editorial board for pressing failed mob banker/US Senate candidate
Alexi Giannoulias on a very straightforward question: If you had been in the US Senate over the last two years, which spending bills would you have voted against? Alexi tries repeatedly to slither away from the issue, but "John" (who I believe to be board member John McCormick) just won't let him off the hook:
It's hard not to squirm listening to Giannoulias' "who me?"
routine as he feigns confusion over whether McCormick is seeking a specific answer to a specific question. McCormick's retort is priceless: "Specifically
is how members of Congress vote, so yes."
At this point, you can practically hear Giannoulias enter panic mode. With flop sweat beading around his temples, he fumbles desperately for a response--any response. He finally lands on TARP--which, of course, passed under Buuusssshhh--
so he assumes it's terra firma for hypothetical opposition.
Thinking he's regained his footing, Alexi assures the Trib's
editors that he would have "looked at" TARP and "pushed hard" for greater accountability and oversight (and hey, why not a bailout for his family's failed back
, at which he dispensed millions of dollars to known mobsters
as a senior loan officer?). McCormick, still hoping for an actual answer, asks for confirmation that Giannoulias is saying he'd have voted 'no' on TARP. The jig is up. Giannoulias backpeddals madly, seeming to concede that he, in fact, would
have joined Mark Kirk in voting 'yes' on TARP--but only if he had "no choice."
McCormick concludes the exchange by succinctly summarizing Giannoulias' decisive leadership qualities: "So we still haven't heard an answer. There's no answer." Gold
, despite his flaws, would have given a very clear, non-hypothetical answer to this question. As a sitting Congressman, he did vote (specifically!) against the "stimulus"
and every version of Obamacare
Rasmussen's latest poll shows Kirk ahead by four
, while the Tribune
poll gives Giannoulias a thin edge