LJWorld.com / "Did Kline break his vow?" by Campaign Briefing

Blogs home Staff blogs Campaign Briefing

Did Kline break his vow?

Here are today's headlines from the 2006 election race:

Attorney General

(Topeka Capital-Journal) Kline broke vow in sex case: Republican Attorney General Phill Kline kept quiet about an alleged blemish on Democrat Paul Morrison's past for two months of the general election campaign. Kline's sense of fair play even prompted a pledge Oct. 11 to avoid making information in his possession about a sexual harassment claim leveled against Morrison in the early 1990s an issue in the race. "I'm not," he vowed to the Wichita Eagle's editorial board when asked if he were going to make an issue of the case. "I'm not." However, Kline has moved steadily over the past two weeks to make the unproven allegation a cornerstone of his re-election effort against Morrison, district attorney in Johnson County.
The video from the Wichita Eagle meeting.

(Hutchinson News) Consumer claims drop on Kline's watch: The amount of money being paid back to consumers who claim they've been ripped off has dropped significantly since Attorney General Phill Kline took office nearly four years ago.

Governor

(AP) Sebelius in command: Many voters here in Pittsburg don't see any reason to unseat Democratic Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, despite weeks of criticism from GOP challenger Jim Barnett. With less than two weeks before the Nov. 7 election, Barnett continues to talk optimistically about his chances - but he's still a long shot to win.

Washburn University professor Bob Beatty assesses new poll in governor's race: The new Rasmussen poll is out and it's good news for Governor Sebelius and a sign that if the Barnett campaign is going to go into overdrive it will have to be soon. ... The Rasmussen poll shows Sebelius leading Barnett 56 percent to 37 percent, a 19-point advantage and a 10-point increase over the Rasmussen poll of 9/25. 500 likely voters were polled on 10/22 and there's a 4.5 point margin of error. A key finding from the poll are Sebelius' and Barnett's favorability ratings, especially compared to the Rasmussen poll taken two months ago. Two months ago Sebelius had very favorable ratings of 35 percent and an overall favorability of 70 percent. Her new numbers have increased slightly to 38 percent very favorable and overall of 71 percent. Barnett, however, after campaigning for two months and getting his two TV commercials out, is seeing his favorability numbers actually go down.
Chat about the 2006 election with political scientist Bob Beatty

Other election news

(Garden City Telegram) Supreme Court retention below the radar: Criticism of the Kansas Supreme Court reached a crescendo in the past two years after a ruling in a headline-grabbing school finance case and an ethics controversy involving one justice. A statewide election Nov. 7 to retain state Supreme Court Justice Robert Davis and nine judges on the 12-member state Court of Appeals, though, has drawn little attention so far.

By Joel Mathis

October 27, 2006

Campaign Briefing

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

27 October 2006
at 9:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Baille (Anonymous) says…

Unethical. Speaker of Half-Truths. Master of Double Speak. Oath Breaker.

Methinks Phill has set his sights too low. These are the qualifications of a man meant for national office.
27 October 2006
at 9:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

yes he did! Time for ALL of us in Kansas to vote this chump out & revoke his state pension! Kline tried national office & lost. This Gas bag has nowhere to go! bye bye kline! Don't let the door hit your SIX on the way OUT! Take your venom somewhere else, you SKUNK! By the way, kline, you stink!
27 October 2006
at 9:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

werekoala (Anonymous) says…

You know, I can't help but see how Kline's campaign will spin this: “Of course we didn't WANT to release it, but after Morrison did , we felt we had to set the record straight”

Crikey, other than the fact that ***newsflash*** a politician went back on his word, this just irks me. It shouldn't be an issue because it's not a flipping issue, not because the great Kline had deigned not to make it one.
27 October 2006
at 10:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

I have one more question for Kline supporters & others & if this makes you sick, my apologies, but now that we accuse Morrison of sexual harrassment without results 15 years AFTER dismissl, I have to wonder what kind of “FAVORS” Kline exchanged with that abortion clinic secretary in order that he could illegally intrude on Patients' Privacy by falsely obtaining those documents?! Talk about a predator, Phil Kline fits that mold really well!
27 October 2006
at 12:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

One more reason NOT to trust kline or re-elect him, he does not know how to ANSWER a question. Those who participated in an LJW forum with him, you know this already. He is a politician with FAKE law credentials, therefore the questions one poses to him about the law, he either can't answer them or refuses to answer them because he is too proud to admit he does not know Kansas Law as he should have! take a hike kline!
27 October 2006
at 3:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Godot (Anonymous) says…

I did not know that editors of newspapers merited an “oath” or a “vow.”
27 October 2006
at 8:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgoof (Anonymous) says…

Baille: While a stint at gov may be a stepping stone, you have pulled away the curtain hiding the wizard.
28 October 2006
at 1:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

KSMeadowlark (Anonymous) says…

How has the word “intending” turned now into a “vow”?

Are the KC Star and Wichita Eagle having a “tag team” attack on Kline?
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2006/1…

The Eagle did quote Phill Kline correctly “I'm not” but what was the question? Listen to the video: “Are you intending to use this?” What does the word “intending” me? Do news reporters understand how dynamic a political campaign is?

The Kansas Press thinks it's so terrible that Kline brings up this issue about Morrison, but what about the even older case Morrison is using against Bryan Brown, who is serving as Director of Consumer Protection? When has the press reported that dozens and dozens of Kansas clergy were also arrested in protests at abortion clinics like Brown, which is the “crime” Brown committed?

Morrison is allowed to attack Kline for an old case, but Kline is not allowed to adjust strategy even if he did not intend to attack Morrison about Summerlin?

The Wichita Eagle cannot even find the story about Tiller's ProKanDo PAC sharing a Wichita address with the “non-profit” group sending out “educational” Snoop Dog political pieces against Kline.

Why did it take the Lawrence Journal World to find this Wichita story? And even after the story was reported, the Eagle then publishes only this AP story, http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news… “TV, radio spots pulled; mailing linked to Tiller”

Look at this quote: “Anti-abortion activists have suspected that the group is tied to Tiller, who donated $153,000 to ProKanDo, an abortion rights PAC, which then spent the same amount on radio ads against Kline four years ago as part of a larger campaign to elect abortion rights supporters.”

Was $153,000 correct here? It's not even close yet the Kansas press ignores and ignores facts that are not difficult to verify:

Kansans for Democratic Leadership formed on 10/14/2002

$40,000 from Tiller's ProKanDo PAC on 10/21/2002

$6,000 from George Tiller on 10/23/2002

$55,000 from ProKanDo on 10/28/2002

$10,000 from ProKanDo on 10/30/2002

$153,000 from ProKanDo on 11/4/2002

$1496.13 to Democratic Tallgrass Committee on 11/19/2002

Kansans for Democratic Leadership files termination report 1/10/2003

http://www.kansasmeadowlark.com/2006/…

Why is the $153,000 figure the only one reported?

There is a HUGE political story from 2002 and another from 2004 that is ignored. Why does the Kansas Press ignore political money if it comes from an abortion doctor in Wichita?

Dr. Tiller has perfected the process now in his “Snoop Dog” piece by making this an “educational” piece sent by a “non profit” exempt from campaign finance reporting.

Why do we even have campaign finance laws if one guy in Wichta can spend as much as he wants to affect Kansas politics, and the press ignores the story?
28 October 2006
at 7:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

dirkleisure (Anonymous) says…

It is moot, because Meadowlark won't ever come back here, but how embarassing is it for him that the full Wichita Eagle interview includes Kline answering, quite firmly, “no” when asked if there was an ad.

I guess, since we need to be educated on “intending,” we also need to be educated on “is there an ad.”

Meadowlark, you're a hack.