White House Tries to Shed their Sgt. Schultz Image.

Suddenly, things are moving at the speed of light at the White House. They appear to be desperate to contain three or more budding scandals which they and supporters claim are not scandals.

Which begs the question: If these are not scandals then why are they reacting like they are?

After first claiming no control over the IRS, President Obama announced that he asked Treasury Secretary Lew to seek the resignation of the current Interim Director, whose term was expiring in June.  The Director then resigned.

Now President Obama, suddenly interested in swiftly showing the nation he actually governs and does not lead from behind, or is apathetic or bored with the day to day governance of the ever expanding Federal Government, appoints a new Interim IRS Director, who comes from the President's Office of Budget and Management, and who was in charge of implementing "Sequestration" constraints on spending.

Is he the same fellow who closed White House tours claiming a lack of funding?  Placed Air Traffic Controllers on furloughs even though the FAA later suddenly found funding to reverse that decision?  The White House kept coming up with various doomsday scenarios resulting from the sequestration, only to see them shrugged off unless some overly outrageous action was implemented. Does this mean a less consumer friendly IRS down the road?

Which begs another new question: Is the President merely rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic by inserting someone in that position who will do his bidding?  If so, will it be in a bid for reform or to quietly reinstate the status quo?

Now a few friends of mine who are not Republicans are complaining over how I am portraying our President and White House over these matters.  It is much ado about nothing, they complain.  Using the confused, bumbling, know nothing, see nothing, hear nothing Sgt. Schultz to describe the White House is unfair to them.

Sorry. They need to take this more seriously. When you provide information to the IRS in an application for a certain tax status or a tax return, you provide that information under penalties of perjury. The IRS demanded information about membership, supporters, who conservative groups were supporting, sources of funding, their activities, all as part of an application process, that again, included penalties of perjury. Intimidating? You bet. Squelching free speech? You bet.

President Obama is also now requesting increased security at U.S. Embassies around the world.  Has he finally learned his lesson from the Benghazi tragedy?  Time will tell.

President Obama is also requesting passage of a bill protecting or shielding reporters from revealing their sources, something he previously opposed. But he "makes no apologies" for the actions of his Justice Department in seizing telephone records of numerous reports of the Associated Press.

Nice to see the President become so suddenly engaged.  Maybe the President will finally keep his long time promise to Americans to make the Federal Government more transparent, open and accessible. His administration has been anything but since he first assumed office. Those references to Nixon must be galling to Obama.

The President needs to agree to a series of independent counsels to investigate these matters. No one trusts the Holder Justice Department, The Treasury Department or the IRS to investigate these matters. That would be the same as investigating oneself. Congressional investigations in turn will allow Democrats to snipe and claim partisanship. The scrambling of this White House so far is designed to contain the scandals, not to reveal all the facts so that the public can determine if they are scandalous or not.

Independent counsels? Sgt. Schultz would never agree to that!

Sgt. Schultz Pounces! IRS Director Thrown Under the Bus!

So as Speaker of the House Boehner asked, "Who is going to jail?" over the exploding IRS scandal?

Since yesterday's posting, the Sgt. Schultz White House has been extremely active. After first denying they had any real power or authority over the Internal Revenue Service, Treasury Secretary Lew requested and received the resignation of the interim Director of the IRS. Remember Mr. Lew?  The fellow that came up with the "Sequester" concept that the Sgt. Schulz White House now pretends never came from them?

So do they have the ability to change the focus and direction of the Internal Revenue Service?  It certainly appears so.  I am assuming at this point in time that IRS employees are getting the message loud and clear. That new message: "You can now stop picking on conservative political groups." 

The question remains, who created those earlier policies and who demanded they be implemented?  Anyone in the White House? The Obama Reelection Campaign?

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney is still bobbing and weaving.  Someone needs to clue in Mr. Carney that the Sgt. Schultz routine isn't working.  The we have to see what "actions were performed by the IRS" ring false. The IRS admitted behaving in such a fashion! Schultzie!  Look around!

The typical Sgt. Schultz approach of this White House has been to first deny, then soft peddle, then after wiping the pie off their faces, throw someone under the bus and say: "See, we are fixing this. There is nothing more to see here, just move along folks!"

Those liberal Democratic politicians who screamed for IRS investigations into conservative political groups and their tax exempt statuses, might want to revisit a USA Today article on the subject.  For 27 months starting in 2010, not a single conservative political group received tax exempt status from the IRS, which kept demanding additional information including who these groups were associating with and who these groups were supporting for election.  In the interim, hundreds of liberal political groups with titles that included the words "Progressive" or "Progress" received quick approval from the IRS to become tax exempt.

Our Senator Durbin (D-IL) was one of those screamers. One news report indicates that his letter demanding investigation of conservative political groups has been "scrubbed" from his website and Facebook page.  You can still find it and articles about it on the internet.  Durbin suddenly is singing a different tune on the topic.

I must congratulate the White House.  They and their supporters demonized Tea Party and Patriot Groups, and demonized "Super PAC" groups that support Republicans to the point where such groups, which began being pretty popular in polls, later plunged to being less popular than used car salesmen.  Tea Partiers were called stupid racists, ignorant of government and selfish to the point where those falsehoods stuck.

Even Brad Schneider (D-10th) had the utter audacity to repeatedly and falsely label Congressman Robert Dold as being a Tea Party member, candidate or being completely beholden to Tea Party groups that actually mistrusted or despised him.

Now those grass roots Tea Party and Patriot Groups are suddenly looking better.  Their prior complaints of IRS harassment were treated with derision. Now those complaints are true.

Even arch-liberal publications like the New Yorker and Salon rushed articles defending the IRS which can be summarized in a single sentence: "But those groups under investigation were conservative!" Liberals, especially liberal journalists are the last to figure out the serious violations of civil liberties and rights that a segment of our population was forced to undergo at the hands of their own government.  And the liberals in the White House still haven't figured it out, other than to read internal polls which inform them that the public finds the whole fiasco to be distasteful and wrong. Sgt. Schultz always knew when to turn a blind eye. Unfortunately for the White House, turning a blind eye in this instance doesn't work.

Nice work there Sgt. Schultz! You have revived floundering Tea Party and Patriot Groups and have made them relevant again. The American public and certainly the once docile press have taken notice. The "I know nothing, I see nothing, I hear nothing" bleatings of the White House now are ringing false. 

Who is next to be thrown under the bus? 

The press is now clamoring for action. Of course, their clamoring began in earnest when the Justice Department of Eric Holder audaciously grabbed telephone records of journalists working for the Associated Press. That act seems to have been their wake up call. Government attacking free press in this country? Even Richard Nixon didn't push that far!

The Benghazi tap dancing?  The Fast and Furious gun running to Mexico and the murders of Mexicans south of the border and Americans north of it?  Showering a major campaign contributors with millions in federal cash, like Solyndra? The secret list kept by the former head of the Board of Education of Chicago, now our Federal Education maven, allowing wealthy campaign contributors and those with connections to send their children to special magnet schools in Chicago, while others more qualified got stuck on waiting lists or were forced to attend schools with lackluster or poor teaching?

Start those Congressional Hearings.  Now.  And let's stop accepting the usual "I know nothing, NOTHING!" answers from our Sgt. Schultz White House.

Sgt. Schultz White House Responds to IRS Misbehavior Towards Conservative Political Groups

The Obama White House has retreated into Sgt. Schultz mode yet again on a number of fronts. It's become very predictable behavior. From pretending the "Sequester" concept didn't come from the Obama White House to other matters, suddenly things have turned. And suddenly the press is paying attention. The multiple "we didn't know about that" defenses on multiple issues are becoming less and less credible.

Two weeks ago at an American Bar Association lawyers conference, an IRS official "apologized" for singling out Tea Party, Patriot and other conservative political groups, and harassing them or delaying the processing of their paperwork seeking tax exempt status. Would the IRS accept your "apology" if you filed your tax return late?

During the last campaign for President, multiple liberal groups and politicians demanded that the IRS "investigate" conservative political groups, including those operating as tax exempt. In October of last year for example, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) sent a letter to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman. "I write to urge the Internal Service the purpose and primary activities of several 501(c)4 organization that appear to be in violation of the law," wrote Durbin, complaining of Karl Rove's "Crossroads" group.  Durbin wasn't squawking about any "liberal" or pro-Democratic Party groups in that letter.  The arch-liberal Huffington Post featured Durbin's letter at that time. Click here to read it.

After all that, was it mere coincidence that the IRS commenced their "investigations?" Too many coincidences are piling up at the front door of the White House on too many issues for that claim to be credible.

Tons of questions are emerging about this IRS matter which the White House is unable to answer, other than to retreat into Sgt. Schultz behavior of "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing." White House Press Secretary Jay Carney was beaten up in a pretty ugly press conference this week. It was pretty clear from reviewing video of that conference that Carney was not used to being treated in such a fashion by a normally tame and docile press.

The first White House reaction was a quiet "gee, that would be awful if the IRS did that" type of answer. Several days later as the story kept building and the Inspector General Report on the subject was ready to be released, President Obama suddenly emerged and stated such behavior was "outrageous" and of course, he would instantly get to the bottom of it. Attorney General Eric Holder is investigating, which should frighten no wrong-doers. In the meantime, numerous Democratic Congressmen and Senators nearly immediately condemned that IRS behavior, suddenly finding common ground with their Republican counterparts.

Our perpetually slow to react Congressman Brad Schneider, (D-IL10th) six days after the story emerged, finally issued a statement condemning the IRS actions. The language of his statement sounds suspiciously like that of someone who didn't want to say anything about it. Again, this occurred after nearly a clear majority of fellow Democratic Congressmen jumped in with condemnations.

Sgt. Schultz is an iconic television personality who emerged from a rather silly sit-com that ran on CBS TV for six years during the late 1960's and early 1970's.  The sit-com was set in a Nazi prisoner of war camp run by inept guards while the prisoners openly ran spying and covert operations out of the camp. The Schultz character, the chief guard, played by actor John Banner, was famous for knowing what was going on during each episode but always willing to ignore it or look the other way to save his own skin from being "transferred to the Russian front." Schultz' two catch phrases, "I know nothing, I see nothing, I hear nothing" and "I see nothing, NOTHING!" ran throughout the series.

So, did the White House read an advance copy of the Inspector General IRS report on this subject and suggest changes, ala Bengazi?  Are there e-mails from the White House to the IRS requesting investigations? Are there also e-mails or letters from Obama campaign officials to the IRS requesting investigations? Why did IRS Commissioner Shulman last year deny such activities were occurring?  Why initially was the IRS activity claimed to be the actions of a few rogue officials working out of their Cincinnati offices?  Was this office really bogged down by over 350 applications, considering the millions of documents the IRS processes daily? Why was confidential information pertaining to Koch Brothers funded conservative groups and some Tea Party Groups, well demonized by Democrats during the past two years, released for review to liberal groups who requested it?  I always thought all information provided to the IRS by individuals, corporations and groups were confidential.

Not anymore.

Any questions being asked seem to represent just the tip of the iceberg.

Obama is being compared to Richard Nixon and his enemies list days just prior to his resignation as President and subsequent pardon by President Gerald Ford.  Is this a fair comparison?

Just ask Sgt. Schultz.

Grass Roots Lake County Republicans Moving Forward

Virtually unnoticed by all following the November 2012 elections has been the activities of certain grass root Republican organizations in Lake County Illinois.

I will be featuring several of these activities in the future as they are worth more than just a mere mention.

Up in Northeast Lake County, three Republican Township Organizations (Benton, Newport and Zion) have joined forces and have created a consolidated Tri-Township Republican Organization.

Their first meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 21, 2013 at 7:00 p.m. in Room A of the Zion-Benton Public Library, 2400 Gabriel Avenue, Zion, IL. This meeting will feature guest speaker Willard Helander, our Lake County Clerk, who will speak on the topic "Why Illinois is a Blue State."

The goals, aims and purposes of this newly created organization are as follows:

"We believe that it is only through a group effort of concerned voters will any progress be made toward reversing the harmful trends of spending and debt, joblessness and hopelessness. Government handouts cannot replace the satisfaction of meaningful work and lower taxes, with the freedom to make our own decisions about how to spend, invest, or help others with what we earn.

"The strategy will be to reach out to voters with opportunities for education, discussion and social events that with the strength of our presence will motivate us to mobilize for future elections.

"To that end, we invite you to become a member of the newly formed Tri-Township Republican Organization, a group consisting of interested Republicans from Benton, Newport and Zion Townships."

To make reservations or for additional information, please contact this organization at tritwprepubs@gmail.com, or their Facebook Page, or by calling 847/682-1541.

NEWS FLASH: Bob Dold Announces His New Run For Congress

After weeks of speculation from AOL Patch publications and its political reporter, a founder of the 10th Congressional Democrats, who has also been extremely busy writing a series of puff pieces about our current Democratic Congressman, it's now official. 

Former Congressman Robert Dold has now announced he is again running for Congress in the 10th District of Illinois. He was victorious in 2010 against Dan Seals when then Congressman Mark Kirk decided to run for United States Senator. Dold then barely lost by a close 3,000 votes, or less than 1% of the votes cast, to Brad Schneider after Democrats severely gerrymandered the District to guarantee that a Democrat would win the District by at least 7% of the vote. The last few AOL Patch puff piece articles reflect a nervous Schneider is worrying about Dold's entry into the next race.

He should be worried after his extremely lackluster performance since being elected to office, a performance long on press releases and symbolism, and short on any real serious votes.

Many Democrats and some conservative Republicans have issues with Dold. He compiled a strong record during his two years in Congress that reflected independence from straight party line voting, similar to his predecessors Kirk and John Porter. Hard line Democrats were outraged and distorted that independent voting record. Some hard line conservative Republicans refused to vote for him.

The result? A new Congressman named Schneider who has basically toed the Democratic party line while claiming to be a moderate.

For those tired of the endless partisan gridlock, returning Dold to Congress should be a major priority in the 10th Congressional District.

Roll Call Monday felt the 10th Congressional District of Illinois was a seat deemed likely to flip and stated: "Dold has not yet announced that he will run again, but GOP insiders agree that he is looking closely at a possible rematch. Schneider drew 50.6 percent to Dold’s 49.4 percent (a margin of 3,326 votes), so it isn’t hard to see why the Republican would think his prospects would improve in a non-presidential year."

Today, Roll Call reports that Dold is interviewing staffers. Roll Call also states: "Since then, he’s topped the House GOP’s list of candidates that it would like to see run again. (Read Roll Call contributing writer Stu Rothenberg’s ranking of this cycle’s top 10 House rematches.) The National Republican Congressional Committee has recruited him to run again in the district north of Chicago.

“No one works harder for his constituents than Bob Dold,” NRCC spokeswoman Katie Prill said. “The NRCC is hopeful Mr. Dold will make a decision in the coming days to run for his seat again in 2014 because Illinois families deserve his independent voice back in the 10th.”

Now it's official.

The Press Release reads as follows:

"Dear Friends,

I ran for Congress just a few years ago because I felt a call to serve the 10th District, and you sent me to Washington, DC to do just that. Together, we provided what so many say our country is missing right now - thoughtful leadership that is able to build bridges between parties, and put people before politics and progress ahead of partisanship.  We succeeded in changing the dialogue to focus on getting our government on a budget and solving the biggest issues we face as a nation. 

  

As someone who broke the mold and earned a reputation as one of the most independent-thinking, moderate members of Congress, and as someone who was never afraid to work with anybody who shared a desire to solve problems, I share your frustration with the current lack of compromise and the consistent stalemate in Washington.

Over the past few months, I’ve had the opportunity to speak to many of you about the problems you are facing in your businesses, in your households, and in your communities. You have encouraged me to carry your voice forward in 2014.

With deep reflection, and strong support from you, Danielle and our kids, my family and friends, I wanted to share with you first that I’ve made the decision to step forward and run in 2014 to represent the 10th District of Illinois.

I want to personally thank you for your continued encouragement. Running for office is never an easy decision for any candidate or their families, but this decision is much larger than my family and me; it is about serving our community and country.

I hope you will join me as we lay out our vision, together, for a more prosperous 10th District."

For more information, you can access his website at: www.doldforcongress.com.

Obama's "Wishful Thinking" Foreign Policies

The U.S. Commission's latest report on International Religious Freedom has just been released.  The Commission documents repeated attacks and abuse of minority religious groups throughout the world.  In the middle east, which seems to the prime and only focus of our new Congressman, Brad Schneider (D-10th), Eastern Orthodox Christians, who this past Sunday celebrated their Easter (Pascha), find themselves under repeated attack.

While Schneider during his last visit to Israel watched in awe when Israeli bombers attack Syria while the Obama Administration dithered on the growing menace and draws lines in the sand, "secular" Turkey continues to repress the religious freedoms of Christians and Jews within its borders and in the region where its troops continue to illegally occupy Cyprus for over three decades.

The Obama Administration's Commission report, which can be read here, makes for fascinating reading. A bitter dissent by several commission members complains that after spending three years on the Commission's "watch list" requiring regular monitoring, without significant improvement, Turkey was suddenly upgraded to a "country of particular concern" requiring little or no monitoring.

This should come as a news flash to the long suffering non-Muslim minority religions of Turkey which comprise one tenth of one percent of the total population, including Greek Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox Christians, Syriac Christians, Roman Catholic and Protestant Christians, Baha'is, Assyrian, Maronite, Chaldean and Nestorian Christians, Jews and Hindus.

They struggle in Turkey while the government confiscates their properties, imposes taxes designed to cause forfeiture of properties, closes schools and refuses to allow theological seminaries to open so that future priests and spiritual leaders can be trained and ordained.  Being in a minority faith in Turkey and the other nations of the middle east, is a pretty miserable experience.

Yet the Wishful Thinking foreign policy of the Obama Administration suddenly says: "Hey, it's not so bad over there!" This after we watched a conclave of Roman Catholic Cardinals elect the new Pope of Rome with no government interference. When his counter-part in the Greek Orthodox Church is elected through the Holy Synod, the Turkish government has a right to veto the selection, and veto who sits on the Holy Synod.

By contrast, minority religions in Israel have far greater freedoms than in "secular" Turkey. The rest of the middle east continues to be a nightmare for those of minority religions. During Eastern Orthodox Holy Week in Syria, Muslim radicals kidnapped two Bishops, who remain missing as this is written.

It makes for interesting reading.  Perhaps our current Congressman, Brad Schneider, can turn his focus away from Israel ever so briefly and condemn the Obama Administration for their "wishful thinking" report on religious freedoms in the Middle East?

Mr. Schneider can start by reading the angry, blistering dissents starting at page 277 of the report. Then he can follow up by reading the entire report.  Maybe then his 100% support of Obama's policies will begin to crack ever so slightly.

Pat Brady to (Finally) Resign as Illinois GOP Chairman

News reports are popping up all over.  Pat Brady is (finally) resigning as Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party.

I was less than impressed with his performance as Chairman, finding much of what he attempted to be scattered shot, but recognized how impossible his position was, and how even more impossible certain Republicans made it for him to do his job, whether or not you agreed with his performance. Certain Illinois Republicans enjoy demonizing anyone who dares become Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party.

The past few months have seen Brady "preside" over a severely divided party, while Brady stubbornly hung on and the demonizers ramped up their attacks. Since our stunning losses in last November's election, all the party has bothered to engage in is a civil war. Planning for the future?  In Illinois, that hasn't been the Republican way.

The demonization of Illinois Republican Party Chairmen by a certain "wing" of State Republicans has turned into a routine, regular bloodsport which has damaged the party to the point where some feel it is beyond repair.  Let's face reality, Brady was the latest victim. The next Chairman will suffer the same fate. Who would be insane enough to want that position?  All the next chairman has to utter are the words "big tent" and his/her effectiveness will immediately be reduced to zero.

Demonized Pat Brady joins the recent ranks of demonized Andy McKenna and demonized Judy Barr Topinka. They are all good Republicans. They will continue to be good Republicans. They were all ultimately treated in a shabby fashion by certain Republicans who claim to be the "base" of the party.

So another round begins: a new chairman will be named shortly. The process the party uses to name chairmen in Illinois will again be attacked. The new chairman will be greeted with suspicion and derision, but allowed a brief honeymoon. Finally, the new chairman will also be demonized and run out of office on a rail.

And on and on it goes.  Democrats in Illinois who have proven their inability to govern will continue to sleep well tonight.  The demonizers in the Republican Party of Illinois will guarantee their continued electoral victories well into the future.

Next?

Keyboarding Our Way Through Health Care/Obama Care.

A few weeks ago, an old friend of my late father was describing his latest hospital stay. He kept talking about all kinds of new changes. He also talked about how healthcare practitioners spent less time with him than in the past. This individual had been hospitalized several times in the past two years, so I consider him to be more or less an expert patient on this subject.

This weekend I began to understand his frustration following an injury to my mother-in-law.  She slipped and fell early Sunday morning. She found herself in intense pain and unable to get up. Because of prior harassment from her daughter, she pulled out her cell phone from her pocket and dialed 9-1-1. At age 94, and remarkably self-sufficient up to that moment, she directed responders on how to enter her house and where she was located.

She was transported to a major hospital which is constantly expanding, located in the western suburbs.  A quick x-ray revealed a fractured femur, requiring surgery in the form of a partial hip replacement and insertion of a rod. Surgery was finally performed at 7:30 p.m. last night. Changes in our healthcare system created by the soon to be implemented "Obamacare" made things somewhat complicated. Time frames for tests and care are now expanded. I began to understand the complaints I had heard a few weeks ago.

Hospitals and healthcare providers have been busy making changes to accomodate the implementation of "Obamacare." I call it "Obamacare" because the President seems to like the nickname of the Affordable Care Act.

With my mother-in-law, hospital staff had just started a new "paperless" patient chart system the day before. No doctors entering the room holding a file and thumbing through pages. When I arrived, I noticed doctors and nurses seated at workstations, staring at computer screens and typing. And typing. And typing some more.

When I finally asked about implementing a voice dictation like system for doctors and nurses tied up typing, I was informed that patient privacy issues still had this idea under review.

Tests were ordered by typing. Routine checks of her temperature and blood pressure were performed after a sequence of typing. The results were entered after the computer found her chart and called it up. Access to each page required a series of passwords. A blood test order took 20 minutes to type and enter. The patient's file was accessed through bar coding, numbering and other devices I see in the local grocery or pharmacy. And the doctors and nurses were spending more time at their desks or at a computer screen in the patient's room, than they were spending with their patients.

When finally admitted and transferred to a room, a station filled with computers was right outside her door. This station was again filled with doctors, nurses and assistants staring at computer screens and typing. And typing. And typing some more. A debate broke out between nurses when a bar coded IV bag did not register in the patient record, in spite of multiple repeated sequences of scanning the wrist band bar code, and then the IV bar code.

Surgery was delayed as a pre-surgical checklist could not be located in the electronic patient chart. When located, more tests were ordered.

Electronic patient charting was sold as an idea to save money as part of the extensive healthcare reforms  anticipated through "Obamacare." And yes, money will be saved when one considers storage fees of paper files. Nurses like the idea of scheduling medications through the system, but then find themselves falling behind as they access the system and type. And type. And type some more. Several nurses and doctors did admit that their time with patients were being compromised by this system, which requires attention. They also admitted that the time patients sit in rooms unattended has increased while they type. And type. And type some more.

What I witnessed so far was a more impersonal system of healthcare. "When can I see the doctor?" and "When will they tell me what is going on?" were two questions repeated over and over by the patient.

While those questions were being asked, doctors and nurses were busy typing. And typing. And typing some more. As an attorney specializing in work injuries, I await the next wave of carpal tunnel injuries from the constant keyboarding in hospital care, so maybe I shouldn't be all that concerned about electronic patient files. I should be preparing for future injury cases.

Change for the better?  Somehow I still feel something is missing here. In the meantime, I'm heading back to my car for another hospital visitation.  And I'll be watching them type. And type. And type some more.

Principled Republicanism

One by one, Principled Republicans have been emerging since the November elections.  They have been emerging and stating their positions on what pundits call "social issues."

The Principles of Republicanism have been previously published on this website and can be accessed here.

Principled Republicans closeted themselves over a decade ago in the face of a relentless attack on their characters, their principles and their abilities to win elections. The attacks came primarily from self-proclaimed conservatives. The attackers forget that the main purpose of a major political party is to win elections.

Principled Republicans "believe the strength of our nation lies with the individual and that each person's dignity, freedom, ability, and responsibility must be honored," and "believe in equal rights, equal justice, and equal opportunity for all, regardless of race, creed, sex, age or disability," while they  "believe Americans value and should preserve our national strength and pride while working to extend peace, freedom, and human rights throughout the world." Their beliefs again can be accessed here.

Over the last few weeks, Principled Republicans have been emerging with pro-gay marriage positions, including our Senator Mark Kirk, State Representative Ed Sullivan and State Senator Ron Sandack.

They have placed Republican Principles ahead of a Republican platform which contradicts those very same principles. These good Republicans and others are now under attack by groups and individuals that demand that all Republicans rigidly walk and think in lockstep with the "Republican platform." Like Communists demand of their membership. Like Socialists demand of their membership. Like Fascists demanded of their membership.

Political vampire groups have been busy raising money from Republicans for the express purpose of attacking Principled Republicans and to purge the party of them. These political vampire groups plan no purges of Democrats.  Just Republicans. These groups do not even claim to be Republican, but are quick to judge in their own minds who is a good principled Republican.

And yes, it is all pretty strange.

For months I have been asking fellow Republicans what happens when our principles conflict with our platform. Many have responded that it is time to correct or amend the platform. The rest treat the platform as the Bible, which is not subject to amendments. Again, the Principles of Republicans can be accessed here. Those principles need to be carefully studied and understood. It's time to stop ignoring them.

Its time the Republican party return to the Principles of Republicanism which made it great. On social issues, it is time we respect the privacy and liberty of all Americans and stop paying lip service to or contradicting ourselves on those rights.

President Obama just a few months ago announced his support for gay marriage. Secretary of State and Senator Hillary Clinton a few weeks ago announced her support for gay marriage. The press hardly mentions Democratic late converts to this issue, but feature only Republicans.

Senator Mark Kirk and those other elected principled Republican office holders, I support your principled stands on this particular social issue. I agree with your principled stands. I recognize that you all have a lot to lose in your political careers in taking such stands and I admire you for those stances.

I by comparison would have far less to lose. Any positions I hold in the Republican Party are unpaid elected or volunteer in nature. Should I find myself removed from those positions, I would lose nothing more than a little pride a few titles, and save considerable money and time in the process.

With that in mind, I too will publicly take a stand. From this point forward, where the Republican Platform conflicts with Principles of Republicanism, I will make it a point to stand on those principles.

Enough is enough.

Elitist 1% Brad Schneider and His Anti-Budget Votes

Most Democrats in Congress have been out and about bragging over not voting for "The Ryan Budget" which passed the House, and now faces instant death in the Senate.  But then again, this has been happening in Washington, DC since Obama was first elected President. Congressman Schneider promised to be different if elected.

He was elected. And he certainly did something very different on budget votes.

What is really stunning is our newly elected Congressman, Brad Schneider (D-10th) practically stood alone over the recent budget votes taken by the U.S. House of Representatives during the week ending March 23, 2013.

During that week, Mr. Schneider had six (6) opportunities to vote for a Federal budget. He participated in all six (6) roll calls pertaining to the six proposed (6) budgets pending in the House.

House Roll Call 83
House Roll Call 84
House Roll Call 85
House Roll Call 86
House Roll Call 87
House Roll Call 88

Two of those budgets were prepared by Republicans, including the Rep. Paul Ryan version that eventually passed. But four (4) of those budgets were prepared by Democrats. One was Senate Leader Harry Reid's version.

Brad Schneider voted against every single proposed Federal Budget.  Yes, all of them!

In fact, only six (6) Congressmen voted against all six (6) budgets, with Mr. Schneider being one of them.  Even extremist Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (D-9th) voted for two budgets, leaving Mr. Schneider as the new face of extremism in Washington.

Think about it. Out of 435 Members of Congress, only six (6) failed to vote for a single proposed budget, or approximately 1% of all elected Congressmen.  Our 1% Congressman Brad Schneider!

Was Schneider being extremely timid in voting for a budget, or extremely fussy in not voting for any budget? Was he too frightened? Was he too principled? He isn't really talking about it. If he thought those votes were heroic or brave, he certainly would have bragged about them.

His press release on the subject dated March 21st merely stated:

"Rep. Schneider Votes to Avert Government Shutdown" (March 21, 2013 Press Release)

"Cites Need to Provide Small Businesses with Certainty.

"Congressman Brad Schneider (IL-10) voted today for a bill to avoid a government shutdown and provides critical funding through the rest of Fiscal Year 2013. The Continuing Resolution passed the House by a vote of 318 to 109.  'While I believe both sides have to sit down and work toward a long-term solution to address the ill-conceived, indiscriminate sequester cuts, I also know it is essential that we avoid a government shutdown that would have disastrous consequences for our economy," Schneider said. "I hope passing this bill today will help spur action from both sides to begin working on a long-term framework to address our nation's financial planning and provide certainty for our communities and small businesses."

Did he provide "certainty" by voting against all six (6) budgets offered for consideration and joining that unique 1% club? Unlike last year, when his predecessor, Congressman Robert Dold, helped to introduce a bipartisan budget, Schneider introduced nothing, not even offering amendments. His press release reprinted above not so curiously omits his shameful budget votes or his new 1% status.

Voting on a budget for government to live within is one of the most basic functions and responsibilities of elected leaders everywhere. By failing to support even one of the six (6) budget proposals or introduce his own alternative, our 1% Congressman Schneider failed in his leadership responsibilities in a most alarming fashion. This is the same Brad Schneider who during the campaign bragged that he enjoyed reading budgets so much that he does it on Saturday nights. He then went to Washington and dodged a basic responsibility. Not just once. But six (6) times!

If you aren't up to the job, Mr. Schneider, just say so. With the debt crisis and our four (4) year stumbling economy and high unemployment continuing to swamp this great nation, I don't see those 1% Schneider votes as being very principled or honorable. Those votes are classic "kick the can further down the road" positions championed by President Obama.

Is that the future you wish to leave for your children 1% Brad? Continuing spiraling debt, high unemployment, less good jobs and a stumbling economy?

Eight years ago, in 2005, the federal debt was half of what it is today. Then Senator Obama voted against lifting the debt ceiling and against additional spending, decrying the debt that his two daughters would shoulder in the future. Every single Democratic Senator and Congressman voted "no" at that time.

With the Federal deficit nearly $17 trillion and President Obama submitting a budget that called for increasing deficits of an additional $9.2 trillion through 2022, our 1% Congressman pulls this stunt when it comes time to vote for a budget? Since Obama has been President, this nation has operated without any budget.

This isn't 2005 Mr. Schneider.  You need to understand that.  And to vote accordingly.

GOP Chairman Special Meeting Postponed

Word is out that the Special Meeting called by seven (7) members of the Illinois Republican State Central Committee for this morning was postponed by an e-mail notice sent out very late last night.

The seven who called for the meeting postponed it due to the unavailability of Chairman Pat Brady to attend.  Brady has repeatedly stated that he will be on a long planned family vacation out of state and would have been unable to attend.

It will be interesting to see how many individuals and members of the press show up to the meeting, which was set for Tinley Park, Illinois, unaware of the cancelation.

Illinois GOP Chairman Meeting Gets National Press

This Saturday, the Illinois Republican Party State Central Committee meets in a closed door special session to discuss the leadership and future of the party.

The story has now gone completely main stream press national through the Associated Press and appears not only on their website, but in multiple newspapers around the country, both through their websites.  The headline reads "GOP Chairman, Lawmaker Take Heat on Gay Marriage."

The meeting clearly will attract major press coverage, not to mention the convergence of activists seeking to get their two cents in on the issue. The meeting location may turn into a three ringed circus while the Central Committee meets privately.

We should expect some major news coverage tomorrow. Will the coverage be a positive or a negative for the party.

Feel free to use the comments section to voice your opinions.

Plummeting Poll Numbers Post Sequester?

The Chicago Tribune has reprinted a Reuters story about their latest Reuters/Ipsos poll on the approval ratings of the President, Congress and the two major political parties.  If this poll is to be believed, President Obama's approval ratings plunged 7 percentage points since February 26th, or two days before the "sequester" law kicked in.  It now stands at 43%. The White House plan was supposed to have Republican poll numbers plunge. Well, they didn't.

This may explain why during last weekend's talk shows, White House officials were being very polite about Bob Woodward's articles that have been very critical of the President and his sequester idea.  They even called him a "legend." The fangs, the personal insults, all were suddenly put away. The poll seems to insinuate that the public doesn't appreciate the gamesmanship of the White House any more than the gamesmanship played by the two political parties on this issue.  Is there private poll or two out there the White House has access to or retained which show similar numbers to the Reuters/Ipsos poll?

Coupled with the record high numbers posted by the stock markets, perhaps the grand plan of the Obama administration to turn the tables on the sequester and blame everyone else but himself is failing?

Where exactly does our Congressman Brad Schneider stand on this issue?  He has been pretty quiet overall about it. During the campaign he voiced his total allegiance to President Obama and his policies.   He then shifted with President Obama to the "tax the rich" only instead of allowing all those "Bush Tax Cuts" to expire.  Problem is as I posted yesterday, the Obama policies have shifted or morphed into something different post-campaign.  Has Mr. Schneider shifted along with the President?  If Mr. Schneider is calling the sequester bill hatched by President Obama dumb like the President now is, then is he calling his president dumb?

Questions, questions!

Random Thoughts on Breaking Sequester News

You have got to give the Obama Administration credit.  They are now implementing some serious cuts in federal spending now that the sequester has taken hold.

Interesting tidbits are emerging:

1.  All White House tours are canceled effective March 9, 2013.  The rationale is the White House has to cut back somewhere. Why not first ground that Presidential jet and curb those expensive First Family vacations?

2.  Egypt is receiving $250 million dollars in foreign aid from the United States with a visit from our new Secretary of State John Kerry.  Because Egypt is a great reliable ally of the United States?

3.  Since the sequester took effect, stock markets continue their dramatic rallys and posting new highs.  Is this a rebuke of the Chicken Little cries of Obama that our economy will collapse with an imposed 2.3% cut in federal spending over the next decade?

Here is a Common Sense suggestion for the White House which seems unable to govern with the thought of a mild cut back in federal spending: "Keep the $250 million you were going to give to Egypt, and use a tiny fraction of it that it costs to reopen the tours of the White House."

It isn't that the White House can't figure out what to do.

They don't want to.

Last year Obama threatened to veto every single measure that would water down federal spending cuts through the Sequester. Now he is singing an altogether different song?

Congressman Schneider promised to support President Obama and his policies without reservation during the campaign. Which policies are those Mr. Schneider?  The 2011-2012 policies of Obama?  Or the different ones of 2013?

A Democrat Squeezing the Poor and Homeless

Columnist Mark Brown of the Chicago Sun-Times has an interesting column out concerning the actions of a certain liberal, North Side Chicago Alderman.  He basically has ordered the Salvation Army to stop feeding the hungry using one of their portable food trucks in his ward.  According to the Salvation Army, they initially agreed to move elsewhere, then later changed their mind. The food truck draws many desperate people who need additional assistance including housing and is an important part of their ministry. This same Alderman claims that Salvation Army officials stormed out of his office.  If true, then good for the Salvation Army.

On a personal note, the Salvation Army appeared at our house in Skokie when it and two neighboring homes were burned to the ground by a teenaged arsonist at night in the fall of 1967. While standing in front of our home shivering while wearing a robe, slippers, underwear and a T-shirt, suddenly a warm coat was draped around me by a good samaritan. I looked up and saw that Salvation Army hat. We were also given several bags of items, such as soap, combs, toothbrushes and tooth paste, sweat pants and shirt. A plastic bag contained donuts and cartons of milk. They asked for nothing in return. They offered to make arrangements at a local hotel for us, but we stayed a few days with an aunt who lived four blocks away. My new wardrobe came from a K-Mart like "Shoppers World" which a few schoolmates were quick to ridicule. Since our home was uninhabitable for over a year, school officials wanted me transferred elsewhere when our family rented a temporary apartment outside of our district, while our home was being rebuilt. I have regularly and gratefully  contributed to the Salvation Army since that time.

As a young boy, I learned first hand how some private charities operate as compared to government when disaster strikes a family.

This same Alderman also recently introduced a bill to abolish "cubital hotels" such as the Wilson Men's Hotel, which exists in his ward. Such hotels serve poor single elderly gentlemen who usually have no families and subsist on social security retirement or disability checks. For roughly $300.00 a month, they have a small room to sleep in and store a few valuables.

Now, imagine the angry uproar if a Republican heartlessly demanded removal of the Salvation Army from his District, or forced elderly poor gentlemen to become homeless.  It would be deafening.

So maybe it is time to ask Alderman James Cappleman (D-46th Ward), who claims to be a "licensed clinical social worker," a few harsh questions.  What does he have against poor and hungry people who  reside in his ward or who pass through it each day? Why pick on the Salvation Army and what sounds like a laudable program?

John Ruberry, who blogs as Marathon Pundit (www.marathonpundit.blogspot.com) on many issues, include Chicago, also has a great take on these developments.

The Salvation Army has a nice facility in Waukegan and another in Zion which is frequented by those looking for clothing and furniture bargains and for those in need.  Please donate freely to them. They do a great job helping others.  I know from my childhood first hand experience.

Pick on the Salvation Army? Pick on someone else alderman!

Illinois State Party Chairman Dispute Intensifies

A local story concerning the debate over the future of the current Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party has finally surfaced. Kerry Lester of The Daily Herald has an article revealing what has been quietly whispered in Republican circles the past few days.

On Saturday, March 9, 2013, a special meeting of the Illinois Republican Party State Central Committee has been called by seven members. Two of the seven members signing the meeting notice represent Lake County, Gene Dawson (8th Congressional District) and Mark Shaw (10th Congressional District). To impeach or remove the current Chairman, Pat Brady, as Chairman of the Central Committee, 60% of the weighted vote of the committeemen is required.

Mark Shaw

Whether those votes are present at that meeting and such a vote is taken, word has leaked out that 10th Congressional Committeeman Mark Shaw may be selected to act as interim chairman until a new chairman is named. According to The Daily Herald, that is what Jack Roeser, a leader of a  conservative movement that has helped to batter and divide the Republican party in Illinois the past few decades, is telling everyone. Roeser reports that he has been calling party leadership with his endorsement of Shaw as interim chairman should Brady be removed.  To be fair to Roeser, he alone did not create the current state of the Illinois Republican Party and its many divisions.  No one person can claim that accomplishment.

Nearly three years ago, all elected committeemen within the 10th Congressional District selected Tolbert Chilsom to represent them on the State Central Committee. One member is elected from each Congressional District in Illinois to serve in such a capacity every four years. These individuals in turn elect the party chairman, who does not have to be an elected committeeman.  By comparison, the  Democrats elect their State Representative directly instead of through committeemen.

Pat Brady

Adding to the confusion, last year, Mr. Chilsom resigned his position after moving out of state. Mark Shaw was elected to replace him by Lake County Chairman Robert Cook and four of the five elected Township Committeemen of Cook County who are part of the 10th Congressional District in a weighted vote. At the time of Shaw's selection, the old boundaries of the 10th Congressional District instead of the newly gerrymandered boundaries that helped elect Brad Schneider to office, were used. And it was perfectly legal. Shaw also continues to serve as West Deerfield Township Chairman in Lake County.

In Cook County, a single Committeemen is elected in each Township during the primary, who then appoints precinct captains to work each precinct.  Outside of Cook County, each precinct elects a committeeman.

Weighted vote? Committeemen of Townships vs. Committeemen of precincts?  Old Boundaries instead of New Boundaries? How the Chairman is elected? Confused?

Welcome to the Illinois Republican Party!  Explaining party rules always results in confused looks.

In a short hand form of explanation, when a committeeman casts a "weighted" vote, he casts the number of Republican votes in his region, instead of just one vote.  Committeemen of Townships are elected by Republican voters during the primary for two year terms in Cook County. Precinct Committeemen outside of Cook County are elected to their positions by Republican voters for two year terms during the primary. The committeemen so elected of each township gather every two years by county and cast "weighted" votes for their County Chairman.  Township Chairman outside of Cook County are elected by "weighted votes" of precinct committeemen within their townships.

The new boundaries of the 10th Congressional District take effect by law during the next primary election in 2014.

We will save the debate of reforming the Republican Party of Illinois and straightening out some of the confusion in how it operates for another (few) postings in the future.  It gets pretty complicated. There seems to be no real consensus on how to make things less confusing.

I'm sure there will be more stories leading up to March 9th, as well as after this special meeting.  How the public in Illinois perceives the actions of the Illinois Republican State Central Committee remains to be seen as well.  Either way, it won't be pretty.

Until then, I'll don my old "cub reporter" hat and do the best I can to keep everyone informed of all further developments as they occur.

Acronymaholic Democrats

First our newly elected Congressman Brad Schneider (D-10th) proudly introduces his first bill, the AMERICA Work Act, the tongue twisting "American Manufacturing Efficiency And Retraining Collaborate Achievement Work Act."

Now our newly elected Democratic State Representative Scott Drury (D-Highwood) has stated his legislative agenda which appears in Patch publications in his district.  He calls his agenda REBOOT, or the "Reform Through Ethics and Better Operations, Open and Transparent Government."  Unlike the Congressman, Drury's agenda sounds remarkably more Republican than Democratic, which may doom a significant portion of it in the veto proof Democratic majority Illinois House of Representatives.

Using acronyms to explain or name legislation is one thing and can be a laudable tool at time. But using clumsy and wordy acronyms, shall we politely say, can be less than useful.

Democratic Representative Sam Yingling (D-Round Lake) authored several op-ed  proposals to abolish Township Government before and during his run for office. Now that he is elected, I cannot find any evidence that he has introduced a bill in the House to abolish Township Government.

Since he is a Democrat, does anyone have any idea what acronym he is using so we can track it down?  Or is he trying to figure out an acronym first?

Democratic Representative Carole Sente (D-Vernon Hills) sponsored a hearing on concussions and head injuries in high school football.  She wants to limit tackling practices. Head injuries and concussions are a serious problem in football. Learning proper tackling techniques avoids injuries.

Since she is a Democrat, does anyone have any idea what acronym she is using so we can see ultimately what she is proposing?  Or is she trying to figure out an acronym first?

As I uncover more clumsy acronyms from our Democratic friends, I will be happy to pass them along.  Just call me an willing enabler for clumsy Democratic acronymaholics!

Senator Link Loses Primary Race for Waukegan Mayor

The big news tonight is Senator Terry Link finished third in the Democratic primary election for Mayor of Waukegan.  Clerk Wayne Motley received 1505 votes, Sam Cunningham 1345 and Link 1037.  Link only received 290 early and mail votes, while Motley received 372 and Cunningham 381, which may explain which campaigns had better get out the vote (GOTV) programs.  The winner faces the current mayor, who is running as an independent.

Some interesting statistics from Clerk Willard Helander's website:  Total Registered Voters: 49,028.  Election Day Turnout: 8.61%.  Total Turnout:  11.14%.

For Waukegan Clerk, Former Coroner Artis Yancy made a political comeback winning the primary election over 5 other candidates. No independent is running for this position.

For Waukegan Township Trustee, six candidates ran for four seats.  Winning the primary were Jeff McBride, Percy L. Johnson, Katherine Rothwell-Francis, and Charles "Chuck" Willms. No opposition in the consolidated election exists.

For North Chicago Mayor, incumbent Leon Rockingham, Jr, won the primary with 471 votes, with Valerie DeVost drawing 319 votes, Bobby Allen drawing 275 votes, and Anthony Coleman drawing 130.

These vote totals may change a bit in 14 days once late arriving mail ballots and provisional ballots are counted.

Bob Woodward Exposes the Sequester Lies of the White House

Long time darling of the media left, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Bob Woodward of the liberal Washington Post has been making a lot of media people uncomfortable these days. Woodward is a throwback to the days when reporters tenaciously unmasked the truth, no matter what their political beliefs were. And yes, there are some journalists still out there who continue to behave that way.

In the face of President Obama's doomsday proclamations and figures about the forced "spending cuts" and blaming Republicans for them, Woodward, who exposed Watergate and brought down a sitting President Nixon in the process, has exposed the truth, leaving liberals, Democrats and the White House sputtering in rage.

The fiscal cliff and the automatic across the board spending cuts ideas, that if Congress and the White House were unable to reach a deal on both, then they would be mandated by law, came from President Obama.

It was Obama's idea.

To quote Woodward in his latest piece published last Friday: "The automatic spending cuts were initiated by the White House and were the brainchild of Lew and White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors .  .  ."

So Obama and his new Treasury Secretary  Lew came up with this brainchild in August of 2011, to raise the spending ceiling so that it did not become an issue during the campaign.  The thought at the time would be the Republicans would panic over defense cuts and cave into a later White House deal. Both the House and the Senate passed this measure and President Obama signed it into law.

Now Woodward reports that since that deal was reached and enacted into law, President Obama "moved the goalposts" by demanding additional revenues and taxes.  In other words, the President did not keep his word during the negotiations.

Now the President and all his minions are out there telling the world that the fiscal cliff and across-the-board spending cut measures were not his idea, but the idea of Republicans.  And if they aren't stopped, they claim catastrophic economic consequences will occur. When those claimed catastrophic consequences occur, it will be the fault of Republicans, and not the President and his men who came up with the idea in the first place.

In other words, they are fibbing to the American public.  It was their idea.

I find it hard to believe that one half of one percent (according to the U.S. Treasury) of federal spending cuts will destroy America as we know it.  And this being Washington, DC of course, spending will continue to increase annually, just one half of one percent less higher each year.

Now the President's minions are also out there trying to denigrate the sterling reputation of Bob Woodward by claiming he is wrong, or he misunderstood or misreported what occurred. Woodward in the meantime is on tour laying out the true facts.

This coming from the President who boldly proclaimed back in August of 2011: "Already, some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No. I will veto any effort to get rid of  those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending. There will be no easy off ramps on this one."

Oh, really?

So much for the tough guy and tough talk. Who is now crying for relief from his own spending cuts now?  Who is claiming that thousands of school teachers, thousands of students, tonnage of uninspected meats and foods, delays in approving new medicines, and other atrocities await us because government cannot limit its spending increases by one half of one percent?

And now other news sources are chiming in, scolding the President for moving the goal posts, for not engaging in serious negotiations with Congress, for playing golf with Tiger Wood and otherwise being disengaged from the process of government. But then, he has governed this way for over four years now. In other words, leading from behind. Making sure the buck never stops on his desk.  Making up stories when things go wrong under his watch, like when embassy officials were killed overseas.

So Congressman Brad Schneider?  How will you vote?  Will you support the President who lied to the American people in order to get elected? Or will you support slowing down the future wild spending of our federal government, even if it is a tiny one half of one percent of future spending?

Our Blank Slate Congressman Brad Schneider

Imagine how giddy I felt as a Republican to have received an e-mail from my newly elected Congressman, the nearly invisible Brad Schneider (D-10th).  My first reaction was maybe he truly is reaching out to Republicans. Maybe he really means what he says when he repeats "bipartisan" over and over again.

I quickly opened the e-mail which was sent on February 23, 2013 at 4:30 pm and saw the following message: "This message has no content."

Truly it did.  It was completely blank.

Curious, after reading a series of puff pieces about the mysterious Mr. Schneider that have been appearing in the AOL Patch publications, I decided to visit his official website.  The AOL Patch publications have been busy glowing that Mr. Schneider introduced legislation called the "American Manufacturing Efficiency And Retraining Collaborative Achievement (the acronym is "AMERICA") Work Act." Clearly a lot of thought went into naming this bill. After introducing the bill, Mr. Schneider has been on a tiny limited  "listening tour" of area manufacturers to hear their concerns.

So he introduced the bill first, then decided to hear out his constituents after introducing the bill?  I guess that is something we may all need to get used to in the future.  The glowing Patch articles neglected to mention that fact.

I then accessed his official website, payed for by us taxpayers, to discover the content of the "American Manufacturing Efficiency and Retraining Collaborative Achievement Work Act."  Is it a bunch of hot air behind a wordy acronym?  Is it meaningless?  Is it a bill of real substance?  His official website link for Schneider sponsored bills reports "No Items Were Found For The Search."  No bills sponsored? No bills introduced?  Another blank slate?

I then decided to access the link for bills Mr. Schneider co-sponsored, thinking that perhaps I misread those glowing Patch articles.  His official website link for Schneider co-sponsored bills reports "No Items Were Found For The Search." No bills co-sponsored?  No co-sponsored bills introduced?  Yet a third blank slate?

I could have accessed the Thomas website of Congress in desperation to try to access this bill but I stopped right there. His taxpayer supported website is supposed to be a wealth of information for his constituents, yet I all ran into were blank pages!

I finally decided to access votes he has taken in February in Congress from that same website.  We all know his first official vote as a Congressman was to elect Representative Nancy "We Don't Have A Spending Problem in Washington" and "You Can Read the Contents of the (Obamacare) Bill After We Pass It" Pelosi as House Minority leader.

This month he voted against and for H.R. 273 on succeeding days. This bill eliminates the 2013 statutory pay adjustment for Federal employees and for other purposes. On February 14, 2013, Valentine's Day, he voted against it.  On February 15, 2013 he voted for it.  Is there any explanation for that change of heart?

To his credit he did vote against the hidden Obamacare 2.3% tax on medical devices, like heart valves and other important devices, which caused a great deal of consternation when it became effective on January 1, 2013. But then again, so did nearly everyone else vote against that nonsense. He also voted for the tax increases of the "fiscal cliff" which quietly increased the social security tax by 2% on the middle class, a fact that President Obama and his fellow Democrats never mention in their "tax the rich" campaigns.

He also invited the mother of Hadiya Pendleton to attend the recent State of the Union address of the President. Ms. Pendleton is the mother of the poor young student who was shot and killed in Chicago while in a public park.  Ms. Pendleton elected to sit with First Lady Michelle Obama instead.  I was unaware that the Pendletons lived in the 10th Congressional District.

Is our new congressman truly an empty suit or a blank slate, or is he just acting like one?

Time will tell. Some important votes are coming up in the next few days.  Is he up for them?

Forbes Calls Lake County, Illinois a Miserable City/Suburb

Forbes Magazine just released what I am sure they are claiming is a careful analysis and ranking of the 20 most miserable cities in the Country.  Rockford placed 3rd and Chicago is 4th.  The City of Lake County, Illinois placed 9th!

City of Lake County?  Forbes is calling us a city?  Way to fact check Forbes Magazine!

They used standards including declining population, property values, high commuter times, municipal bankruptcies and lousy weather in reaching their rankings.

Lake County is a City?  They actually describe it as a "suburb of Chicago." Next time I see him I will be sure to call him Mayor Lawlor.

Here are the rankings with No. 1 being the most miserable to live in and the 20th being not quite as miserable as the 19 which precede it.

01.  Detroit, MI

02.  Flint, MI

03.  Rockford, IL

04.  Chicago, IL

05.  Modesto, CA

06.  Vallejo, CA

07.  Warren, MI

08.  Stockton, CA

09.  Lake County, IL

10.  New York, NY

11.  Toledo, OH

12.  St. Louis, MO

13.  Camden, NJ

14.  Milwaukee, WI

15.  Atlantic City, NJ

16.  Atlanta, GA

17.  Cleveland, OH

18.  Poughkeepsie, NY

19.  Gary, IN

20.  Youngstown, OH