors made on those petitions were too minor to warrant rejecting, the panel found, and should be included in Seng’s total for signatures gathered. With those counties included, Seng met the qualifications for inclusion on the ballot whether the Wayne, Scott and Wapello county signatures were included or not, effectively mooting McAndrew’s complaint

“We can assume that for this analysis that Wayne and Wapello and Scott are not counted toward 12” counties a candidate must garner signatures from, Miller, a Democrat, said during Wednesday’s meeting. “The 12 was reached independent of them.”

So..basically..Seng had enough signatures from 12 counties to meet the ballot standard.

So, essentially..McAndrew filed a frivolous complaint in an attempt to throw Seng of the ballot.

There is a larger question here that Loebsack and you need to answer here John..

Why is Dave Loebsack so afraid of Joe Seng's primary challenge?

The fact that Loebsack would go to the lengths of having one of his large financial backers engage in an effort on his behalf to try to keep a challenger off the ballot is quite frankly shameful and pathetic, John.

So, now that this challenge has failed miserably..I'm sure we'll see the Loebsack attack machine fired up soon..attacking Joe Seng at every turn.

Let's just see what lengths Loebsack will go to tear down a member of his own party...

John said...

Bitter? Moi? I save my bitterness for important stuff, like the Packers having their one lousy game of the year in the first round of the playoffs.

I saw the committee's case and their reference to precedent, but I think a letter of the law ruling would have tossed Seng.

Team Loebsack (I'm a proud member since 2005) ain't scared. But what's the harm in checking sloppy homework? Maybe it didn't strike Seng from the ballot, but it definitely shows he's in over his head.

Even the Scott County Dems have no clue why Seng is doing this. I suspect a lot of ego involvemnt. True, anyone in politics has a certain amount of ego, but not many insist on being addressed as Senator Doctor.

Todd Versteegh said...

Team Loebsack "aint scared" huh?

Funny..then explain why Loebsack would even try to get Seng thrown off the ballot in the first place?

Why would the DCCC spend the money to do polling in the district to gauge support for Loebsack?

Its going to be extremely interesting to see how virulent and downright nasty people within the Democratic Party are going to get towards Seng over the course of the next couple of months.

Holding office isn't a birthright,'s a privilege. That's why we have elections, John..if someone feels they can do a better job...they can step up to the plate and run.

The fact that Loebsack would attempt to throw a competitor off the ballot--says everything people need to know about Dave Loebsack.

John said...

Nope. Not scared. But the portrayal or a guy who's only in his third term and who came out of nowhere to beat a 30 year incumbent as some sort of entrenched tenured eminence is good for a chuckle.

No one anywhere is disputing Joe Seng's right to run. I do question his wisdom and qualifications. Even his own legislative campaign treasurer is supporting Loebsack over him. As for the petitions, it was close enough to be worth a look.

DCCC typically supports incumbents. Nothing unusual there; ask Ed Fallon.

Todd Versteegh said...

"No one anywhere is disputing Seng's right to run" Really?

Then I guess Loebsack's blessing of Paul McAndrew's challenge is just a big fantasy?

The very fact that Loebsack tried getting Seng thrown off the ballot demonstrates clearly that Loebsack sees this as "his office" and how dare ANYONE within the Democratic Party challenge him.

Its the very definition of arrogance, John. Its an arrogance that Loebsack has demonstrated time and again while serving in Congress.