Guglielmi For Congress - Too Many Unkowns
April 13, 2006 by Conservative Culture
Filed under Ohio
The only information of substance to be found about Guglielmi are ads about how to say his name and that he is pro-everything conservative. But the substance is missing. In the end you are left to ‘trust’ that he really is.
I have been giving it considerable thought since Guglielmi has spent nearly $600,000 of his own money for the campaign already (if that is not correct… please comment). Those concerns were compounded by dropping the name of Voinovich. Are we going to end up with a liberal Republican in office should his campaign pull it out? Is Ohio’s 4th district going to buy the pro-family, pro-life stance without any credentials? If this happens we will likely end up with a Congressman ‘Taft’ type Republican. I make the connection because Voinovich and Taft are similar in one main aspect. Neither are conservative.
More information about the Guglielmi family surfaced through Google. It’s tragic news for those not knowing. But I raise it because it reveals some concerns about who some might be voting for.
On Spring Break 2000 the Guglielmi family lost their son Andrew. Andrew was on a drinking binge and leaned over a balcony on the third floor. He fell. The family was told Andrew only had a 50-50 chance of living. Unfortunately, Andrew didn’t survive. A parent’s nightmare. A tragedy that we hope we don’t face and certainly don’t wish this on any family.
What does this reveal about their family? Many kids get drunk and go to Florida or vice versa. Why pick on a sad moment? Read their responses to the tragedy. Does this reflect the person you want in Washington?
“He was seduced by hotels, bars, and the alcohol folks,” Guglielmi says. “I put the advertisers in the same hopper. The advertising comes to the kids subtly; you watch these programs, MTV, kids doing degrading things on the beach with beer. It’s threaded with movies and TV selling this type of behavior.”
“How much can we parents do in these MTV-like environments?” asks Frank Guglielmi, whose son Andrew died during a trip to Panama City Beach. “I urge (the alcohol, hotel and tour industries) to help us. Certainly, as a parent, I’m responsible. But other people who, through the strength of advertising, have created an environment for this to happen have to take responsibility, too. It’s very seductive.”
“The intensive care unit was a war zone. There were families camped out everywhere. There were kids in comas,” Guglielmi said.
“What we parents learned is that this scene was repeated every year at the same time.”
Nan and Frank are haunted by the steady parade of injured teens they saw in the Florida hospital during the family’s vigil in the intensive care. Others there were also fighting for their lives after balcony falls, and there were girls in comas because they had unknowingly consumed drinks spiked with drugs. The Guglielmis want to help raise awareness about the realities of spring break alcohol use in order help others and to make positive social change from the tragedy of their son’s death.
You will find that Guglielmi is a social activist with a tragic story. He has lots of money to buy the race but he is out of touch or lying if he knows about MTV but knows nothing about the drinking and parties down there. Perhaps he is both. The real danger is if he is given the power to legislate. Talk about frivolous lawsuits. When someone dies and we suddenly feel all this pain there will need to be more awareness, more programs forcing others to step up and take responsibility for those type deaths. Guglielmi’s ads would be more genuine if they would say ‘Guglielmi for positive social change.’
I don’t buy the ads or the rhetoric. Guglielmi should stay in business and be a real help creating jobs. Leave the ‘positive social changes’ to individuals and not the government. The last thing we need is more government. Perhaps there were too many unknowns… but I now know more than I want and it isn’t pretty.
Tom Blumer
on Thu, 13th Apr 2006 11:49 am
I think Jordan is the better choice. He has Club For Growth backing and I believe fewer question marks.
Gugli is a lot like McEwen; he comes in from nowhere (Gugli) or after a long absence (McEwen) and we’re supposed to take an awful lot on faith. Gugli’s revelations are selective, and distract from what might otherwise matter at least as much (business experience, etc.).
Why, when the 4th has Jordan and the 2nd has Schmidt (plus another 2nd District challenger who, though she has no legislative experience, is willing to tell us about herself), should we take a chance?
Conservative Culture
on Thu, 13th Apr 2006 3:34 pm
Might we say that Gugli is just a risky scheme?
These quotes need to be out there. Too many people only see the ads. If anyone had doubts, these should settle the matter.
Daniel J. Mount
on Thu, 13th Apr 2006 4:12 pm
Guglielmi might be a crusader, but to date it’s not been for the causes that attract conservatives. He’s not been seen as a regular speaker at pro-life, pro-marriage, or other pro-family events; he’s spoken at this type of event. What he’s done in this cause is not inherently bad; he’s just being about as forthright as Jordan would be were Jordan to run ads portraying himself as a person who’s spent the last several years trying to regulate spring break. Jordan cares about pro-family issues; Guglielmi cares about other issues.
Daniel J. Mount
on Thu, 13th Apr 2006 4:14 pm
Also, you’re right on the $600,000+ out-of-pocket figure.
save_the_rustbelt
on Sat, 22nd Apr 2006 9:58 pm
Mark:
You are showing that you are neither as smart or as Christian as you try to project.
You apparently think the word “activist” is a perjorative. Ronald Reagan was an activist for conservative causes.
If you want to be pro-Jordan that is fine, he will probably win. But this is a little too slimy for decent conversation. You might start by buying a dictionary. The first word you should look up is ethics.
Conservative Culture
on Sun, 23rd Apr 2006 7:43 pm
Rustbelt seem to be no stranger to personal attacks. So be it. Social or Conservative activists? At least he recongnizes that Mr. G is not conservative which was the point of the article. This article is not slimy but a fairer representation of his point of view than the ads. If anyone finds that slimy, so be it.
Perhaps Rustbelt will begin to blog so we can partake in his/her (?) accumulated wisdom.
Cyndi Jones
on Mon, 24th Apr 2006 10:43 pm
I am not only appalled by your willingness to stoop as low as to dig up and use what must surely be the most painful experience a family could go through, I am utterly stunned at the stupidity of your ???argument??? against Mr. Guglielmi. What exactly is your argument? ???Don???t vote for Frank Guglielmi because he???s against the promotion of binge drinking to young people???? The quotes that you listed seemed to express concern about the over-glamorization and promotion of drinking. Mr. Guglielmi took responsibility as a parent (which is admirable and rare in this age of blaming everyone else and taking no responsibility) ??? he???s only asking the alcohol, hotel and tourist industries to act more responsibly, too. I see nothing wrong with all of us trying to stop people from dying due to alcohol ??? do you?
As for your comment that Mr. Guglielmi should stay in business locally and continue to create jobs?? again, what is your argument against Mr. Guglielmi? He has had great success at creating jobs locally, why not take his skills to congress to help create jobs on a broader scale?
Conservative Culture
on Tue, 25th Apr 2006 6:11 am
You are appalled only because of emotion. The issue at hand is what are his true core values and principles of life. Often these are best revealed in those ‘painful’ moments of life.
Family values means teaching personal responsibility for your own actions. No one put a drink in his hand and forced him to drink. No one forced the irresponsible behavior upon the son. People do what they do because they made the decision to drive all that way for one purpose.
Mr. G. sounds like an activist who will bring government regulation into an area that should have been dealt with by the family. A conservative understands the culture around them but doesn’t blame it. If that was my son, all I could say is he chose poorly. It is a tough lesson. But it was surely preceded by other previous ‘bad’ choices never dealt with. I am sure it wasn’t the first time the parents discovered he drank with friends.
As for the job creations issue. Now I know you are a liberal. People don’t go to congress to create jobs. If they do they are dems who expand government, regulation and then have to raise taxes to pay for it.
Is that what you want? Feel free to answer the question.
Craig
on Sat, 29th Apr 2006 8:00 am
Mark-
I wonder about your motivations. I agree there are unknowns but I don’t see how the son who died has any bearing on how anyone should vote.
Vote on solutions - Frank isn’t the only one who is Pro-whatever. Jordan is worse - and his views are scarry.
He signed a survey that he would support forcing a rape victim to have a child. If Jim Jordan can imagine putting his wife, daughter, or mother through that, forcing them to live with the reminder of such a horific event, then he doesn’t have my vote.
You shouldn’t elect this position based on Pro-life or Pro-choice anyway. You should vote on issues like: taxes, health care, immigration, etc.
All Jordan can say is Pro-Family. My question is, “Who is anti-family?”. He has not accomplished anything in Columbus. He has opposed tax increases but has he every introduced a bill to reduce them?
Frankly, there are more unknowns with Jordan and he has been an elected official for 12 years.
Study the candidates and pick someone else.
Conservative Culture
on Sat, 29th Apr 2006 4:27 pm
You wonder about my motives. But I know yours. Obviously you ignored his quotes and refused to comment on their content.
What legislation has Gugli brought to bear to reduce taxes? Where was he speaking publicly against the tax raises? Where was he when pro-life organizations needed money? Does the Findley pro-life facility have a trust fund to operate with?
Jordan has opposed every piece passed by a majority. He has fought to get pro-life and parental consent initiatives passed.
What did you say your motives were… I missed it… well, not really. The cover was veil thin. Anyone want to deal with the actual quotes… anyone? I still have no takers.
Daniel J. Mount
on Mon, 1st May 2006 9:33 am
Craig,
Guglielmi, Martin, and Nestor (at least) all said the same thing—that a child is a child in cases of rape and should not be killed. So don’t support any of those people either.
Daniel J. Mount
Daniel J. Mount
on Tue, 2nd May 2006 4:18 pm
I, too, have had the privilege to know each the candidates, most personally, and I personally believe that this district will be in serious trouble should Guglielmi win.
We will suffer if we have for the next twenty years a Congressman who leans whichever way the wind is blowing, and bases campaigns, positions, and actions on what the polls are saying.
gREG
on Wed, 3rd May 2006 2:00 am
Now that Frank G. has not been elected, we are all screwed. We have a Pro-Wrestler as a possible coongressman. Jordan does not have my vote!
Daniel J. Mount
on Wed, 3rd May 2006 7:23 am
Don’t be a sore loser. We’ve got a principled, pro-life conservative.
Daniel J. Mount
on Wed, 3rd May 2006 7:23 am
I’m excited! We’ve got a principled, pro-life conservative. On to victory!
Greg
on Wed, 3rd May 2006 12:12 pm
On both sides, it was a well ran race. Jordan and Guglielmi both.
Tell me craig, how pro-life is accepting PAC money from the same company that produces “the pill” for women?
Not a very pro-life agenda if you are in this companies pocket.