Is Illinois the Worst State in America?

May 1, 2014 - The Land of Lincoln is stinkin' in the minds of a lot of Illinois residents these days. Massive budget problems, high taxes, cold winters, over-regulation are among the reasons that half -- HALF -- of Illinois residents wish they could live in some other state.

"These findings are from a 50-state Gallup poll," says Gallup on their website, "conducted June-December 2013, which includes at least 600 representative interviews with residents aged 18 and older in each state. Gallup measured residents' interest in moving out of state by asking, "Regardless of whether you will move, if you had the opportunity, would you like to move to another state, or would you rather remain in your current state?"

Eager to Leave: The Chicago Tribune notes that Gallup "points out that Illinois has ranked at the bottom of recent polls gauging residents satisfaction with state taxes, state government and 'overall perceptions of how their state compares to others as a place to live'." About 19 percent of the polled Illinoisans "said they plan to move in the next 12 months, a rate that trailed only Nevada," said the Tribune.

The Facebook page "Illinois Sucks- Let's Move Out of State!" presents stories about the sad state of Illinois, along with brutally frank comments by those suffering there. "Enough of Illinois, and Chicago in particular," asks the page's authors. "Why do you continue to live there? The weather stinks, it's ugly, it's flat, the cost of living is high, the taxes are ungodly. The state government is broke, and so are the schools. The politicians and civic leaders are corrupt; the traffic is terrible. Major tax hikes are on the horizon to pay for the coming state pension bill. Not to mention the awful winters. In fact, I can't think of one good reason to live there. Stop complaining about much Illinois sucks- do something about it and vote with your feet!"

Also See:

• Which states have the most government taxing bodies? Reboot Illinois
• Illinois Emergency Management Agency fears the worst for budget Pekin Times
• Illinois Dems Drop Plans for Tax Surcharge, Progressive Income Tax Heartlander
• Illinois sucks life out of small business Illinois Watchdog
• Why Illinois Is Going Bankrupt Time

Happy Friday: Chicago Sh-t Cans 850 Teachers

Photo: Museum of Science and Industry

June 14, 2013 - "About 850 teachers and staffers at schools doomed to either close this month or to reboot their staffs were handed pink slips Friday afternoon, according to Chicago Public Schools," reports the Chicago Sun-Times this afternoon.  

It's about to get real ugly. Expect protests, and they won't be pretty.

At the 48 closing schools, 420 teachers of 1,005 total lost their jobs, plus 110 paraprofessionals and 133 bus aides and part-timers. At the five schools headed for “turnaround,” where the children remain in the building but all the adults are replaced, 192 staffers were laid off: 125 teachers, 20 paraprofessionals, 20 bus aides and part-timers and 27 clerks, custodians and security staffers. More at the Sun-Times.

And there's this from Chicagoist (my emphasis added):

Layoffs were on the mind of the Chicago Teachers Union earlier this week when CPS CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett unveiled a five-year action plan for the school system aimed at improving education across all grades. CTU fears the evaluation pillar of the plan could result in as many as 6,000 teachers losing their jobs. While the teachers union fears the worst, additional cuts are already underway at CPS. More than $21 million in cuts  are being made at the central office, administrative positions and operations programs as CPS works to close a $1 billion budget deficit. CPS previously announced $31 million in other cuts. Under school based budgeting, principals are responsible for their own staffing plans and may lay off staff at their schools as needed to meet their budgets. More at Chicagoist.

Also See:

• CPS details staff cuts from closing of schools WGN TV
• Pink Slips Begin Flying At Chicago Public Schools Chicagoist
• Millions for DePaul, budget cuts for public schools Chicago Reader
• For insiders, community group UNO’s charter schools pay Chicago Sun-Times
• CPS budget bomb. Students will need to bring their own toilet paper Fred Klonsky
• CPS' Per-Student Budgets Will Exacerbate School Inequality... Progress Illinois

Obama, Emanuel, Gregory Hypocrites About Armed School Guards

Dec. 26, 2012 - The hypocrisy of Liberals, Democrats and other subspecies of anti-gun creatures is mind-boggling.

After the Dec. 14 shooting that killed 28 people at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, the NRA's Wayne LaPierre called for placement of armed guards in all of the nation's schools.

As predicted, the anti-gun crowd immediately howled that guns are not a way to protect kids in schools, many arguing that it would only compound the problem. And yet...

The hypocrisy comes from politicians such as Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and His Royal Highness Barack Obama, and such as NBC's David Gregory. They say they are anti-gun, each has made statements against putting armed guards in schools, they all send their children to private schools where armed personnel protect the staff and students.

Emanuel and Obama, and thousands of other politicians, never appear in public without a cadre of well-armed guard flanking them for protection. And who can blame them? They want to be safe. They feel that armed guards protect themselves and their kids. So, why then, do they tell us that the same thing won't protect you and me?

"As it happens," notes Wizbangblog.com, "Gregory sends his kids to D.C.-based Sidwell Friends, the same expensive, high-end school the President sends his own children to. Every day that school features armed security details. In fact, the security department is quite large for such a small school as Daniel Halper points out."

Yet, hypocritical elitists such as Obama, Emanuel and Gregory insist that what works well for them is not appropriate for the average ordinary peasant. “It’s outrageous and unsettling that the NRA would choose to address gun violence not by taking assault weapons off our streets, but by adding more guns to our schools,” Emanuel said in a written statement. “That is not the right answer for our society, our schools and most importantly our children.”

"While the Obama administration is calling the idea of armed protection at our schools crazy, they are not mentioning the fact that Sidwell Friends School in Washington, DC, has 11 security officers and is seeking to hire more," points out Gather.com. (See the classified ad here.) "This of course is on top of the secret service officers that are at the school daily since Obama's daughter attend there. Joe Biden's grandchildren as well as children and grandchildren of other high profile political figures attend Sidwell Friends. One more note here. As Hillary and Bill Clinton were calling for gun control, their daughter was attending Sidwell Friends for the superb protection afforded by the added by the schools armed security."

Perhaps Emanuel's hypocrisy was best summed by Jim Johnson of WLS 890 AM in Chicago:

"Oh, outraged huh? Gee, if he's soooo outraged, then why doesn't he pull his kids out of the LAB School at the U of C campus. Guess the 2 U of C armed police officers that work the Lab School everyday just make for such a scary and unsafe environment. Oh wait, if he did that then he just might have to enroll his kids in the local CPS school by his house!?!?! Wait, that can't happen. CPS is just good enough for the peasants kids but not for his little angels. Double standard hypocrite." (h/t: Second City Cop)

Johnson was referring to The University of Chicago Laboratory School, an exclusive and expensive private school. Before he ascended to the Throne, Obama sent his daughters to this bastion of education for the wealthy and privileged. Emanuel currently sends his own kids there. (This begs for a discussion of their hypocrisy about school choice and school vouchers, but we'll save that for another day.)

What the anti-gun idiots do not seem to understand is the painfully obvious fact that when there is a mad killer on the loose in a school, there will be a scramble to call 911. And why is 911 called? To get police to the scene, of course, so that they can - drum roll, please - introduce guns into the school, and thereby stop the lunatic. In other words - and this is what the anti-gun morons cannot seem to comprehend - the defensive guns will be in a school that's under attack sooner or later. Yet, with incredibly dysfunctional "logic," the anti-gun imbeciles opt have the defensive guns arrive later, after the murderous attacker has had more time to kill than he would have if an armed guard, armed teacher or other armed staff member been able to draw his or her own pistol and end the killing well before the police dispatcher even finished with the first 911 call.

"How have our nation's priorities gotten so far out of order?" asked LaPierre in his statement. "Think about it. We care about our money, so we protect our banks with armed guards. American airports, office buildings, power plants, courthouses - even sports stadiums - are all protected by armed security. We care about the President, so we protect him with armed Secret Service agents. Members of Congress work in offices surrounded by armed Capitol Police officers. Yet when it comes to the most beloved, innocent and vulnerable members of the American family - our children - we as a society leave them utterly defenseless, and the monsters and predators of this world know it and exploit it. That must change now!"

So there they are: Obama and fellow anti-gun clowns telling us that we need stricter gun laws. They tell us what we cannot do to protect our own children, while they themselves do exactly what they say would be wrong for us. It should be remembered that the State of Connecticut and the City of Chicago have some of the toughest gun laws in the nation. And just how are those working out?

Rahm Emanuel Lost His Luster

Sept. 17, 2012 - OF COURSE Chicago's mayor is now hated and despised by hundreds of thousands of Chicagoans. The blush, as some might say, is indeed off the rose. The mask is off, and so on. Rahm Emanuel is now officially and undeniably a union buster (God bless him).

There is a myriad of blog posts and other articles out there, and has been for over a week now, that are slamming Emanuel rather hard for this "Walker-like" anti-union position in the ongoing Chicago Teachers Union strike. Emanuel is being portrayed now as a traitor to the pro-union, pro-worker Liberal Cause.

Emanuel is now seen as a sell-out to the corporate interests. Progressives all over the nation are calling Emanuel a Judas and saying he is the Democrats' Scott Walker. Luster? Yah, luster lost. The rose is no longer blushing.

Here is a sampling of those blog posts and news articles, which prove beyond doubt that Rahm Emanuel's reputation as a Hope and Change Progressive Liberal is forever tarnished:

Exclusive: In Secret Meeting, Scott Walker Advised Rahm Emanuel To Use "Nuclear Option" Against Striking Teachers (Satire)

Sept. 17, 2012 - Special Report - In the days just before the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) went on strike (now in its sixth day) Mayor Rahm Emanuel was desperate for a quick solution.

Completely fake photo, so relax

Emanuel was not getting the expected level of support from his own Democratic Party that he had hoped for and so he turned to a neighbor to the north: Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, well known for his anti-public sector union legislation.

Sources told Chicago News Bench late yesterday that Emanuel was "very dismayed" early on by contentious negotiations with the CTU. "President Obama indicated that Mayor Emanuel would get no support from the White House," said the source, "but several prominent Republicans phoned the mayor to privately express their support."

One of those Republicans, said the source, was U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc), who later came out publicly to support Emanuel in his fight with the CTU. Ryan is running for Vice President as Mitt Romney's running mate. Another Republican was Gov. Scott Walker, who phoned the mayor in late August to give moral support to Chicago's mayor. It was during that call that Emanuel asked Walker if he would be willing to meet with him in Kenosha, in the southeastern part of Wisconsin just north of the Illinois border.

Our source, a member of Emanuel's mayoral staff, said that the mayor was "pleasantly surprised" when Walker agreed. During the last weekend of August, the two men each flew to Kenosha by helicopter - Walker from Madison, Emanuel from Chicago - and secretly met in a park on the edge of town "for about two hours."

Emanuel told Walker that he planned to allow the CTU to strike for a week, said our source, "just to make it look like he was negotiating in good faith." However, says the source, Emanuel never really planned to agree to all of the demands of the CTU, which the source says Emanuel called "absurd and insulting."

The "Nuclear Option"

"I was with them," said our source,

"walking with them in the park. I was carrying Mayor Emanuel's briefcase and heard the whole conversation. Walker advised Rahm to let it play out, as he put it, for a week and then use what he called the 'nuclear option' of getting an injunction against the union."

In fact, that is what Emanuel did. Lawyers for the Chicago Public Schools (CPS) asked a Cook County Circuit Court to order the teachers back to work. CPS says that the strike violates Illinois state law. In its   motion to the court, CPS said that the strike is "a clear and present danger to public health and safety."

"Governor Walker actually told Rahm to use that phrase," said our source. "He said calling the strike a 'clear and present danger' would make it sound all scary and serious. Mayor Emanuel really liked that and said he would pass that on to Chicago School Board President David Vitale."

"Mayor Emanuel felt a lot better about the situation after meeting with Governor Walker," our source said. "I think he's really grateful for the support and the advice." Emanuel and Walker continue to talk regularly on the phone about the developing and still unresolved teachers strike.

Rahm Emanuel, Puppet Master of the Solyndra Mess?

Rahm Emanuel: Puppet master

August 6, 2012 - "Scandal: The sunlight continues to expose the machinations behind the White House's support of failed solar panel manufacturer Solyndra with our tax dollars, including the false claim by former White House chief of staff." So began a highly provocative article in Investor's Business Daily last weekend.

According to IBD, "a batch of White House emails released in a report on Solyndra by the House Energy and Commerce Committee" last Thursday, a White House aide wrote to Jacob Levine of the Office of Energy and Climate Change on Aug. 19, 2009.

What the aide wrote is damning: "Feels like Rahm wants this too (barring any concerns) — POTUS (President Of The United States) Involvement (in pushing Solyndra) was Rahm's idea."  Rahm Emanuel: Puppet master.

Let's see if Emanuel, currently Chicago's mayor, keeps lying about his key role in the Solyndra mess. It just became a lot more difficult for him to do that.  Full Story at news.investors.com...

Chicago Mayoral Election (Yawn)

February 22, 2011 - Chicago - Will Carol Moseley Braun be Chicago's next mayor? Hell, no. The "consensus candidate" selected by the self-appointed "leaders" of Black people in Chicago has been enjoying the taste of her own foot too much to win this election. Odds are that Rahm Emanuel will win. Jeepers, the suspense is killing me (not). 

Perhaps that Chico guy or that Del Valle fellow can force a run-off, but that's unlikely. The voting turnout so far is reportedly light, and that will probably help the Rahm Machine with its busloads of well paid voters. 

The stark reality that she doesn't have a chance in this election hasn't stopped her from uglifying the landscape with campaign signs, however. This one, photographed today near the Loyola CTA Red Line Station in Rogers Park this morning, is in violation of election laws. You can see that it's just past the blue cone, which advises "No Electioneering Beyond This Point!" 

I suppose this one sign won't make a difference and, in any case, Moseley Braun won't be electioneering for much of anything ever again after today.

Illinois Supreme Court Gets Horse Heads From Rahm Emanuel

January 25, 2011 - Chicago - What a difference a day makes. Yesterday morning, Rahm Emanuel was removed from Chicago's mayoral primary ballot. That was due to a ruling by the Illinois Appellate Court, which said that ballots must be printed without his name. Late this morning, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that Rahm's name must remain on the ballot. Heads are spinning. "Looks like Illinois Supreme Court justices finally received their horse heads," wrote "Fector" on Twitter. Or, maybe, the justices each got a dead fish in their mailbox. The Chicago Sun-Times reports today that the IL Supreme Court "has not decided whether to hear Emanuel’s appeal of Monday’s Illinois Appellate Court ruling that tossed him out of the race to replace Mayor Daley. But the Supreme Court granted Emanuel’s motion for a stay of the ruling." Huh? The Appellate Court made a legitimate ruling but the Springfield Supremes just overturned it without even hearing the case for themselves. Granted, they just said that they will hear the case, but why not let the Appellate Court's ruling stand until the Supreme Court hears it? (Does this smell bad to you, too?) This, and a hundred other things, have only convinced me that my profound and deepening dislike of Illinois is justified.

UPDATED: Rahm Emanuel Off The Ballot; Ray Hanania Calls Him Racist

UPDATE, January 25: Emanuel, kicked off the ballot yesterday, is back on the ballot. WTH? More over here... January 24, 2011 - Chicago - You've probably heard by now that Rahm Emanuel has been booted off of Chicago's mayoral primary ballot. Some of us aren't surprised, including a local law professor. 

Carol Felsenthal spoke with him today and wrote it up at chicagomag.com: Weeks ago, when most people thought that the challenge to Rahm Emanuel’s residency status was a lost cause, Northwestern Law Professor Sam Tenenbaum dissented. He reminded me of that today when I called him for his reaction to the Illinois Appeals Court ruling that Rahm is ineligible to run for mayor because he does not meet the residency requirement of having lived in Chicago for a year prior to the February 22nd primary. “I told you [the challenge] wasn’t frivolous,” said Tenenbaum, a clinical associate professor of law, whose specialty is civil litigation. Full Article at chicagomag.com... 

Emanuel is also being called some very nasty things. Local liberal columnist and defender of Arab dictatorships Ray Hanania wrote last Friday that Rahm is a racist and religious bigot. Yes, he really did. Apparently, Hanania has no problem with racist bigots if they are autocratic royal rulers of Middle Eastern nations, but Rahm is just too extreme for his tastes. Hanania started his column with a truly idiotic paragraph: "Everyone knows that the reason why Rahm Emanuel is in the race for mayor is that he has more money than any other candidate." 

Ray Hanania
Photo: WNYC

Hanania's logic is so twisted that the mind reels. So, one day Rahm was sitting around and thought, 'Golly, I've got all this money that I'm dying to piss away on a mayoral race that I care nothing about. In fact, the only reason I want to run is because I have more money than any other candidate!' 

I'm no fan of Emanuel, but it's quite a stretch to believe Hanania's crazy hypothesis. What's even crazier, however, is that the often-crazy Hanania blunt called Rahm Emanuel a prejudiced bigot.

Hanania's first paragraph was merely stupid, but he get downright vitriolic: "Emanuel is proving to be a vicious political animal who harbors hatreds and biases. He won’t talk to some people because of their race and religion. He won’t talk to some people because of their political views.... Chicago is a diverse city. The last thing it needs is a mayor who discriminates on the basis of race, ethnicity and religion as Rahm Emanuel does." 

Hanania offers no substantiation of those serious charges, no examples or Emanuel discriminating against anybody based on race, ethnicity or relgiion. Has Ray Hanania learned nothing about making public discourse more civil? Apparently not, and the last thing Chicago needs is a columnist like Ray Hanania who makes such vile accusations without offering any proof. Rahm is off the mayoral ballot, for now anyway. That means somebody else is the new leader in terms of having "more money than any other candidate." Will Hanania's declare that candidate to be in it just for that reason? Abracadabra, Hanania Banania. 

RELATED: 

Ray Hanania defends Arab dictatorships ikrahs.com 

Ray Hanania Cancels His Daily Radio Show chicagoradioandmedia.com 

Cowardly Ray Hanania Disappoints (Kind of) CNB

(Updated) Moseley Braun, Davis - Slaves To Racial Politics

January 1, 2011 - Chicago - How very disappointing, but how sadly predictable: Danny Davis has dropped out of the Chicago mayoral race and thrown his support behind Carol Moseley Braun. Why? It's all about racial politics. Yesterday afternoon, I expressed faint hope that maybe - just maybe - Davis and Moseley Braun had put that nonsense behind them (see text of my original post below). Hours after posting that, word came that Davis had caved in to demands by Jesse Jackson, Sr. to drop out in order to form a unified Black front. The Chicago Sun-Times reports today: It was a push from black businessmen who’d wanted a single candidate to back, that had helped convince Davis late Friday to withdraw and back Braun. Braun ribbed Davis about giving her little notice Friday night, of his decision to endorse her, saying, “He gave me all of 25 minutes to get to his office to talk about how we could come come together to make the case for the people.” Full story here... Shame on them all. Can you imagine a scenario in which white businessmen got together to form a united white front? People would be rightly accusing them of racism, and perhaps even crying out for boycotts of their businesses. Alas, Chicago is still a racist city. The irony of it all is that the most racist of them all are Black "leaders" who practice their racism openly and get slapped on the back for their bravado. Shame. Posted December 31, 2010: Are Danny Davis and Carol Moseley Braun new voices of racial rationality and reason for Chicago? Was I was wrong in my post on December 30? In that post, I said this: Perhaps Chicago's Black mayoral candidates .... is willing to "look beyond race," certainly not on an issue as important as who is going to lead the city. Today we still have self-proclaimed "Black leaders" (such as the Reviled Jesse Jackson) constantly whining that race is a dividing issue. Perhaps that's due in no small part to the fact that they just won't shut up about it and because they insist - in a knee jerk, involuntary manner - on basing everything they do, say and think upon racial issues. As to my first question above, the answer is "not by a long shot." The answer to the second question is, "Partially." Both Danny Davis and Carol Moseley Braun deserve reserved kudos for refusing to go along with race baiter Jesse Jackson's latest ploy to play the race card and to perpetuate the artificially maintained, psychological racial divide in Chicago. John Chase wrote a piece for Clout Street, which summed up the deal (my emphasis added): Rev. Jesse Jackson brokered a meeting last night to try to settle on a single major African-American candidate for the Chicago mayor's contest, but neither former Sen. Carol Moseley Braun nor U.S. Rep. Danny Davis have budged. The idea is to unify behind a single black candidate akin to 1983, when Harold Washington became the city's only elected African-American mayor.‬‪"They know it's going to be difficult to get two candidates through the race. There will be two losers and no winner," Jackson said today. "It's difficult to get one camel through the eye of the needle. It's impossible to get two." Imagine a White reverend, priest or minister getting a group of White mayoral hopefuls together for the purpose of trying to "settle on a single major White-American candidate for the Chicago mayor's contest." Imagine the outcries of outrage, the indignant condemnations of such a boldly racist action. Imagine that, and ask yourself how that hypothetical would be any different in principle or offensiveness than what Jackson actually did. I could suggest where Jackson should put that camel, but I won't. Instead, I'll just say that it's somewhat refreshing to see folks such as Carol Moseley Braun and Danny Davis refusing to play Jackson's insidious game of Divide and Conquer. John Chase wrote this for The Chicago Tribune: U.S. Rep. Danny Davis and former U.S. Sen. Carol Moseley Braun both insisted Thursday that they would keep running for Chicago mayor, despite renewed calls by black leaders to unite behind a single candidate who could improve the odds of an African-American winning the February election. Good for them. Their decisions required a modicum of courage. They will take heat from some Black voters who will accuse them of putting self-interest ahead of a united racial political front. I stand, then, by my December 30 statements about "Black leaders" such as Jesse Jackson. However, recent statements by Davis and Moseley Braun have forced me to rethink their status as mindless mongers of race-based voter sentiment. Of course, I am still inclined to think of them as mindless adherents to the same old tired Liberal and Progressive policies that have gotten the City of Chicago into the dire financial mess that they both promise to get it out of, albeit without the cracking veneer of racial identity. This is not to say that most Black voters in Chicago will not cast their votes in February's election based on race. We know that Blacks, as a group, tend to vote Democrat about 90 percent of the time. Undoubtedly, most of Chicago's Black voters will vote for one of the Black candidates, such as Davis or Moseley Braun, rather than for that Jewish White guy or that Latino guy. Even so, having two prominent Black politicians tell Jesse Jackson to stuff it because they're running to be mayor of all citizens of Chicago, not just Blacks, is something of a start. Gery Chico, a Latino candidate for mayor, "is steering clear of the notion their has to be a Hispanic candidate," WLS AM reported. WLS quoted Chico as saying, "My priority is to have the concensus [sic], most qualified candidate to be the mayor of our city." Chico, of course, was not part of Jesse Jackson's meeting with Davis and Moseley Braun, but his statement sends the same between-the-lines message to Jackson: Shut up. RELATED: Braun vows to dump Weis Chicago Tribune Braun, Davis reject calls for consensus candidate ABC7Chicago Jackson: Clinton should stay away WGNTV Rev. Jesse Jackson arm-twisting or persuading in the Mayor's race? WLS 890 AM

Keeping Race in Chicago's Mayoral Race

With the election of Comrade President Barack Hussein Obama, we were promised, the nation would move beyond race. In January, 2008, Obama was finishing his Iowa caucus campaign. He was quoted by the Chicago Tribune as saying, "People are willing to look beyond race, particularly on issues as important as who is going to lead the country." It was a fantastical statement, given the fact that we still have racist institutions like the Black Congressional Caucus. Oh? Perhaps Chicago's Black mayoral candidates missed that pronouncement from The Messiah. None of them is willing to "look beyond race," certainly not on an issue as important as who is going to lead the city. Today we still have self-proclaimed "Black leaders" (such as the Reviled Jesse Jackson) constantly whining that race is a dividing issue. Perhaps that's due in no small part to the fact that they just won't shut up about it and because they insist - in a knee jerk, involuntary manner - on basing everything they do, say and think upon racial issues. To wit, the current mayoral race in Chicago, where Black "leaders" and candidates are conspiring about the best way to defeat Rahm Emanuel. Of course, it's all about beating the White Man, not about finding the best person to be our next mayor. Carol Felsenthal writes about this in two good articles at ChicagoMag.com: Rev. Jesse Jackson: The Davis/Moseley Braun meeting-and on the media covering the mayor’s race - December 30, 2010: As previously reported, Jesse Jackson, Sr., met Wednesday night at his Rainbow PUSH headquarters with Danny Davis and Carol Moseley Braun, the two leading African American candidates for mayor. The purpose, Jackson told me in a telephone conversation Thursday morning, was to get them talking-to jump start the dialogue about one of them dropping out to give the survivor a chance to turn the momentum that has been building for Rahm Emanuel. Jackson predicted that the two “old friends” will reach an agreement: “There’s nothing hostile or petty about their relationship….They left the meeting on good terms.” Here’s the rest of what Jackson told me.... Danny Davis: Ministers want a single black candidate; Rev. Jesse Jackson brokering? - December 29, 2010: Congressman Danny Davis says that, at the behest of various black ministers, he and Carol Moseley Braun will meet again later today to discuss whether one of them should drop out of the race for Chicago mayor. The two longtime friends—the leading African American candidates in the contest—met on Christmas Eve to talk shop about the campaign ... The unspoken (so far) implication, of course, is that anybody who supports Rahm Emanuel must be anti-Black and, therefore, racist. We heard that spoken often enough during Obama's campaign and still here accusations of racism thrown at anybody who opposes His policies. Willing to look beyond race? I think most of us are, but we also wish the self-proclaimed Black "leaders" would just shut the hell up and keep their paranoid delusions out of politics. RELATED: Clinton and race in Chicago Politico - Rahm Emanuel's African-American opponents continue to use race as a wedge in a city with a history of fraught racial politics Racial Politics in Chicago, of All Places National Review Online Obama's Race Baiting Washington Times Black Racism and “The Jena Six” FrontPage Magazine

Updated: Election Board Keeps Rahm Emanuel On Ballot; Odelson Mounts New Challenge

December 23, 2010 - Chicago - 11:55 AM - Rahm Emanuel got his way this morning: The Chicago election commissioners voted before noon to allow him to stay on the Feb. 22 mayoral ballot. Kristen Mack reports: "The vote came just hours after a hearing officer recommended that the high-profile candidate be allowed to remain on the ballot. Joseph Morris' 69-page recommendation was issued at nearly 2 a.m., and the board began meeting at 9 a.m. (Read report here." Full story at Chicago Breaking News... However, attorney Burt Odelson, who represented multiple objectors to Emanuel's residency status, is already prepared for a followup challenge with a new lawsuit. RELATED: Odelson Preps New Anti-Rahm Suit‎ NBC Chicago (blog) Election board: Emanuel can run for Chicago mayor‎ Houston Chronicle Election board: Emanuel should remain on ballot‎ Chicago Sun-Times Election board: Emanuel can run for Chicago mayor‎ Forbes Elections Board Rules Rahm Emanuel Can Run For Mayor Of Chicago NPR

Rahm Emanuel Residency Hearings Close, Final Opinion Promised Before Christmas

December 16, 2010 - Chicago - The Rahm Emanuel residency hearing wrapped up its final day of weirdness today just in time for the dinner hour. Today's bizarre session was one of several this week in the process to determine Emanuel's residency and eligibility to run for mayor of Chicago. People who object to Emanuel's candidacy for stated legal reasons have been allowed to make statements and even cross examine witnesses, which has led to many delays but also to many strange and often amusing moments. 

Hearing Officer Joe Morris announced at 4:15 p.m. that final oral arguments by objectors would be heard, just after a short recess. He added that objectors who want to submit written briefs to him may do so, with a deadline of 12:00 Noon next Monday. The only rule for the briefs, he told the objectors, was that their briefs be legible. 

"Neatness counts," he said, and then broke the hearing for ten minutes. 

During the recess, Mr. Morris told Chicago News Bench that he would consider all that he's heard this week in the hearings, and then carefully consider the written briefs next week. 

He said that the purpose of the briefs is to give objectors the opportunity to state in writing whatever they might not have gotten in orally this week, and also to clarify or support statements made by citing legal cases. Mr. Morris said he will base his recommendation on both what he's heard and the written briefs. He will then forward his recommendation to the Board of Elections, which will make the final decision. Mr. Morris told CNB that he expects a decision before Christmas.

Photos of items left in storage by Rahm Emanuel were shown and discussed. The photos showed boxes and other items, including a bed frame, in a crawl space and the basement of the house owned by the Emanuels but rented out while they lived in Washington, D.C. 

The Sun-Times gave a strange report that said, in part, "Attorneys for Emanuel visited the house he owns in Ravenswood at 1:30 p.m. Thursday, located the much-discussed 'crawl space,' looked inside and found the valuable items Emanuel had maintained he had stored there. They have argued the fact they left the items there while Emanuel went to Washington D.C. to work as President Obama’s chief of staff shows he always planned to return to Chicago — and therefore should be eligible to run for mayor." 

In the hearing, however, Attorney Dana S. Douglas testified under oath that she took the photos late last night, around midnight, and not "at 1:30 p.m." today as the Sun-Times mysteriously reported. Under questioning, Ms. Douglas admitted that there were a number of boxes that she and others with her did not open. Some objectors voiced the opinion that no matter what was shown in the photos, or found in the house, none of it proves Rahm Emanuel's intentions to have moved back to Chicago or to maintain his legal residence here. 

You could make a rational argument that many people leave valuable items in storage, in other cities or states, while they are looking for a house to buy elsewhere and that the items stored by Emanuel prove nothing about his intentions about residency when he left Chicago years ago. 

Related:  

• Rahm Emanuel Residency Hearing Turns Circus-Like‎ - CBS News 
• Arguments End in Emanuel Residency Hearings‎ Chicago News Cooperative 
• Conservative Activist Presides Over Rahm Emanuel Residency Hearings CNB 
• Mainstream media ignores fishy story of Rahm Emanuel's GOP mayoral opponent Washington Times

Conservative Presides Over Rahm Emanuel Residency Hearings

Attorney Joe Morris

December 14, 2010 - Chicago - Rahm Emanuel continued to be questioned about his Chicago residency today. Running for mayor here, some say that he forfeited his residency status when he moved to Washington, D.C. to be Obama's White House Chief of Staff. Not so, says, Rahm. 

I've been a big fan of attorney Joe Morris for a few years now, ever since I saw him speak at a conservative gathering at the Lincoln Restaurant. 

Morris is one of the best-read and most engaging public speakers I have ever had the pleasure to witness. He has a mind like a steel trap and sense of humor as sharp as a titanium blade. The last time I saw him speak, he gave an entertaining lecture about Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" in June, 2010. 

Morris is a staunch conservative, and he is currently presiding over the petition objections to the mayoral candidacy of Rahm Emanuel in Chicago. 

Tom Swiss, a local Republican insider, wrote that he is sure "this is not an accident." Swiss wrote that on December 6 on the website of the Chicago Republican Party. I would add that I am sure that Morris is relishing ever delicious second of the hearings, and that I can't wait to hear him describe it all at a future Lincoln Restaurant gathering. 

Will Rahm Emanuel Be Treated Fairly? 

Does that fact that Morris, widely known in Illinois as "Mr. Conservative," is presiding over a bunch of squabbling Democrat contenders for mayor of Chicago mean that Rahm Emanuel will not get a fair hearing? Probably not. Morris is also known for his expertise in law, but he's also revered for his decency and honesty. Swiss addressed this, and made a prediction, in his Dec. 6 article: "[Emanuel's] 'luck' and Republican's problem is Joe Morris is an honest man." wrote Swiss. "Morris will give Emanuel a fair hearing denied to so many GOP candidates in the past. Morris will correctly rule Emanuel did not forfeit his residency by serving the President of the US." 

I'm not sure how Tom Swiss could know in advance how Morris will rule on Emanuel's residency issue. Suppose compelling evidence is presented that "proves" that Emanuel actually did lose his residency status? I would contend that Morris, being an honest man, would have to take that into consideration. I have no doubt that Joe Morris would agree with my contention. 

ChicagoMag.com took a look at Morris today and published her profile of him at ChicagoMag.com. Friend Carol Felsenthal's article, "A Look at Joseph Morris, the Hearing Officer in the Rahm Emanuel Residency Challenge," gives a nice synopsis of Morris's life and then delves into his involvement with the Rahm Emanuel hearings. 

"His plan," wrote Felsenthal, "is to wrap up the hearing on Thursday [Dec. 16], and then he will consider the testimony and write his recommendation on whether Rahm’s name should stay on the ballot. He will submit it to the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, which will decide whether or not to accept it. The board’s decision will likely be appealed—first stop the Circuit Court of Cook County—perhaps up to the Illinois Supreme Court." Felsenthal also notes that Morris has been appointed to be a hearing officer for the Board of Elections a number of times over the past 20 years. 

Joe Morris is also President, pro bono publico, of the Lincoln Legal Foundation, a member of the national Board of Directors of the American Conservative Union (of which I am a former Assistant Media Director), former Assistant Attorney General of the United States under President Reagan. 

Related:

• Rahm Emanuel defends Chicago residency TheHill.com
• William Kelly Fights Media's Rahm Emanuel Bias CNB 
• Stop Rahm Rules for Radicals RahmStoppers.com

Eric Massa Says Rahm Emanuel "Hates My Guts"

Rep. Eric Massa

March 8, 2010 - The melt down of the Democrat Party continues, as Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY29) tosses verbal grenades at the White House on this, his last day as a U.S. Representative. 

Massa announced last Friday that he will resign today, effective at 5:00 p.m. EST. Massa is not the first member of Congress to diss the Obama Administration and Democrat Party leaders, but his words may be the harshest so far from a fellow Democrat. Massa is resigning during his first term in Congress. 

The Massa case is weird, however. First he announced that he would not seek re-election because of personal health concerns. Then came word that a male staffer filed an ethics complaint against him, allegedly for sexual harassment. Later, Massa insisted that he was being forced out of Congress because of his opposition to health care legislation. 

Before Massa officially goes down at 5:00 p.m. today, however, Massa's final mission seems to have been one of complete destruction of as many fellow Democrats as possible. (We wish him all the best in that endeavor, by the way.) 

Massa's resignation comes in the wake of major events in his life. He recently had a CAT scan and was told that "the anomalies in the films may or may not be scar tissue," so he made the decision to prioritize his family and himself ahead of his political career. Massa was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in 1996. 

He bowed out of his bid for re-election and was then informed that "a member of my staff believed I had made statements that made him feel 'uncomfortable.'" That staffer reportedly filed a complaint with the Congressional Ethics Committee. 

In a phone interview with WKPQ-AM, Massa said that "Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil's spawn. He is an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive, and if he doesn't like that he can come after me personally." 

It gets weirder. "Let me tell you a story about Rahm Emanuel," Massa said: 

"I was a Congressman, and in my first eight weeks, I was in the Congressional gym and I went down and I worked out, and I went into the showers, which by the way, for the life of me I can't figure out why they took all the shower curtains off the shower stalls in the Congressional shower. I mean, the last thing I want to look at is my fellow colleagues naked, but they don't have any shower curtains down in the gym, and I'm sittin' there showering, naked as a jay bird, and here comes Rahm Emanuel not even with a towel wrapped around his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me because I wasn't going to vote for the president's budget. Do you know how awkward it is to have a political argument with a naked man? By the way, what the heck is he doing in the Congressional gym? He goes there to intimidate members of Congress.... We had words, and he hates my guts. He's hated me since Day One, and now he wins. So, he'll get rid of me, and this [health care] bill will pass, and I don't know what we're going to do with this country."

Arguing politics with naked men is, apparently, something that Rahm Emanuel is comfortable with. The shower encounter was not the first time that Massa and Emanuel have had a tense moment together. 

During Massa's 2006 run for Congress, Emanuel visited Eric Massa during a trip to upstate New York. In a video of the visit, Emanuel scolded Massa for seeming too angry. At that time, Emanuel was the National Campaign Director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. One of his duties was to inspect the troops, so to speak. During the video, Massa and his staff say "F--- him" about Emanuel at least twice when they are away from him. 

My own theory is that Massa has, indeed, been forced out by Emanuel and the Democrat leadership. Consider this: He gets word that he may or may not have scar tissue from his 1996 bout with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Most people would not immediately quit their job because of that, however. Rather, they would hang in there until further tests could be done to determine absolutely what their medical condition is. Remember that Massa has (had) fine health care as a Congressman. Then there is the sudden and terribly (in)convenient charge of sexual harassment. Coincidence? Or conspiratorial action engineered by Rahm Emanuel, who has never liked Massa and saw him as an obstructionist. After the charges broke, Massa changed his story to include his own charges that the Democrats have forced him out, and that he's quitting because he does not want to put his family through the ordeal of a sexual harassment investigation. 

Remember, Emanuel is a Chicago politician, as is his boss Obama. In other words, they're thugs, and to this Chicagoan such dirty tactics would not be at all surprising. 

We can only hope that Eric Massa continues to criticize Emanuel and the Chicago Thugocracy after his resignation one hour from now. 

Massa is just one of a string of New York Democrats embroiled in controversy and scandal. Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-NY) just took a leave of absence as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee "who’s currently under investigation for a slew of ethics violations." 

NY Governor David Paterson is under pressure to resign because of "allegations that his office had improper contact with the ex-girlfriend of a close gubernatorial aide to pressure her to drop a domestic violence case against the aide; and the second into allegations that the governor lied about whether he sought free World Series tickets from the New York Yankees in violation of state ethics laws." 

Massa's Congressional web site is http://massa.house.gov/. It will probably come down after his resignation becomes official late this afternoon. Also, traffic to the site is very heavy today, so if you don't get it at first, just refresh the page. 

Related: 

• Eric Massa Goes Out Swinging 
• Rep. Eric Massa Bashes the Obama Administration 
• Rep. Massa and the Chicago Boys 
• Departing Rep. Eric Massa goes down swinging - at his fellow Democrats 
• Video: Rahm Emanuel inspects Congressman Eric Massa (Must See) 
• Ethics clouds over Rangel and Paterson are the talk of political Harlem 
• Dems Won't Endorse Rangel, Return His Campaign Donations 
• Revolving Door: Rahm Emanuel Employment Summary 
• Both right and left want Rahm Emanuel's head

In Defense of Scott Lee Cohen

by Michael Coyne I don’t like to make a habit out of defending the opposition party, but it seems that our side needs to seriously get a better grip on things. Recently, I was forced to defend Rahm Emanuel against Sarah Palin. Now, I may very well be forced to defend the new Democratic nominee for Lieutenant Governor of Illinois, Scott Cohen, from media criticism and conspiracy-hunters on my own side of the aisle. Cohen was apparently arrested five years ago for a domestic abuse allegation. The charges were dropped, and the accuser was a known prostitute. Now, Cohen is being called on to explain the allegation and may very well be forced to recuse himself of his party’s nomination. This is ridiculous. If the allegation is true, Cohen is a monster. Welcome to Common-sense-land. But, given that the charges were dropped because the so-called “victim” failed to even show up to court—notwithstanding the known credibility of the prostitute community—we should be willing to move past this nonsense and onto matters of actual significance. Cohen vehemently denies any wrongdoing, and says that he did not harm the woman. It is understandable, from a journalistic standpoint, to follow this story. But it is unlikely that anything substantial will come of it. In the realm of reasoned debate, this is a non-issue. Cohen should not be Illinois’s Lieutenant Governor. However, I reached this conclusion because his party has failed the state. It has nothing to do with a supposed controversy. Let’s let cooler heads prevail. Debate the issues, not a five-year-old dropped case. The past is the past; let’s live in the present. For more of Michael Coyne's conservative commentary, visit his website, RepublicanBlue. Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed

SHOCKER: Democrat Involved in Scandal

by Sean Vera To be perfectly fair, it's only a shocker if you're either (a) an idiot, or (b) a rabid Democrat. But even Illinois Dems, no strangers to the sort of sordid scandals that have made the state a punchline for every comedian and late night host across the country, must be reeling from this one. The Lieutenant Governor nominee (as you can recall, he's been the nominee for all of 2 days), Scott Lee Cohen, has been alleged to have held a knife to the throat of his girlfriend, who it was later revealed is also allegedly a prostitute.

Classy, Democrats...really classy. More can be read from the Loyola Republicans blog:

Scott Lee Cohen, the Democrat’s newly named candidate for Lieutenant Governor, is again being questioned about his 2005 domestic battery arrest.

Although the case was dropped, apparently due to the failed appearance of the victim, concerns remain. It is alleged that Cohen, who was going through a divorce, held a knife to his girlfriend’s throat. A filed police report shows that the victim, a convicted prostitute, had cuts on her throat and hands...(read more)

Leave a Comment * Conservative T-Shirts * Follow CNB on Twitter * RSS Feed

Biased Chicago Media Ignore 5th District Republican Candidate

UPDATED: About Rosanna Pulido's Trouble Campaign If ever you doubted whether most of the "mainstream media" has a Liberal slant, ask yourself why Mike Quigley got virtually all the headlines after Tuesday's primary election in Illinois' 5th Congressional District. That's the seat known as "Rahm Emanuel's seat," even though Rahm happily abandoned it - and his constituents - for a cushier job in the White House. The local Chicago media have slanted the story as if Tuesday's election was the election, not just the primary, as though Quigley has already become the new Congressman in the 5th. Let's be clear: Quigley did not win the primary, he won a primary. In reality, there were three on Tuesday. There was one for Democrat voters, one for Republican voters, and one for Green Party voters. Quigley won the primary that he participated in. The other two primary races have received far less attention than the Democrat primary has. Oh, by the way, the other candidates still in the race for that seat are Rosanna Pulido, Republican, and Matt Reichel, Green. He has not. Quigley must still face two other candidates, a Republican and a Green. All three candidates - and they are still candidates - must still go through the April 7 general election before any of them become the next representative in Congress. That includes Quigley, but hte local press is treating the primary election as a virtual coronation of Quigley. "Oh, by the way," some of the big Chicago media seem to say, "there were a couple of other candidates who won their primaries, too, but they don't really matter." I had a phone conversation yesterday with well-known local Democrat (yes, a number of them actually talk to me). We'll call said Democrat "Jack." I told Jack how disgusting the local media's treatment of the 5th District primary is, what with the virtual dismissal of the Republican and the Green. "But," said Jack, "they don't matter." Honestly, that's what Jack said. "Quigley's gonna win. What's it matter if the press covers the other candidates or not?" I consider "Jack" to be a dear personal friend, actually, so I will be careful with how I call Jack a typical, party-centric hack who doesn't give a rat's ass about informing the voters so long as it furthers the Democrat candidate. To hell with objective reporting, so what if that attitude is contrary to the Fairness Doctrine that Jack and other Democrats would love to revive. As long as the local media is in the hip pocket of the Dems, that's just dandy. Why even acknowledge the Republican and the Green in the race? That's not what democracy is about, and it sure as hell isn't the "objective journalism" that the Tribune and the Sun-Times pretend to practice. The post you're reading right now, on this blog, is obviously an opinion piece. A conservative radio talk show makes no pretense of being objective while presenting what is obviously opinion. However, when the likes of the Chicago Tribune or the Chicago Sun-Times present coverage of a local election, they should do more than pretend that said coverage is complete or even fair. Here's a challenge: Do an advanced Google news search for "Pulido." Set the search to find items from March 4 to March 6, with "Pulido" as part of the headline. As of 12:03 p.m. on March 6, the search produced only one (1) result ("Quigley wins Democratic nod; Pulido leads GOP," March 4, Burlington Hawk Eye). Do the same search for "Quigley," and the results numbered "about 400." No media bias? Don't make me laugh. Even Lynn Sweet, who usually pretends to be objective, ran a post with the headline "Mike Quigley wins!" The post, published at 10:49 p.m. on Tuesday, contained no text, just two big photos of Quigley. Sweet digitally drooled, unable to contain herself. She probably had to be peeled off her chair. Any similar treatment for the Republican or the Green? Are you kidding? Shame on you, Lynn, where's the "Rosanna Pulido wins!" or the "Matt Reichel wins!" headline? Will Quigley win? Probably, but there is no guarantee. The Democrats have a much bigger campaign machine on their side. Todd Stroger will probably have troops out campaigning again for Quigley, and why not? Quigley and his army of patronage stooges campaigned hard for Todd Stroger. Just ask Sara Feigenholtz, a Democrat who lost in Tuesday's primary. The announcer in one of her campaign ads said this: “Mike Quigley? He talks a good game, but he endorsed Todd Stroger. Even sending his county staff to help Stroger’s campaign. And Quigley voted for Stroger’s budget, cutting nurses and hospital workers to keep Stroger friends on the payroll." (See the video here.) Will Quigley win? Probably, as noted above. If the mainstream media in the metro Chicago area continues its blatantly biased "coverage" of the election, many voters will assume incorrectly that Quigley has already won the seat. It is deception, whether by design or by knee-jerk behavior, by the press. Democrats like my friend "Jack" are perfectly content to perpetuate the deception. It is up to non-Democrat voters in the 5th Congressional District - whether Republican, Green or Martian - to spread the word that the election is not over yet. RELATED: Rosanna Pulido 2009 (IL) 5th District (Republican) Matt Reichel for Congress (IL) 5th District (Green) Illinois, District 5 Census Data from The Washington Post Chicago News Bench RSS Feed Cool Stuff...

Pulido "Taking No Prisoners"

UPDATED: About Rosanna Pulido's Trouble Campaign The Post Chronicle has what amounts to an endorsement for Rosanna Pulido, a Republican running in this month's primary election for the 5th District congressional seat. That seat was occupied by Democrat Rahm Emanuel until he abandoned his constituents to take a more glamorous job as White House Chief of Staff. The Post Chronicle's column provides an interesting look at Pulido, a woman who is not afraid to tell it like it is. In a state not known for its traditional American values, a strong 5th District conservative candidate has come forth and is taking no prisoners. Her name is Rosanna Pulido. I first met Rosanna, native Chicagoan and the founder and current director of the Illinois Minuteman Project, in 2006. This prompted my interview with her and subsequent article "More Illegals in Illinois than California." Since then, Rosanna has been extremely busy. Full Column... Chicago News Bench RSS Feed Cool Stuff...

"Burris Must Go" Says NLPC

From PRNewswire, this press release: NLPC Says Roland Burris Must Go FALLS CHURCH, Va., Feb. 16 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Peter Flaherty, President of the National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), made the following statement today: "Roland Burris must resign from the U.S. Senate. If he is unwilling to resign, he should be removed. This new sideshow results from Barack Obama and other prominent Democrats acquiescing to a brokered process to fill the seat, instead of insisting on the special election they originally favored. The Blagojevich debacle holds continued danger for Obama. His chief of staff Rahm Emanuel is not out of the woods. More importantly, public cynicism about this affair will undermine the hope and good will that ushered in the new administration." On February 2, NLPC released an in-depth analysis of financial contributions made to Friends of Blagojevich by Balmoral and Maywood racetrack owner John Johnston and other Johnston-owned/affiliated interests. The "pay to play" relationship of these interests with Blagojevich was described in the FBI affidavit. It was previously reported that such contributions totaled $160,000. The NLPC analysis documents a much-higher figure of $343,000. NLPC promotes ethics in public life and sponsors the Government Integrity Project. SOURCE National Legal and Policy Center Hat Tip: Princella D. Smith CNB RSS Feed