Jean Schmidt called young Republican activists, "young Hitlers"

The Hill ^ | March 8, 2006 | Jackie Kucinich

[LandofGrant]

That is correct. I believe I am entitled to criticize the woman who is the poster-child of today's failing Republican Congress. I am not the McEwen campaign by the way. When I make remarks about other politicians does that mean I am representing their opponents? NO! I voice my own beliefs thank you very much. I find it insulting that you think I'm stupid enough to allow some campaign staffers to tell me what to say and use me as their dummy. You are shameless. How dare you judge my analysis of this race in that manner. I am so against regurgitating what the party says I would probably be ostracized if my fellow GOPers knew. I am a Republican because of my OWN convictions and nothing else. I am being active in this primary because I have a personal conviction on the matter. It is ME, yes me that has decided to take action. So before you make a judgment about me again please contact me personally before you make a false and personal attack again.

I believe that the Republican Party is on the verge of becoming a laughing stock among the masses. Jean is the perfect example of how nasty partisanship, RINOism, 24/7 campaigning and politicking has ruined our current Republican congress. Again, that is correct, I have posted many anti-Schmidt comments.

[DennisR]

No problemo.

[AmishDude]

That's all I wanted to know.

It was one article, you didn't have to post it twice.

But the blog posts in the second were revealing.

[AmishDude]

Well, you should be on the McEwen payroll (it seems everyone else is) because you seem to devote an inordinate amount of time on an inordinate amount of blogs discussing it.

So, when Schmidt wins the primary, will you start supporting the Democrat?

Out of nothing but curiosity, what do you think of John Murtha?

[SUSSA]

Well, her comments about the drinking age, and the Dole's are spot on. One cannot like Reagan and the Dole's at the same time. The Dole's are the antithesis of the Reagan wing of the party.

###

You nailed it. Well said.

[LandofGrant]

No. I'm finished discussing this with out of state people.

[mewzilla]

Given the last name of the author of this piece, I wonder if the author has a dog in this hunt?

[mewzilla]

The last name of this author isn't relevant to begin with, especially since she's not the one who reported the event.

No, she's just the one doing the reporting...

[AmishDude]

No. I'm finished discussing this with out of state people.

Then you'd better ask JimRob to kill your account. This is a national (nay, international) forum, and if you don't like American citizens commenting on who you want to send to the Congress that will make laws for all of us, then you'd better get back to spamming that Cincinnati blog the other Schmidt-hater linked to.

[AmishDude]

As I said in one of my posts, Dennis does have a daughter Jackie, but his daughter would be around 20 and I can't believe that The Hill would hire a 20-year-old as a full-time writer.

[conservative_2001]

The original quotes came from a 1984 Cincinnati Enquirer article. The Enquirer endorsed Schmidt in 2005, so I don't think they're involved in a conspiracy against her. The Hill is a high quality newspaper that gives a ton of information about Capitol Hill politics. If anyone thinks the Hill is biased against them, they need to remove their tin foil hats.

As for the author, even if this was Dennis' daughter and she was as bad as he was, I'm not sure she'd spend her time to help a candidate who's as conservative as Steve Chabot. If Jackie wanted to fill Congress with liberals, she wouldn't be helping someone as conservative as Bob McEwen. There's plenty of Republican incumbents vulnerable to Democratic challengers. And this conveniently ignores the fact that reporters have editors who assign and review stories before publication.

[Prognosticator]

Spot on analysis. Schmidt isn't so much a moderate - it's just that she's just not that bright and she has a big mouth. That's a deadly combination. Especially when she's working with moderate leadership.

As a resident of the second district, I know Schmidt all too well.

She's an embarrassment down here. Chabot and Tancredo know it.

In 2004, she lost her own battle for State Senate, and when she tried to return to her township trustee seat later that year, they told her to get lost.

She has a knack for rubbing people the wrong way and that's why she's going to lose against McEwen.

Further, to all those who try and say McEwen has ethical baggage, I say prove it.

Don't just show me breathless newspaper reporting from 1992. Show me government documents that prove McEwen bounced a single check. The reporting in 1992 was flat wrong - over 350 people were accused of bouncing checks back then. Only a handful of people (less than 30?) were actually found guilty of anything.

McEwen was accused, like former Congressman and now Vice President Dick Cheney, of "bouncing checks." Both were exonerated. Unfortunately for McEwen, he lost his race in 1992 and Cheney won. So people erroneously believe McEwen "bounced checks" and Cheney didn't.

The fact is his Congressional District was re-aligned in 1992 and he had to fight it out with another long-time Congressman for the right to face Strickland. It was an ugly battle, and McEwen, weakened in the primary and facing a Democrat in a new district, lost (barely) to Strickland.

Those are FACTS.

A few other FACTS:

McEwen has a 12 year Congressional record that proves he's a strong conservative, especially considering his record was forged in a time when the House was controlled by Democrats.

Schmidt's record (which is dismal on the fiscal side), was forged at a time when Ohio controlled EVERY major Republican office and both sides of the legislature.

The best thing that can be said about her is that she's a fighter. But she's a dumb fighter with a big mouth and a lousy conservative record.

Prediction: McEwen 53%, Schmidt 47%, Kraus 0%, Constable 0%

[delapaz]

Nice try, but the facts on record don't support your view. The fact is McEwen himself admitted making mistakes:

link

McEwen faced questions about the bounced checks he had written on the House bank. Buchert ran campaign commercials citing McEwen's checks, the expenses of his Congressional office, and his campaign finance disclosures, while noting Portman was "the handpicked choice of the downtown money crowd" and was "a registered foreign agent for the biggest Democrat lobbying firm in Washington," labeling Portman and McEwen "Prince Rob and Bouncing Bob."[48] McEwen, who had taken a hard-line on his checks in 1992, relented in the campaign. Martin Gottlieb wrote, "McEwen says now that his problem was a form of excessive pride. He says he used to 'demand perfection' of himself." McEwen also said, "I felt I could never admit a mistake. . . . I am very, very sorry. I should have watched it more carefully. . . . I have learned a great deal." [49] Les Spaeth, chairman of the Warren County Republican Party and former Warren County Auditor, said, "People very much disliked the check overdraft thing, but I think they don't see it as happening again. I think it's past. He made a mistake and he got caught. But that's overridden by the service he's given, particularly to our county." [50]

[NeoCaveman]

She's spent the last 2 days getting nailed locally for falsely claiming endorsements from Congressmen Tom Tancredo and Steve Chabot.

She claimed Chabot endorsed her? How dumb does she think the voters are?

I mean anyone can google the cake incident.

[Prognosticator]

Oh boy. Now Jean Schmidt lied on her resume. 700 WLW news radio reported she is claiming two bachelor's degrees and only earned one. She has since scrubbed her web site, but you can still read it in the League of Women Voter's Smart Voter guide from 6/14/2005...

The Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting that her Chief of Staff stated she DID earn the degree but just didn't collect it...

Anyone buying that story?