Greg Hinz
There are two big developments, as state lawmakers near a vote on legislation designed to revive Chicago's struggling convention and trade-show business.
First, bowing to political reality, Juan Ochoa, the CEO of the agency that runs McCormick Place and Navy Pier, announced his resignation.
Mr. Ochoa said in a statement that he "achieved what I set out to do" when he was named boss of the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, commonly known as McPier.
But the revamp plan being considered in Springfield would have removed him and his board, with former McPier chief Jim Reilly likely to be named the temporary new boss.
Mr. Ochoa, a Mexican by birth, said he will spend his time working on "the central issue our country will face this century: immigration reform."
The second development concerns a threat by some of the city's biggest conventions to leave Chicago unless legislation pending in Springfield is amended.
In an e-mail to lawmakers signed by officials from the National Restaurant Show, the American College of Surgeons and others, the trade officials said they "adamantly oppose" a clause in the proposed legislation that would give the new McPier the authority to have one firm as the exclusive contractor to operate McCormick Place.
The e-mail says that the trade-show officials met via conference call to review the draft legislation and concluded that giving just one firm that much power would undermine the goal of lowering prices.
"This clause must be removed, otherwise it negates all potential reform in other sections of the legislation," it says. Making the change "will save McCormick Place a great deal of business."
There was no immediate response from lawmakers, who have been reviewing the draft for several days but have not yet scheduled a vote.
The bulk of the draft imposes new work rules and other changes designed to cut costs and would allow the convention authority to rework its debt.
* * * 11:25 a.m. update: The spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan said he has not yet seen the note and is not sure what it references, but said officials would review and take it into consideration.
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/cgi-bin/blogs/hinz.pl?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3a1daca073-2eab-468e-9f19-ec177090a35cPost%3a21192cdb-2a63-480a-b6fa-15fb50128370&sid=sitelife.chicagobusiness.com
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
The Pearson Report ISRA
May 4, 2010
Let me start by thanking all of you for the uplifting feedback about our kick-off edition distributed last week. I sincerely hope that this and future editions continue to meet your high standards.
Although a lot has happened in the past week, two very disturbing occurrences in Chicago caught my attention. The first of these events involved Mayor Daley uttering probably the most idiotic suggestion I've ever heard him utter - and that takes a lot. While addressing an international group of mayors, Daley demanded that the World Court hear his complaint that U.S. firearm manufacturers and retailers are responsible not only for crime in the United States, but responsible also for international cases of terrorism and genocide. Daley has called upon the World Court to levy sanctions against U.S. firearm manufacturers, retailers, and anyone who supports them.
What's behind this latest dose of Daley demagoguery? To answer that question, let's turn back to 1998 when Daley filed a $433 million lawsuit against U.S. firearm manufacturers and suburban Chicago firearm retailers. Daley's claim at that time was that the manufacturers and retailers were willfully "flooding" Chicago streets with illegal guns thus encouraging violent crime which, in turn, caused Chicago and Cook County to incur expenses related to fighting these alleged crimes.
In support of his complaint, Daley cited results of secret sting operations conducted by Chicago cops at suburban gun shops. In the months leading up to the lawsuit, undercover Chicago cops went "shopping" at these gun retailers while sporting tattoos, urban fashion clothing, piercings and shaved heads. The undercover cops approached store clerks and expressed an interest in buying one or more firearms. In each case, the undercover cops presented valid FOID cards and successfully passed FTIP background checks. Consequently, the retailers sold the undercover cops guns in full accordance with state and federal law. Nevertheless, Daley filed his lawsuit asserting that the retailers never should have sold guns to the undercover cops because the cops "looked" like gang members as they were wearing urban style clothing and uttering "street lingo." How nutty is that?
Fast forwarding to November of 2004, we see Daley getting his feelings hurt by the Illinois Supreme Court as it overturns a lower-court ruling that had gone in Daley's favor. Ever since that time, Daley has been vigorously pursuing clampdowns on gun rights in the Illinois General Assembly. Fortunately for law-abiding citizens, Daley has had little success in convincing legislators that law-abiding citizens living in the suburbs are the cause of violent crime in his city. Shunned by both the courts and legislature here at home, Daley has desperately turned to freedom-hating foreign institutions like the World Court for help in his crusade against private firearm ownership.
What does all this mean? Well, in short, by seeking intercession of the World Court, Daley is rejecting the authority placed in our courts by our Constitution. Instead, Daley is asserting that the World Court has supreme authority over domestic matters here in the United States. Although it took Daley 3 tries to pass the bar, he should at least have a working understanding of the hows and whys of the American legal system. To suggest that the United States cede the authority of its courts to the World Court borders on subversion and leaves me wondering whether Daley remains fit to serve as Mayor of our third largest city. An ISRA Press Release responding to Daley's troubling statements was issued late last week.
Now on to the second issue I wanted to discuss with you. I'm sure that each of you were as saddened and as shocked as I was to read about the two young women who were brutally attacked by a baseball bat-wielding thug on Chicago's north side. The two women were blind sided from behind - both struck in the backs of their heads by full swings of the baseball bat. Both suffered severe head injuries - with one woman in a drug-induced coma to allow her damaged brain to heal.
As is often the case, the suspected perpetrator of this crime is a multiple loser with over 30 arrests for a variety of property crimes and crimes of violence. His girlfriend/accomplice is also well known to law enforcement officials by virtue of her lengthy rap-sheet. Their victims? A couple of grad students out for a night on the town. The more seriously injured of the two is an Irish exchange student here less than 3 months - welcome to Ritchie Daley's Chicago! Based on the ethnicity of the victims and the ethnicity of the perps and given the proximity of the assault to the passage of the Arizona immigration bill, I have to wonder if there isn't a hate-crime dimension to this incident.
One thing I do know is that Illinois remains one of only two states that continue to deny law-abiding citizens the opportunity to defend themselves against thugs such as those who lurked under a viaduct waiting for these two young ladies. Another thing I know is that Mayor Daley and the Chicago legislative delegation have persistently used their political and parliamentary powers to block any legislative attempts to move Illinois into the mainstream on this issue. From my vantage point in Springfield, I have also witnessed blatant attempts on the part of Daley and his pals to push the option of self defense farther and farther out of the reach of the good people of Illinois.
For all intents and purposes, Daley is an accomplice to the crimes committed against those two young women. Daley and every member of his Chicago legislative delegation had a figurative grip on the handle of that ball bat as it pulverized the skulls of two innocent people. So long as Daley and his pals oppose concealed carry legislation, they will serve as accessories to every robbery, rape and murder perpetrated against law abiding Illinois citizens.
This is supposed to be the last week of the spring session of the Illinois General Assembly. If all goes well, next week's newsletter will consist of a wrap-up report on the highs and lows of the spring session. If, by chance the governor orders the legislature to remain in session, I will update you on what the legislature is up to. Until then, take care, and remember to protect and defend your rights at every opportunity.
Let me start by thanking all of you for the uplifting feedback about our kick-off edition distributed last week. I sincerely hope that this and future editions continue to meet your high standards.
Although a lot has happened in the past week, two very disturbing occurrences in Chicago caught my attention. The first of these events involved Mayor Daley uttering probably the most idiotic suggestion I've ever heard him utter - and that takes a lot. While addressing an international group of mayors, Daley demanded that the World Court hear his complaint that U.S. firearm manufacturers and retailers are responsible not only for crime in the United States, but responsible also for international cases of terrorism and genocide. Daley has called upon the World Court to levy sanctions against U.S. firearm manufacturers, retailers, and anyone who supports them.
What's behind this latest dose of Daley demagoguery? To answer that question, let's turn back to 1998 when Daley filed a $433 million lawsuit against U.S. firearm manufacturers and suburban Chicago firearm retailers. Daley's claim at that time was that the manufacturers and retailers were willfully "flooding" Chicago streets with illegal guns thus encouraging violent crime which, in turn, caused Chicago and Cook County to incur expenses related to fighting these alleged crimes.
In support of his complaint, Daley cited results of secret sting operations conducted by Chicago cops at suburban gun shops. In the months leading up to the lawsuit, undercover Chicago cops went "shopping" at these gun retailers while sporting tattoos, urban fashion clothing, piercings and shaved heads. The undercover cops approached store clerks and expressed an interest in buying one or more firearms. In each case, the undercover cops presented valid FOID cards and successfully passed FTIP background checks. Consequently, the retailers sold the undercover cops guns in full accordance with state and federal law. Nevertheless, Daley filed his lawsuit asserting that the retailers never should have sold guns to the undercover cops because the cops "looked" like gang members as they were wearing urban style clothing and uttering "street lingo." How nutty is that?
Fast forwarding to November of 2004, we see Daley getting his feelings hurt by the Illinois Supreme Court as it overturns a lower-court ruling that had gone in Daley's favor. Ever since that time, Daley has been vigorously pursuing clampdowns on gun rights in the Illinois General Assembly. Fortunately for law-abiding citizens, Daley has had little success in convincing legislators that law-abiding citizens living in the suburbs are the cause of violent crime in his city. Shunned by both the courts and legislature here at home, Daley has desperately turned to freedom-hating foreign institutions like the World Court for help in his crusade against private firearm ownership.
What does all this mean? Well, in short, by seeking intercession of the World Court, Daley is rejecting the authority placed in our courts by our Constitution. Instead, Daley is asserting that the World Court has supreme authority over domestic matters here in the United States. Although it took Daley 3 tries to pass the bar, he should at least have a working understanding of the hows and whys of the American legal system. To suggest that the United States cede the authority of its courts to the World Court borders on subversion and leaves me wondering whether Daley remains fit to serve as Mayor of our third largest city. An ISRA Press Release responding to Daley's troubling statements was issued late last week.
Now on to the second issue I wanted to discuss with you. I'm sure that each of you were as saddened and as shocked as I was to read about the two young women who were brutally attacked by a baseball bat-wielding thug on Chicago's north side. The two women were blind sided from behind - both struck in the backs of their heads by full swings of the baseball bat. Both suffered severe head injuries - with one woman in a drug-induced coma to allow her damaged brain to heal.
As is often the case, the suspected perpetrator of this crime is a multiple loser with over 30 arrests for a variety of property crimes and crimes of violence. His girlfriend/accomplice is also well known to law enforcement officials by virtue of her lengthy rap-sheet. Their victims? A couple of grad students out for a night on the town. The more seriously injured of the two is an Irish exchange student here less than 3 months - welcome to Ritchie Daley's Chicago! Based on the ethnicity of the victims and the ethnicity of the perps and given the proximity of the assault to the passage of the Arizona immigration bill, I have to wonder if there isn't a hate-crime dimension to this incident.
One thing I do know is that Illinois remains one of only two states that continue to deny law-abiding citizens the opportunity to defend themselves against thugs such as those who lurked under a viaduct waiting for these two young ladies. Another thing I know is that Mayor Daley and the Chicago legislative delegation have persistently used their political and parliamentary powers to block any legislative attempts to move Illinois into the mainstream on this issue. From my vantage point in Springfield, I have also witnessed blatant attempts on the part of Daley and his pals to push the option of self defense farther and farther out of the reach of the good people of Illinois.
For all intents and purposes, Daley is an accomplice to the crimes committed against those two young women. Daley and every member of his Chicago legislative delegation had a figurative grip on the handle of that ball bat as it pulverized the skulls of two innocent people. So long as Daley and his pals oppose concealed carry legislation, they will serve as accessories to every robbery, rape and murder perpetrated against law abiding Illinois citizens.
This is supposed to be the last week of the spring session of the Illinois General Assembly. If all goes well, next week's newsletter will consist of a wrap-up report on the highs and lows of the spring session. If, by chance the governor orders the legislature to remain in session, I will update you on what the legislature is up to. Until then, take care, and remember to protect and defend your rights at every opportunity.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
How Mexico Treats Illegal Aliens
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
By Michelle Malkin
Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens.
While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south
The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?
The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics." How's that for racial and ethnic profiling?
-- If outsiders do not enhance the country's "economic or national interests" or are "not found to be physically or mentally healthy," they are not welcome. Neither are those who show "contempt against national sovereignty or security." They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.
-- Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years' imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years' imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama's illegal alien aunt -- a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).
-- Law enforcement officials at all levels -- by national mandate -- must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens' arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.
-- Ready to show your papers? Mexico's National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens' identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.
All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico's Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There's been no public clamor for "comprehensive immigration reform" in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.
Consider: Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators "Smash the State," and holding signs that proclaimed "No human is illegal" and "We have rights."
But under the Mexican constitution, such political speech by foreigners is banned. Noncitizens cannot "in any way participate in the political affairs of the country." In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited private property and employment rights (if any).
As for abuse, the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico's southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn't respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.
Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the United States have coordinated with left-wing social justice groups and the Catholic Church leadership to demand a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America.
Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing -- a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here's the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands:
Hipócritas.
By Michelle Malkin
Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens.
While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south
The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?
The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset "the equilibrium of the national demographics." How's that for racial and ethnic profiling?
-- If outsiders do not enhance the country's "economic or national interests" or are "not found to be physically or mentally healthy," they are not welcome. Neither are those who show "contempt against national sovereignty or security." They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.
-- Illegal entry into the country is equivalent to a felony punishable by two years' imprisonment. Document fraud is subject to fine and imprisonment; so is alien marriage fraud. Evading deportation is a serious crime; illegal re-entry after deportation is punishable by ten years' imprisonment. Foreigners may be kicked out of the country without due process and the endless bites at the litigation apple that illegal aliens are afforded in our country (see, for example, President Obama's illegal alien aunt -- a fugitive from deportation for eight years who is awaiting a second decision on her previously rejected asylum claim).
-- Law enforcement officials at all levels -- by national mandate -- must cooperate to enforce immigration laws, including illegal alien arrests and deportations. The Mexican military is also required to assist in immigration enforcement operations. Native-born Mexicans are empowered to make citizens' arrests of illegal aliens and turn them in to authorities.
-- Ready to show your papers? Mexico's National Catalog of Foreigners tracks all outside tourists and foreign nationals. A National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of every member of the population, who must carry a citizens' identity card. Visitors who do not possess proper documents and identification are subject to arrest as illegal aliens.
All of these provisions are enshrined in Mexico's Ley General de Población (General Law of the Population) and were spotlighted in a 2006 research paper published by the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Security Policy. There's been no public clamor for "comprehensive immigration reform" in Mexico, however, because pro-illegal alien speech by outsiders is prohibited.
Consider: Open-borders protesters marched freely at the Capitol building in Arizona, comparing GOP Gov. Jan Brewer to Hitler, waving Mexican flags, advocating that demonstrators "Smash the State," and holding signs that proclaimed "No human is illegal" and "We have rights."
But under the Mexican constitution, such political speech by foreigners is banned. Noncitizens cannot "in any way participate in the political affairs of the country." In fact, a plethora of Mexican statutes enacted by its congress limit the participation of foreign nationals and companies in everything from investment, education, mining and civil aviation to electric energy and firearms. Foreigners have severely limited private property and employment rights (if any).
As for abuse, the Mexican government is notorious for its abuse of Central American illegal aliens who attempt to violate Mexico's southern border. The Red Cross has protested rampant Mexican police corruption, intimidation and bribery schemes targeting illegal aliens there for years. Mexico didn't respond by granting mass amnesty to illegal aliens, as it is demanding that we do. It clamped down on its borders even further. In late 2008, the Mexican government launched an aggressive deportation plan to curtain illegal Cuban immigration and human trafficking through Cancun.
Meanwhile, Mexican consular offices in the United States have coordinated with left-wing social justice groups and the Catholic Church leadership to demand a moratorium on all deportations and a freeze on all employment raids across America.
Mexico is doing the job Arizona is now doing -- a job the U.S. government has failed miserably to do: putting its people first. Here's the proper rejoinder to all the hysterical demagogues in Mexico (and their sympathizers here on American soil) now calling for boycotts and invoking Jim Crow laws, apartheid and the Holocaust because Arizona has taken its sovereignty into its own hands:
Hipócritas.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Noah's Ark Found
THE remains of Noah's Ark have been discovered 13,000ft up a Turkish mountain, it has been claimed.
A group of Chinese and Turkish evangelical explorers say they have found wooden remains on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.
They claim carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old — around the same time the ark was said to be afloat.
Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team, said: "It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it."
He said the structure contained several compartments, some with wooden beams, that they believe were used to house animals.
The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds none have ever been found above 11,000ft in the vicinity, Yeung said.
Local Turkish officials will ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archaeological dig is conducted.
The biblical story says that God decided to flood the Earth after seeing how corrupt it was. He then told Noah to build an ark and fill it with two of every animal species. After the flood waters receded, the Bible says, the ark came to rest on a mountain. Many believe that Mount Ararat, the highest point in the region, is where the ark and her inhabitants ran aground.
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html#ixzz0mMnvzMU3
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html#ixzz0mMnVHrj1
A group of Chinese and Turkish evangelical explorers say they have found wooden remains on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.
They claim carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old — around the same time the ark was said to be afloat.
Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team, said: "It's not 100 per cent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 per cent that this is it."
He said the structure contained several compartments, some with wooden beams, that they believe were used to house animals.
The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds none have ever been found above 11,000ft in the vicinity, Yeung said.
Local Turkish officials will ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archaeological dig is conducted.
The biblical story says that God decided to flood the Earth after seeing how corrupt it was. He then told Noah to build an ark and fill it with two of every animal species. After the flood waters receded, the Bible says, the ark came to rest on a mountain. Many believe that Mount Ararat, the highest point in the region, is where the ark and her inhabitants ran aground.
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html#ixzz0mMnvzMU3
Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html#ixzz0mMnVHrj1
Monday, April 26, 2010
2 Chicago state reps: Bring in the National Guard
Two state representatives called on Gov. Pat Quinn Sunday to deploy the Illinois National Guard to safeguard Chicago's streets.
Chicago Democrats John Fritchey and LaShawn Ford said they want Quinn, Mayor Richard Daley and Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis to allow guardsmen to patrol streets and help quell violence. Weis said he did not support the idea because the military and police operate under different rules.
"Is this a drastic call to action? Of course it is," Fritchey said. "Is it warranted when we are losing residents to gun violence at such an alarming rate? Without question. We are not talking about rolling tanks down the street or having armed guards on each corner."
What he envisions, Fritchey said, is a "heightened presence on the streets," particularly on the roughly 9 percent of city blocks where most of the city's violent crimes occur.
Weis previously identified those "hot spots" and said he plans to create a 100-person team made up of selected and volunteer police personnel to respond to crime there. If guardsmen were to assist police, they could comprise or contribute to that force, Fritchey said.
So far this year, 113 people have been killed across Chicago, the same number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined in the same period, Fritchey said.
"As we speak, National Guard members are working side-by-side with our troops to fight a war halfway around the world," Fritchey said. "The unfortunate reality is that we have another war that is just as deadly taking place right in our backyard." While the National Guard has been deployed in other states to prevent violence related to specific events and protests, the Chicago legislators said they are unaware of guardsmen being deployed to assist with general urban unrest.
Weis countered that the only scenario in which the National Guard would be helpful is in the situation of a tornado, earthquake or flood. If the military were brought in to help with city violence, they wouldn't answer to police command -- creating a "major disconnect" in mission and strategy.
Alluding to the 1970 Kent State University incident where the National Guard was called in and protestors and students were shot, Weis said having guardsmen handle crime could be "disastrous." But he said if the Daley suggested it, he would consider the option.
"I'm open to anything that reduces violence. But I have concerns when you mix law enforcement and the military," Weis said.
But Fritchey and Ford said prompt action is needed because summer is right around the corner and with the warm weather comes an increase in violence.
Fritchey and Ford serve two different constituencies, representing the North Side and the West Side respectively. "One half of this city views this as a part of daily life," Fritchey said. "Another part of the city doesn't care because it doesn't affect them." Yet the lawmakers said they are coming together because gun violence should be a priority to all Chicagoans.
"No help is too much help" Ford said. "This is not just about the murders. It's about the crime. It's about people being stabbed, robbed and in the hospital on life support."
Fritchey said he spoke to representatives from Quinn's office about deploying guardsmen and they "seemed open to the idea." The lawmakers had yet to speak to Weis or the mayor's office.
"I don't anticipate the governor implementing it over the objection of the mayor," Fritchey said.
"I hope this doesn't become a territorial issue. I hope this doesn't become an ego issue. This isn't about public relations or politics. This is about reclaiming our communities."
-- Kristen Mack and Daarel Burnette II
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/04/state-reps-want-to-fight-violence-with-national-guards-help.html
Chicago Democrats John Fritchey and LaShawn Ford said they want Quinn, Mayor Richard Daley and Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis to allow guardsmen to patrol streets and help quell violence. Weis said he did not support the idea because the military and police operate under different rules.
"Is this a drastic call to action? Of course it is," Fritchey said. "Is it warranted when we are losing residents to gun violence at such an alarming rate? Without question. We are not talking about rolling tanks down the street or having armed guards on each corner."
What he envisions, Fritchey said, is a "heightened presence on the streets," particularly on the roughly 9 percent of city blocks where most of the city's violent crimes occur.
Weis previously identified those "hot spots" and said he plans to create a 100-person team made up of selected and volunteer police personnel to respond to crime there. If guardsmen were to assist police, they could comprise or contribute to that force, Fritchey said.
So far this year, 113 people have been killed across Chicago, the same number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined in the same period, Fritchey said.
"As we speak, National Guard members are working side-by-side with our troops to fight a war halfway around the world," Fritchey said. "The unfortunate reality is that we have another war that is just as deadly taking place right in our backyard." While the National Guard has been deployed in other states to prevent violence related to specific events and protests, the Chicago legislators said they are unaware of guardsmen being deployed to assist with general urban unrest.
Weis countered that the only scenario in which the National Guard would be helpful is in the situation of a tornado, earthquake or flood. If the military were brought in to help with city violence, they wouldn't answer to police command -- creating a "major disconnect" in mission and strategy.
Alluding to the 1970 Kent State University incident where the National Guard was called in and protestors and students were shot, Weis said having guardsmen handle crime could be "disastrous." But he said if the Daley suggested it, he would consider the option.
"I'm open to anything that reduces violence. But I have concerns when you mix law enforcement and the military," Weis said.
But Fritchey and Ford said prompt action is needed because summer is right around the corner and with the warm weather comes an increase in violence.
Fritchey and Ford serve two different constituencies, representing the North Side and the West Side respectively. "One half of this city views this as a part of daily life," Fritchey said. "Another part of the city doesn't care because it doesn't affect them." Yet the lawmakers said they are coming together because gun violence should be a priority to all Chicagoans.
"No help is too much help" Ford said. "This is not just about the murders. It's about the crime. It's about people being stabbed, robbed and in the hospital on life support."
Fritchey said he spoke to representatives from Quinn's office about deploying guardsmen and they "seemed open to the idea." The lawmakers had yet to speak to Weis or the mayor's office.
"I don't anticipate the governor implementing it over the objection of the mayor," Fritchey said.
"I hope this doesn't become a territorial issue. I hope this doesn't become an ego issue. This isn't about public relations or politics. This is about reclaiming our communities."
-- Kristen Mack and Daarel Burnette II
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/04/state-reps-want-to-fight-violence-with-national-guards-help.html
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Arizona's New immigration Law- AZ SENATE BILL 1070
I will not reprint the whole Arizona Immigration Bill but I want to give the link so anyone who wants to can read it for themselves.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070h.pdf
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Republicans Threatening Congressional Seats Long Held by Democrats
Winds of change seen not only in places where posts often change hands.
By JEFF ZELENY
& ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: Saturday, April 24, 2010 at 5:06 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, April 24, 2010 at 5:06 p.m.
ASHLAND, Wis. | Rep. David Obey has won 21 straight races, easily prevailing through wars and economic crises that have spanned presidencies from Nixon to Obama. Yet the discontent with Washington surging through politics is now threatening not only his seat but Democratic control of Congress.
Obey is one of nearly a dozen well-established House Democrats who are bracing for something they rarely face: serious competition. Their predicament is the latest sign of distress for their party and underlines why Republicans are confident of big gains in November, and perhaps even winning back the House.
The fight for the midterm elections is not confined to traditional battlegrounds, where Republicans and Democrats often swap seats every few cycles. In the Senate, Democrats are struggling to hold on to, among others, seats once held by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Democrats are preparing to lose as many as 30 House seats - including a wave of first-term members - and Republicans have expanded their sights to places where political challenges seldom develop.
"It's not a lifetime appointment," said Sean Duffy, a Republican district attorney here in the north woods of Wisconsin, where he has established himself as one of the most aggressive challengers to Obey since the Democrat went to Washington in 1969. "There are changes in this country going on and people aren't happy."
Obey, who leads the powerful Appropriations Committee, is one of three House Democratic chairmen who have drawn serious opposition. Reps. John Spratt of South Carolina, who oversees the Budget Committee, and Ike Skelton of Missouri, who runs the Armed Services Committee, have been warned by party leaders to step up the intensity of their campaigns to help preserve the Democratic majority.
These established House Democrats find themselves in the same endangered straits as some of their newer colleagues, particularly those who were swept into office in 2008 by Obama as he scored victories in traditionally Republican states like Indiana and Virginia.
Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said he would consider anything short of taking back the House a failure. Republicans say they have not recruited strong candidates in all districts, but both parties agree that Republicans are within reach of capturing the 40 additional seats needed to win control. Republicans also are likely to eat into the Democratic majority in the Senate, though their prospects of taking control remain slim.
Democratic congressional officials - well aware that a president's party typically loses seats in midterm elections - have long been preparing for a tough year. But that Obey here in Wisconsin, and other veteran lawmakers like Rep. Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota, suddenly find themselves in a fight reflects an increasingly sour mood toward the Democratic Party and incumbents.
"He's supporting the party line of the Democrats, which is not consistent with North Dakota," said Rick Berg, a Republican state representative from North Dakota who is challenging Pomeroy. "In the past, we've been more conservative at home than the people we send to Washington." Asked if this was a good time to be a Republican candidate, Berg laughed and said: "I sure think so."
Pomeroy, who has served for 18 years as the state's only congressman, won two years ago with 62 percent of the vote. Now, he is among the top targets of House Republicans, and is fighting without the help of one of the state's incumbent Democratic senators on the ballot, since Byron Dorgan chose to retire.
"Some cycles are more challenging as a candidate than others," Pomeroy said. "This should be in the range of challenging cycles."
Democrats worry that some lawmakers who have avoided tough races in the past could be at added risk of defeat because they are out of practice, slow on their feet and often reluctant to acknowledge the threat they are facing. The chairman of the House re-election effort, Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, has called mandatory face-to-face meetings with vulnerable members to monitor their campaigns.
http://www.theledger.com/article/20100424/NEWS/4245042?p=all&tc=pgall
By JEFF ZELENY
& ADAM NAGOURNEY
Published: Saturday, April 24, 2010 at 5:06 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, April 24, 2010 at 5:06 p.m.
ASHLAND, Wis. | Rep. David Obey has won 21 straight races, easily prevailing through wars and economic crises that have spanned presidencies from Nixon to Obama. Yet the discontent with Washington surging through politics is now threatening not only his seat but Democratic control of Congress.
Obey is one of nearly a dozen well-established House Democrats who are bracing for something they rarely face: serious competition. Their predicament is the latest sign of distress for their party and underlines why Republicans are confident of big gains in November, and perhaps even winning back the House.
The fight for the midterm elections is not confined to traditional battlegrounds, where Republicans and Democrats often swap seats every few cycles. In the Senate, Democrats are struggling to hold on to, among others, seats once held by President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden. Democrats are preparing to lose as many as 30 House seats - including a wave of first-term members - and Republicans have expanded their sights to places where political challenges seldom develop.
"It's not a lifetime appointment," said Sean Duffy, a Republican district attorney here in the north woods of Wisconsin, where he has established himself as one of the most aggressive challengers to Obey since the Democrat went to Washington in 1969. "There are changes in this country going on and people aren't happy."
Obey, who leads the powerful Appropriations Committee, is one of three House Democratic chairmen who have drawn serious opposition. Reps. John Spratt of South Carolina, who oversees the Budget Committee, and Ike Skelton of Missouri, who runs the Armed Services Committee, have been warned by party leaders to step up the intensity of their campaigns to help preserve the Democratic majority.
These established House Democrats find themselves in the same endangered straits as some of their newer colleagues, particularly those who were swept into office in 2008 by Obama as he scored victories in traditionally Republican states like Indiana and Virginia.
Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said he would consider anything short of taking back the House a failure. Republicans say they have not recruited strong candidates in all districts, but both parties agree that Republicans are within reach of capturing the 40 additional seats needed to win control. Republicans also are likely to eat into the Democratic majority in the Senate, though their prospects of taking control remain slim.
Democratic congressional officials - well aware that a president's party typically loses seats in midterm elections - have long been preparing for a tough year. But that Obey here in Wisconsin, and other veteran lawmakers like Rep. Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota, suddenly find themselves in a fight reflects an increasingly sour mood toward the Democratic Party and incumbents.
"He's supporting the party line of the Democrats, which is not consistent with North Dakota," said Rick Berg, a Republican state representative from North Dakota who is challenging Pomeroy. "In the past, we've been more conservative at home than the people we send to Washington." Asked if this was a good time to be a Republican candidate, Berg laughed and said: "I sure think so."
Pomeroy, who has served for 18 years as the state's only congressman, won two years ago with 62 percent of the vote. Now, he is among the top targets of House Republicans, and is fighting without the help of one of the state's incumbent Democratic senators on the ballot, since Byron Dorgan chose to retire.
"Some cycles are more challenging as a candidate than others," Pomeroy said. "This should be in the range of challenging cycles."
Democrats worry that some lawmakers who have avoided tough races in the past could be at added risk of defeat because they are out of practice, slow on their feet and often reluctant to acknowledge the threat they are facing. The chairman of the House re-election effort, Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, has called mandatory face-to-face meetings with vulnerable members to monitor their campaigns.
http://www.theledger.com/article/20100424/NEWS/4245042?p=all&tc=pgall
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)