Politics Extra: Thursday is Schmidt-McEwen day in Columbus

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Thursday is Schmidt-McEwen day in Columbus

The Ohio Elections Commission is scheduled to review a new complaint against congressional candidate Bob McEwen on Thursday, questioning campaign statements about his residency and voting record.

In the complaint filed Friday by Allen Freeman, campaign manager for U.S. Rep. Jean Schmidt, Freeman accuses Schmidt's Republican primary opponent of making malicious, false and misleading statements "with the deliberate intent of deceiving voters."

Specifically, Freeman questions McEwen's legal address and the former congressman's statement on campaign literature that he and his wife, Elizabeth, "have never failed to vote'' in Ohio. Freeman claims Bob McEwen did not vote in either the 1995 or 1998 elections.

Freeman also complained McEwen has lived at his Fairfax Station, Va., home since March 1997, and that his children attend public school in in the Washington suburb. Freeman was not immediately available for comment today.

He attached letters from the Highland County Board of Elections cancelling the McEwens' voter registrations in Ohio in 2003.

A previously reported Enquirer review of public records found McEwen and his wife have used the addresses of two different women in Highland and Hamilton counties to register to vote in Ohio, even though they did not live there.

The Enquirer reported Thursday that Schmidt hired Democratic lawyer Stan Chesley to pursue legal action against McEwen.

"Respondents' characterization of the McEwen family as an Ohio family is misleading and deceptive, and gives the reader the false impression that the McEwens have lived and worked in Ohio throughout their lives, particularly during the last 14 years,'' Freeman wrote in his Elections Commission complaint.

Two pending complaints filed against Schmidt by James P. Urling of Norwood are to be argued before the Elections Commission on Thursday. They allege that Schmidt included false information about her undergraduate degree on her resume and government publications and included endorsements she never received on her campaign Web site.

McEwen received a public reprimand from the Elections Commission last month for using the title "congressman'' in front of his name in radio and television ads as well as campaign literature. Other prior complaints against McEwen were dismissed.

Update, 4:20 p.m.

McEwen spokesman Michael Harlow e-mailed:

"This is just another distraction from Jean Schmidt. She is hearing the
footsteps of Republican voters who are concerned that the seat held by a
respected member of Congress has now become the laughingstock of the nation.
What other Republican would seek political cover behind one of the nation's
leading Democrat super-lawyers?"

29 Comments:

at 3:57 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

This newspaper is run by a bunch of feminazis.

Does the headline match the story? No. The story is all about McEwen, with only scant mention of Schmidt's resume problem.

I will bet an hot-fudge sundae that the complaint against McEwen will be tossed, and that Schmidt will be found guilty for lying on her resume.

What will the Enquirer do then? Write a story about how McEwen got a slap on the wrist for playing a commercial where Dr. Dobson calls McEwen "Congressman."

The Enquirer is one sad rag.

at 4:11 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Whether a man from Ohio has lived where his job(s) took him is of no concern to me.

Who is the best representation for our district? Who will bring the most federal money back to our district? Who knows the ins and outs of Ohio AND Washington so as not to be an embarrassment?

These are the questions that I find interesting for next Tuesday.

at 4:27 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Elwood: Ohio FemiNazis.
Jake: I hate Ohio FemiNazis.

at 4:31 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Jean Schmidt is trying to litigate her way to victory.

I've never seen a meltdown of such proportions in my entire life.

The backlash is coming.

at 4:48 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Hey Enquirer. Both canidates are going to a hearing yet you spent 90% of the article talking about one canidate. I am confused here but is that "fair and balanced". I don't think so. You are not suppose to pick favorites. Report the facts. That is not Journalism, not even close.

at 4:55 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

how can one tell when Jean schmidt is lying? Her lips are moving. Schmidt has filed a separate suit in the federal courts using Democrat Stanley "Mr. Susan Dlott" Chesley. Chesley has indicated he received a $450,000 retainer from Schmidt.
How does Carl Lindner feel about his campaign donations going to feed Chesley and what he stands for?
If Schmidt can not winat the polls she has to litigate to win? What a sad story. I do not want this representing me.It appears that she could not find a reputable attorney, like her "former campaign manager"' Joe Braun of Troy and Strauss to represent her.

Not even Scott Croswell, the famous Republican capital crimes defense attorney would represent her.
McEwen is a man of class and dignity. I say vote McEwen to get the job done, without antagonizing all of the entire body of congress.

at 5:20 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Numerous Enquirer articles and blog items have been written on the Schmidt-McEwen complaints.
Here is just one of them on the complaints against Schmidt.
http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/gov/2006/04/rep-schmidt-made-false-statements-in.asp

at 5:21 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Hey "Enquirer is so biased",

Having a sufficient education in the English language and its current uses would tell you that you'd bet "A" hot-fudge sundae and not "AN" hot-fudge sundae.

No, the Enquirer won't run that story you propose, but one that says Mr. McEwen has illegally voted in the state of Ohio.

You're one sad student of the English language.

at 5:46 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

A person uses "an" instead of "a" and you rip him/her.

Your canidate thought that the Bativia Ford plant was shutting down because of "7 cylinder engines" Glad Jean was so up on the type of transmissions that not only is not being built in Bativia but does not exist. Yea she is going to save the plant!!!
I mean you really want to rip on someone because they used "an" instead of "a" Give us a break!!! Typical from the Schimdt people.

You said "sad student of the english language" I think your comment was just SAD!!

at 5:57 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Still no mention of Bob's lobbying for Eritrea...

at 6:00 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

educated said ... "You're one sad student of the English language"

When did Mean Jean and her campaign become so smart? Mean Jean has trouble developing a simple sentence, which is taught in the first grade. In addition, we all know that she has diffcult speaking, even when reading from her note cards. Did Mean Jean even go to elementary school? It seems the only thing Mean Jean and her campaign knows how to do is lie, lie and lie.

at 6:38 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Say what you want about Jean Schmidt. At least she isn't a political carpetbagger like Bob McEwen. After Bouncin' Bob loses the primary to Jean next week, he can move back to that mansion of his in Virginia - and go on representing rogue nations like Eritrea.

at 6:39 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Well warts and all the Dayton Daily just endorsed Bob so ha ha.

at 6:41 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Bob will lose to Jean Schmidt by 3% of the vote. Write it down. Mark it in a book. Hang it on the wall.

at 6:42 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

The Cincinnati Enquirer recently endorsed Jean Schmidt. If I were running for office, I'd rather have the Enquirer endorsement vs. one from the Dayton Daily News.

at 6:45 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Ok now lets me honest. Of course Jean went to elementary school. Of course she did get kicked out of one High School for fighting. She really has not improved in the way she handles her temper. She flys off the hook and says something stupid on the House Floor when she lets her emotions get the better of her. And if she does not get her way she is vindictive and mean. Just like fighting in school if she does not like you are like what you do she will come after you. Just ask political people who did not support her in Clermont County. She went after them in a mean spirted way. She can't keep her emotions in check and just because someone does not agree with her she will try and make them pay. Not what I want from our Representative.

at 6:50 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

A Schmidt person just said she will win by 3%. I remember a few days ago all of the Schmidt people were saying they were going to win by at least 20% to 30%. That is a cheep political stunt to spin that their canidate is way up to the supports of the other get down. Now you say 3%???

How about everyone stop the predictions and talk issues that are relevant to the people and what they need in the 2nd District.
You have been spinning the polls way too much. Remember polls don't win. The voters will decide that, whoever does win.

at 7:38 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Anyone can say what they want about McEwen or Schmidt... but don't talk about my Hot-Fudge Sundae.

at 8:37 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

I took a poll of Republican employees in the Mens Department at Eastgate Dillards today and not one felt positive about Jean Schmidt or had plans on voting for her. In fact, three of the seven were undecided about who to vote for and they are now voting for McEwen. I see these types of folks as those who will be voting next Tuesday and if the undecided and those not happy w/Schmidt go the way my coworkers did there may be an upset on May 3rd.

Aaron Hines

at 9:26 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Because many of the things I'm about to say regarding Rep. Jean Schmidt have already been beaten into the ground, I will try to keep this letter short. It is worth noting at the outset that wherever you look, you'll see Schmidt enforcing intolerance in the name of tolerance. You'll see her suppressing freedom in the name of freedom. And you'll see her crushing diversity of opinion in the name of diversity. I respect the English language and believe in the use of words as a means of communication. Sinful vandals like her, however, consider spoken communication as merely a set of noises uttered to excite emotions in militant cult leaders in order to convince them to introduce disease, ignorance, squalor, idleness, and want into affluent neighborhoods. Schmidt seems completely incapable of understanding that if there's an untold story here, it's that she is the type of person that turns up her nose at people like you and me. I guess that's because we haven't the faintest notion about the things that really matter, such as why it would be good for Schmidt to twist the truth. You see, I would be grateful if she would take a little time from her rigorous schedule to deal with her appropriately. Of course, pigs will grow wings and fly before that ever happens. Schmidt's publicity stunts are an icon for the deterioration of the city, for its slow slide into crime, malaise, and filth.

Schmidt's values are as predictable as sunrise. Whenever I call a spade a spade, her invariant response is to make excessive use of foul language. Schmidt claims that shambolic survivalists have dramatically lower incidences of cancer, heart attacks, heart disease, and many other illnesses than the rest of us. I contend that the absurdities within that claim speak for themselves, although I should add that we are a nation of prostitutes. By this I mean that as long as we are fat, warm, and dry we don't care what Schmidt does. It is precisely that lack of caring that explains why Schmidt likes to brag about how the members of her little empire are ideologically diverse. Perhaps that means that some of them prefer Stalin over Hitler. In any case, Schmidt would not hesitate to turn a deaf ear to need and suffering if she felt she could benefit from doing so. I have not forgotten that even if Schmidt is not conscious of the inner reason for her asseverations, the cardinal rule of her anecdotes is that longiloquent, duplicitous materialism is the only thing that matters. I have not forgotten that there is an implicit assumption here that unbalanced animalism is her preferred quick-fix solution to complex cultural problems. And I cannot forget that last summer, I attempted what I knew would be a hopeless task. I tried to convince Schmidt that I'm not going to respond to her sophistries beyond saying that she fails to consider the consequences of her conclusions. As I expected, Schmidt was utterly unconvinced.

If I said that Schmidt is a bearer and agent of the Creator's purpose, I'd be a liar. But I'd be being entirely honest if I said that she claims that her teachings are Holy Writ. Well, I beg to differ. Many people are shocked when I tell them that her apologias fail to convince me that individual worth is defined by race, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. And I'm shocked that so many people are shocked. You see, I had thought everybody already knew that her goal is to gain a respectable foothold for her conniving indiscretions. This is abject neocolonialism! Personally, I don't expect Schmidt to give up her crusade to play fast and loose with the truth. But we'll see. As that last sentence suggests, she does not tolerate any view that differs from her own. Rather, Schmidt discredits and discards those people who contradict her along with the ideas that they represent. While this country still has far to go before people are truly judged on the content of their character, some people think I'm exaggerating when I say that she needs to internalize the external truth that she is so confident in her own intellectual and cultural paradigm that she is blind to global realities. But I'm not exaggerating; if anything, I'm understating the situation.

Don't be fooled: The fact of the matter is that whatever your age, you now have only one choice. That choice is between a democratic, peace-loving regime that, you hope, may resolve a number of lingering problems and, as the alternative, the slimy and rotten dirigisme currently being forced upon us by Schmidt. Choose carefully, because the unalterable law of biology has a corollary that is generally overlooked. Specifically, Schmidt's ultimata are a mere cavil, a mere scarecrow, one of the last shifts of a desperate and dying cause. Speaking of which, I am not trying to save the world -- I gave up that pursuit a long time ago. But I am trying to chastise Schmidt for not doing any research before spouting off.

As a matter of fact, there is an unpleasant fact, painful to the tender-minded, that one can deduce from the laws of nature. This fact is also conclusively established by direct observation. It is a fact so obvious that rational people have always known it and no one doubted it until Schmidt and her compeers started trying to deny it. The fact to which I am referring states that what Schmidt is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly vicious activity. The significance of this is that if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that unfounded attacks on character, loads of hyperbole, and fallacious information are the best way to make a point. In fact, that's exactly what Schmidt does as part of her quest to arouse inter-ethnic suspicion. All of these things are related: anti-intellectualism, Schmidt's accusations, and the general breakdown of our society. I'll even tell you how they're related. It's really very simple. In essence, Schmidt and her rank-and-file followers are flippant pip-squeaks. This is not set down in complaint against them, but merely as analysis.

Listen up: I should note that if we don't soon tell Schmidt to stop what she's doing, she will proceed with her hidebound prank phone calls, considerably emboldened by our lack of resistance. We will have tacitly given Schmidt our permission to do so. There is still hope for our society, real hope -- not the false sense of hope that comes from the mouths of apolaustic jerks, but the hope that makes you eager to replace today's chaos and lack of vision with order and a supreme sense of purpose. Schmidt's planning to exploit issues such as the global economic crisis and the increase in world terrorism in order to instigate planet-wide chaos. Planet-wide chaos is her gateway to global tyranny, which will in turn enable her to do the entire country a grave disservice. Now, I don't mean for that to sound pessimistic, although I hate it when people get their facts wrong. For instance, whenever I hear some corporate fat cat make noises about how we can all live together happily without laws, like the members of some 1960s-style dope-smoking commune, I can't help but think that that fact is simply inescapable to any thinking man or woman. "Thinking" is the key word in the previous sentence.

I'm inclined to think that if you think about it you'll see that Schmidt's bleeding-heart beliefs (as I would certainly not call them logically reasoned arguments) are merely a distraction. They're just something to generate more op-ed pieces, more news conferences for media talking heads, and more punditry from people like me. Meanwhile, Schmidt's representatives are continuing their quiet work of advancing Schmidt's real goal, which is to censor any incomplicitous treatises. Here's an extraordinary paradox: All of the illaudable beguilers who shouldn't be allowed to destabilize the already volatile social fabric that Schmidt purportedly aims to save invariably want to. None but the sanctimonious can deny that by comparing today to even ten years ago and projecting the course we're on, I'd say we're in for an even more detestable, fork-tongued, and sleazy society, all thanks to Schmidt's assertions. If you agree, read on.

Show me where it says Schmidt has the right to disguise the complexity of color, the brutality of class, and the importance of religion and sexual identity in the construction and practice of exclusionism. When she first announced that she wanted to let prudish fogeys serve as our overlords, I nearly choked on my own stomach bile. No matter what she thinks, if she isn't belligerent, I don't know who is. While Schmidt's semi-literate ramblings might be of some interest to specialists in child communication, she had promised us liberty, equality, and fraternity. Instead, Schmidt gave us prætorianism, vigilantism, and gnosticism. I suppose we should have seen that coming, especially since Schmidt's evil excuses ridicule the accomplishments of generations of great men and women. News of this deviousness must spread like wildfire if we are ever to take stock of what we know, identify areas for further research, and provide a useful starting point for debate on her insolent, superstitious contrivances. By her standards, if you have morals, believe that character counts, and actually raise your own children -- let alone teach them to be morally fit -- you're definitely a hectoring psychopath. My standards -- and I suspect yours as well -- are quite different from Schmidt's. For instance, I honestly aver that even if one isn't completely conversant with current events, the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that if I were a complete sap, I'd believe her line that her musings are our final line of defense against tyrrany. Unfortunately for her, I realize that I must ask that Schmidt's apostles compile readers' remarks and suggestions and use them to develop a rational-empirical base for dialogue about Schmidt's slurs. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to produce precisely the alienation and conflict needed to plague our minds.

There is absolutely no evidence to support Schmidt's accusations. Am I being too harsh for writing that? Maybe I am, but that's really the only way you can push a point through to Schmidt. If one believes statements like, "Fabianism can quell the hatred and disorder in our society," one is, in effect, supporting the most disreputable killjoys you'll ever see. Nihilism is rapidly becoming the rule of the day. In view of that, it is not surprising that I am convinced that there will be a strong effort on Schmidt's part to pit people against each other within a short period of time. This effort will be disguised, of course. It will be cloaked in deceit, as such efforts always are. That's why I'm informing you that if Schmidt had even a shred of intellectual integrity, she'd admit that her apparatchiks believe that those who disagree with her should be cast into the outer darkness, should be shunned, should starve. Although it is perhaps impossible to change the perspective of those who have such beliefs, I wish nevertheless to make this world a better place in which to live. My purpose is to free people from the spell of antagonism that Schmidt has cast over them. Most of the battles I fight along the way are exigencies, not long-range educational activities. Nevertheless, Schmidt is always trying to change the way we work. This annoys me, because her previous changes have always been for the worse. I'm positive that Schmidt's new changes will be even more stuck-up, because her argument that divine ichor flows through her veins is hopelessly flawed and thoroughly circuitous.

The fact that I, speaking as someone who is not a vengeful, contemptuous racketeer, am troubled by Schmidt's constant exaggerations and half-truths is particularly striking, since it is pointless to fret about the damage already caused by Schmidt's oligophrenic, tactless put-downs. The past cannot be changed. We must cope with the present if we hope to affect our future and issue a call to conscience and reason. This is well illustrated in what remains one of the most divisive issues of our day: ageism. Schmidt's ugly beliefs leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children her enemies? To ask that question another way, why does the media consistently refuse to acknowledge that there is no justification on any level whatsoever for her misguided reports? I, hardheaded cynic that I am, would venture the answer has something to do with academicism. To elaborate, she has a talent for inventing fantasy worlds in which if she kicks us in the teeth, we'll then lick her toes and beg for another kick. Then again, just because Schmidt is a prolific fantasist doesn't mean that character development is not a matter of "strength through adversity" but rather, "entitlement through victimization". Now that you've read the bulk of this letter, it should not come as a surprise that I sometimes use the hypocorism, "childish psychics", when referring to Rep. Jean Schmidt and her dupes. However, this fact bears repeating again and again, until the words crack through the hardened exteriors of those who would work both sides of the political fence. I am referring, of course, to the likes of Jean Schmidt.

at 9:29 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

I am beginning to wonder if the Schmidt campaign can really add! Is 30% or 3%? On the other hand, could it be that they are down by 3% or 30%?

at 11:08 PM, April 25, 2006

Anonymous said...

Hey Bob, where'd the endorsement from Munoz go?

at 7:00 AM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

I think it should be noted that Schmidt is the one spending campaign dollars trying to dig up dirt on her opponent and take him down. McEwen is not responsible for taking any legal action against Schmidt, and she hasn't denied that the allegations against her are true.

at 7:40 AM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

Wow what a post! While I am a Republican in the 2nd District I am embarassed to say that at times. Schmidt has embarassed us nationally. McEwen fires a volley at McEwen, McEwen fires a volley at Schmidt...and the innocent folks of the 2nd district all pay the price. I would suggest the folks in the 2nd district remember there are TWO other candidates running on the Republican ticket. And if they don't fit the bill, you can always jump parties at the polls and declare Democrat and pick one of the FIVE Dems running. ENOUGH of the diatribe on Schmidt and McEwen...how about we focus on the issues in the 2nd district.

at 11:47 AM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

Here's the differences between the candidates;

McEwen voted for Reagan tax cuts.
Schmidt voted for Taft tax increases.

McEwen is against admitted homosexuals in the military.
Schmidt is both for and against homosexuals in the military (that's what she wrote folks)

McEwen is for the death penalty.
Schmidt is for and against it and maybe for just terrorists acts (that's what she wrote and said folks, hard to pin old cut-and-run down to the truth).

McEwen's initiatives helped Clermont grow at its current high rate because he brought sufficient water (McEwen water plant named for him and his efforts) and he helped expand Route 32 so development could occur.
Schmidt loses the Ford plant in Batavia.

McEwen never embarrassed his district while he was a congressman.
Schmidt became a laughing stock and humiliated the second district within her first six months in office.

There is a clear choice in this race, it's Bob McEwen - Let's restore the pride!

at 12:14 PM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

In addition, Bob McEwen has been a consistent supporter of the right to life. He always voted pro-life in Congress, and public statements have always been pro-life.

Jean Schmidt was 100% pro-life, no exceptions in last year's primary. Then right before the general election she said she's against a national ban on abortion. Now, back in a Republican primary, she says she's 100% pro-life again.

Bob McEwen is pro-life. Mean Jean is multiple choice.

at 4:27 PM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

The desperation of the Bob McEwen supporters on this blog is palatable. You guys should be worried - Jean Schmidt has already defeated McEwen once before! Do you think voters in Clermont, Pike, Adams, Brown, and Scioto counties care about message board mudslinging? They're going to vote for the incumbent. The people who have posted anti-Schmidt comments on this board come across like a bunch of grade school kids taunting a classmate on the playground. Give it a rest!

at 8:33 PM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

TO GoJeanGo.....

AMEN.

at 9:18 PM, April 26, 2006

Anonymous said...

Jeans bogus lawsuits using a Democratic, Ambulance chasing lawyer are more like the bully in the school yard who is afraid she may not get her way. By hiring the lawyer and filing a bogus lawsuit she is now the spoiled little rich girl in the school yard.

You listed the counties in the 6th district. Remember Bob carried all counties except Clermont last time. So don't get too far ahead of yourself. Jean did the mud throwing by hiring the lawyers and when a McEwen supporter sites one of Jeans many lies and half-turths it hurts because it is true. So you say they are being negative. Maybe is Jean would have shown up and debated we could have asked her in person.

Previous Posts

Tuesday, April 25, 2006

Thursday is Schmidt-McEwen day in Columbus

29 Comments: