DOWNSTATE ILLINOIS ADVOCATE
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke
DOWNSTATEILADVOCATE.COM
Where Do We Go From Here: The Future Of The Tea Parties
Most of us agree that our government's spending problems did not begin on Jan. 20th, 2009 with the inauguration of Barack Obama. However, since that day, spending has gone off the charts and our national debt is mathematically impossible to pay off. At the time in addition to TARP, the "stimulus" package was being discussed. In the process of this expansion of governmental powers and government spending, Rick Santelli of CNBC lit a powderkeg that exploded into the Tea Party movement.
SUPER BOWL SUNDAY!!!!
OK, it's Super Bowl Sunday. Who do you like? I'm going with the Saints. I think today's game with be epic. Two #1 seeds in the Super Bowl. You couldn't have written a better script!
Saints over the Colts - 38-35.
Saints over the Colts - 38-35.
Quote of the Day
Today would have been Ronald Reagan's 99th birthday.
The best quote about Reagan's birthday comes from JC Hagen regarding Reagan's birthday and the record snowstorm today out east:
The best quote about Reagan's birthday comes from JC Hagen regarding Reagan's birthday and the record snowstorm today out east:
"Reagan wins: DC shut down on his birthday."
Good stuff.
Why The Number "41" Is Important
Is "41 is the new "60" because today Scott Brown was sworn in as the junior Republican Senator of Massachusetts?
60 was the number of votes needed to pass substantive (excluding some budgetary) legislation and to bust up any filibuster attempt in the Senate. 60 seats is how many the Democrat Caucus held in the Senate. 60 is the number of votes the Democrats had to pass health care - but didn't. 60 is the number of votes they had to pass the Employee Free Choice (HA!) Act - and they didn't. 60 is the number of votes they need to confirm a Supreme Court justice which brings me to my first point.
According to ABC.com, there are 2 Supreme Court justices that are considering retirement or that ABC thinks may retire sometime in the near future. So which is more important now, 41 or 60? My belief is 41. I know that Justice Sotomoyer was confirmed by a larger margin than the 60 votes, but her vote really did not upset the balance of power on the court. I still disagree with her confirmation because of many of her stances and association with groups like La Raza. However, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens retire, it will be extremely difficult for President Obama to replace the 2 justices, especially Ginsburg, with truly liberal judges. Therefore, the ideological leanings of the court could change which could have a large impact on cases heard in front of the Supreme Court. It is also possible that the 5-4 splits that have been taking place over the last few years could go 6-3. It will be interesting to see if the GOP can stay together long enough to filibuster any judge nominee they deem too liberal - good ole 41.
But then again....
Maybe 1 is the new 60. It will only take one GOP defector to break their own filibuster or vote with the other side of the aisle to pass something. I am definitely pointing the finger at Senators Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain, Dick Lugar, and George Voinovich who don't hold to the conservative side on all the issues or are self proclaimed "mavericks".
Maybe 51 is the new 60. The Democrats have been talking about the "nuclear option" in regards to health care reform. The plan calls for passing a somewhat reduced version of health care reform as a piece of budgetary legislation, but that would require scrapping what they passed and going back to the drawing board. it's not impossible to do, and I wouldn't rule it out. This move would basically be political suicide, but the Democrats would still love to be able to hang their hat on health care reform and also hand President Obama some kind of victory within his first 2 years of office.
Finally, maybe 0 is the new 60. What President Obama can't get passed through Congress, he'll use the bureaucratic process at various government agencies to get the job done anyway. For instance, he might be able to get Card Check without having a Congressional vote via the National Labor Relations Board if Craig Becker gets through the Senate confirmation (he used to be a lawyer for SEIU and AFL-CIO). President Obama has already leveled the threat against Congress to use the EPA to enact Cap and Trade with or without Congressional help. What's stopping him for using other agencies or his multitude of czars to enact other policies that Congress for the most part has had or would not have a say in enacting? Then there is the backlash facing several incumbent Democrat Senators that are up for re-election. Many Senators once though "safe" are trailing badly in the polls or their approval ratings are below the magic 50%. If the Democrats and especially President Obama feel that all is lost in the Senate, they may not object to Congress being sidelined by government policy wonks and unelected government agents.
Whichever number you think is the new 60, the fallout from Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts is the equivalent to whacking a beehive with a stick. What ensues is mass hysteria as the once mostly peaceful and ordered world of the Senate has been turned upside down. While we hail Scott Brown has the stop gap against the Democrats railroading legislation through, we should not lose sight that Brown is not as conservative as people think. We should keep a close eye on him, especially as critical votes on a myriad of issues are set to present themselves in front of the Senate this year. So which number will it be - 41, 1, 51, or 0? Only time will tell.
60 was the number of votes needed to pass substantive (excluding some budgetary) legislation and to bust up any filibuster attempt in the Senate. 60 seats is how many the Democrat Caucus held in the Senate. 60 is the number of votes the Democrats had to pass health care - but didn't. 60 is the number of votes they had to pass the Employee Free Choice (HA!) Act - and they didn't. 60 is the number of votes they need to confirm a Supreme Court justice which brings me to my first point.
According to ABC.com, there are 2 Supreme Court justices that are considering retirement or that ABC thinks may retire sometime in the near future. So which is more important now, 41 or 60? My belief is 41. I know that Justice Sotomoyer was confirmed by a larger margin than the 60 votes, but her vote really did not upset the balance of power on the court. I still disagree with her confirmation because of many of her stances and association with groups like La Raza. However, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg and John Paul Stevens retire, it will be extremely difficult for President Obama to replace the 2 justices, especially Ginsburg, with truly liberal judges. Therefore, the ideological leanings of the court could change which could have a large impact on cases heard in front of the Supreme Court. It is also possible that the 5-4 splits that have been taking place over the last few years could go 6-3. It will be interesting to see if the GOP can stay together long enough to filibuster any judge nominee they deem too liberal - good ole 41.
But then again....
Maybe 1 is the new 60. It will only take one GOP defector to break their own filibuster or vote with the other side of the aisle to pass something. I am definitely pointing the finger at Senators Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain, Dick Lugar, and George Voinovich who don't hold to the conservative side on all the issues or are self proclaimed "mavericks".
Maybe 51 is the new 60. The Democrats have been talking about the "nuclear option" in regards to health care reform. The plan calls for passing a somewhat reduced version of health care reform as a piece of budgetary legislation, but that would require scrapping what they passed and going back to the drawing board. it's not impossible to do, and I wouldn't rule it out. This move would basically be political suicide, but the Democrats would still love to be able to hang their hat on health care reform and also hand President Obama some kind of victory within his first 2 years of office.
Finally, maybe 0 is the new 60. What President Obama can't get passed through Congress, he'll use the bureaucratic process at various government agencies to get the job done anyway. For instance, he might be able to get Card Check without having a Congressional vote via the National Labor Relations Board if Craig Becker gets through the Senate confirmation (he used to be a lawyer for SEIU and AFL-CIO). President Obama has already leveled the threat against Congress to use the EPA to enact Cap and Trade with or without Congressional help. What's stopping him for using other agencies or his multitude of czars to enact other policies that Congress for the most part has had or would not have a say in enacting? Then there is the backlash facing several incumbent Democrat Senators that are up for re-election. Many Senators once though "safe" are trailing badly in the polls or their approval ratings are below the magic 50%. If the Democrats and especially President Obama feel that all is lost in the Senate, they may not object to Congress being sidelined by government policy wonks and unelected government agents.
Whichever number you think is the new 60, the fallout from Scott Brown's victory in Massachusetts is the equivalent to whacking a beehive with a stick. What ensues is mass hysteria as the once mostly peaceful and ordered world of the Senate has been turned upside down. While we hail Scott Brown has the stop gap against the Democrats railroading legislation through, we should not lose sight that Brown is not as conservative as people think. We should keep a close eye on him, especially as critical votes on a myriad of issues are set to present themselves in front of the Senate this year. So which number will it be - 41, 1, 51, or 0? Only time will tell.
If you haven't voted....
Please vote (and grab you neighbor while you're at it).! Turnout is very
low in Chicago. This election may very well come down to central and
southern Illinois voter turnout!
Let's get the vote out and get the right candidates on the ballot!!!!
Let's get the vote out and get the right candidates on the ballot!!!!
Killing JFK's Vision of NASA And American Technological And Military Superiority
Some people seem to open their mouths without knowing what they say. President Obama seems to fit this category quite nicely lately (ok, maybe not just lately, but you get what I'm saying). If it's not chastising the Supreme Court in front of Congress (which no other President has EVER done), it's his recent plans to cut NASA's budget. NASA has been defending itself and its budget for quite a long time. I still remember attending a press conference in front of the Capital Building in Washington DC when then Senator Paul Simon (D-IL) was doing what he could to kill the International Space Station (called Spacestation Freedom at the time).
We have all forgotten how shocked the West was when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik in 1957. We found ourselves in a "space technology gap" to borrow a phrase from one of my favorite movies, Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned How to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.
JFK knew when he delivered his a speech in 1961 in front of a joint session of Congress where he outlined his vision of putting a man on the moon, that the United States was behind the Soviet Union in space technology. He knew that it was vital that the United States be the leader in technology and in essence, to be the most advanced nation on Earth:
NASA's budget is minuscule compared to the rest of the federal budget. The contributions NASA has given us, many we can't think living without in our technology driven lives. So what are some of the products NASA has brought to us? Good question. Let's take a look...
Computers:
GPS, Semiconductor cubing, structural analysis, Windows virtual news reader, air quality monitor, virtual reality
Consumer products:
Enriched baby formula, water purifying systems, scratch resistant lenses, pool purification, portable coolers, trash compactors, Teflon, cell phones
Environmental:
Solar energy, weather forecasting aid, fire resistant material
Medicine:
Voice controlled wheelchair, breast cancer detection, cool suit
Industry:
Micro lasers, engine lubricant, interactive computer training
And numerous safety contributions. I've listed just a few things here, but if you visit this site, you will see a longer list that is a snap shot of the more than 6,300 patents NASA has been awarded. To gut this agency would be a horrible mistake. I know, the free marketers that are reading this will say that private business should be in charge of doing space travel, etc. First, I would say that nothing is really stopping private enterprise from doing space travel right now other than cost. Second, I think out of all the bloated agencies that the federal government has, NASA is actually one that works. Can they do a better job curtailing costs? Yes, and I believe they have done that. This was evidenced by the Spirit and Opportunity missions when they lowered the costs and still completed the missions.
I'd like to remind people what could happen when DC goes around cutting programs willy nilly. Today, Russia released photos of their new stealth fighter - and we killed the F-22 (putting American workers out of jobs too). The powers that be said we didn't need it. The F-22 was a plane for a different time and a different battlefield. All I have to say to that is, how soon until these new Russian stealths show up in N. Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba or China? Then what? So we lessen our military prowess and our scientific edge all in one year. Congratulations President Obama, coupled with your economic plans, NASA and military cuts, you'll make us a 3rd World nation yet!!
We have all forgotten how shocked the West was when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik in 1957. We found ourselves in a "space technology gap" to borrow a phrase from one of my favorite movies, Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned How to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb.
JFK knew when he delivered his a speech in 1961 in front of a joint session of Congress where he outlined his vision of putting a man on the moon, that the United States was behind the Soviet Union in space technology. He knew that it was vital that the United States be the leader in technology and in essence, to be the most advanced nation on Earth:
Recognizing the head start obtained by the Soviets with their large rocket engines, which gives them many months of lead time, and recognizing the likelihood that they will exploit this lead for some time to come in still more impressive successes, we nevertheless are required to make new efforts on our own. For while we cannot guarantee that we shall one day be first, we can guarantee that any failure to make this effort will make us last. We take an additional risk by making it in full view of the world, but as shown by the feat of astronaut Shepard, this very risk enhances our stature when we are successful. But this is not merely a race. Space is open to us now; and our eagerness to share its meaning is not governed by the efforts of others. We go into space because whatever mankind must undertake, free men must fully share.He continues to lay out expenditures and the purposes of those expenditures. See if anything JFK proposes rings a bell:
Amazing! We actually have accomplished these projects or currently have these projects in place (e.g. weather satellites, communication satellites)
...an additional 23 million dollars, together with 7 million dollars already available, will accelerate development of the Rover nuclear rocket. This gives promise of some day providing a means for even more exciting and ambitious exploration of space, perhaps beyond the moon, perhaps to the very end of the solar system itself.
NASA's budget is minuscule compared to the rest of the federal budget. The contributions NASA has given us, many we can't think living without in our technology driven lives. So what are some of the products NASA has brought to us? Good question. Let's take a look...
Computers:
GPS, Semiconductor cubing, structural analysis, Windows virtual news reader, air quality monitor, virtual reality
Consumer products:
Enriched baby formula, water purifying systems, scratch resistant lenses, pool purification, portable coolers, trash compactors, Teflon, cell phones
Environmental:
Solar energy, weather forecasting aid, fire resistant material
Medicine:
Voice controlled wheelchair, breast cancer detection, cool suit
Industry:
Micro lasers, engine lubricant, interactive computer training
And numerous safety contributions. I've listed just a few things here, but if you visit this site, you will see a longer list that is a snap shot of the more than 6,300 patents NASA has been awarded. To gut this agency would be a horrible mistake. I know, the free marketers that are reading this will say that private business should be in charge of doing space travel, etc. First, I would say that nothing is really stopping private enterprise from doing space travel right now other than cost. Second, I think out of all the bloated agencies that the federal government has, NASA is actually one that works. Can they do a better job curtailing costs? Yes, and I believe they have done that. This was evidenced by the Spirit and Opportunity missions when they lowered the costs and still completed the missions.
I'd like to remind people what could happen when DC goes around cutting programs willy nilly. Today, Russia released photos of their new stealth fighter - and we killed the F-22 (putting American workers out of jobs too). The powers that be said we didn't need it. The F-22 was a plane for a different time and a different battlefield. All I have to say to that is, how soon until these new Russian stealths show up in N. Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba or China? Then what? So we lessen our military prowess and our scientific edge all in one year. Congratulations President Obama, coupled with your economic plans, NASA and military cuts, you'll make us a 3rd World nation yet!!
Recommendations For Feb. 2nd
Sorry I haven't been writing as often recently. Between politics and school, I have been very busy and I haven't had much time to research topics for articles. Soon as the primary season is over, I should be able to free up time to pen again on a regular basis. Thank you for your patience and continued reading.
Primary season is very contentious because there are many good candidates to choose from. Some are better than others but that doesn't take away from who that person is or what they stand for (except Mark Kirk for whom these statements do not apply). Here are my recommendations, but first, let me say that the Effingham Tea Party has endorsed only one candidate - Patrick Hughes. Every recommendation after the Senate race is my own personal picks so take them for what you want. One other thing, am I the only one that gets 10 robocalls a day asking me to vote for one candidate or another? Ugh. I've gotten at least 5 from Matt Murphy in the last 3 days.
US Senate - Patrick Hughes. Don Lowery, John Arrington, and Kathleen Thomas are all good conservatives and good people, but Hughes has the best chance and is rising fast in the polls and has narrowed the gap considerably and has the endorsements of Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham and many others.
Governor - Bill Brady. I also like Adam, and he has some great ideas, however, I feel Brady is the best choice at this time (he's not perfect on all the issues though). If our state was in better financial standing, I may have said yes to Adam, but seeing the way things are, we need someone that has experience as a businessman AND with the workings of Springfield. That being said, I hope Adam doesn't leave politics altogether if he loses on Feb. 2nd because I think he has a great future in Illinois politics ahead of him and is a nice guy as well. If Adam happens to read this - start now, the Republicans need a good challenger to go up against Durbin in 2 years. And hurry before Judy Baar Topinka gets any ideas....
Lt. Governor - Jason Plummer. I like his youth, energy, and plans to expand the traditional role of Lt. Governor. Brad Cole is a very close second.
Sec. of State - Robert Enriguez. Running unopposed.
Att. General - Steve Kim. No opposition.
Treasurer - Dan Rutherford. Super nice guy if you ever get to meet him. Should be great if elected. He is also unopposed.
Comptroller - Jim Dodge. I can't bring myself to vote for Judy Baar Topinka again. Besides, Dodge seems like he'll do a good job if elected.
Finally, I do support the city manager referendum. We need a change. Our city government is out of date and out of touch.
I know some of you may not agree with my choices for Governor on down, but these are the people I think that will make the best candidates in November.
Primary season is very contentious because there are many good candidates to choose from. Some are better than others but that doesn't take away from who that person is or what they stand for (except Mark Kirk for whom these statements do not apply). Here are my recommendations, but first, let me say that the Effingham Tea Party has endorsed only one candidate - Patrick Hughes. Every recommendation after the Senate race is my own personal picks so take them for what you want. One other thing, am I the only one that gets 10 robocalls a day asking me to vote for one candidate or another? Ugh. I've gotten at least 5 from Matt Murphy in the last 3 days.
US Senate - Patrick Hughes. Don Lowery, John Arrington, and Kathleen Thomas are all good conservatives and good people, but Hughes has the best chance and is rising fast in the polls and has narrowed the gap considerably and has the endorsements of Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham and many others.
Governor - Bill Brady. I also like Adam, and he has some great ideas, however, I feel Brady is the best choice at this time (he's not perfect on all the issues though). If our state was in better financial standing, I may have said yes to Adam, but seeing the way things are, we need someone that has experience as a businessman AND with the workings of Springfield. That being said, I hope Adam doesn't leave politics altogether if he loses on Feb. 2nd because I think he has a great future in Illinois politics ahead of him and is a nice guy as well. If Adam happens to read this - start now, the Republicans need a good challenger to go up against Durbin in 2 years. And hurry before Judy Baar Topinka gets any ideas....
Lt. Governor - Jason Plummer. I like his youth, energy, and plans to expand the traditional role of Lt. Governor. Brad Cole is a very close second.
Sec. of State - Robert Enriguez. Running unopposed.
Att. General - Steve Kim. No opposition.
Treasurer - Dan Rutherford. Super nice guy if you ever get to meet him. Should be great if elected. He is also unopposed.
Comptroller - Jim Dodge. I can't bring myself to vote for Judy Baar Topinka again. Besides, Dodge seems like he'll do a good job if elected.
Finally, I do support the city manager referendum. We need a change. Our city government is out of date and out of touch.
I know some of you may not agree with my choices for Governor on down, but these are the people I think that will make the best candidates in November.
Someone Didn't Get The Memo...
The definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results. Someone please pass that on to the Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady!
Has the conservative branch of the Illinois Republican Party not made itself perfectly clear about supporting Mark Kirk? We'll let's try this again then:
WE WILL NOT VOTE FOR MARK KIRK!!!!
Do you get it now?!?!
Apparently not, because our new Chairman Pat Brady has decided to put his two cents in the US Senate race and basically endorse Mark Kirk. He also has decided that the "Dump Kirk" movement is a "fringe element". Where have we heard that one before? MSNBC? Pelosi? Reid? Gibbs?
I have written both here and at Redstate about how I believed that Pat Brady and the Illinois GOP establishment has been protecting Mark Kirk - seems I was right. It also seems Pat Brady didn't understand what took place in Florida with the ousting of Jim Greer as Chairman of the Florida Republican Party for his endorsement of Charlie Crist while basically ignoring the candidacy of Marco Rubio. Greer's unemployed now. Has a precedent been set? I don't know. The last Chairman allegedly used his office for his own gain, and couldn't find a way to defeat Blago in 2006, despite Blago's favorable rating of 30%. Here we thought we had a new life at the top of the party, but it seems it's just the same insider BS we have dealt with in the past.
What is so hard to understand about Virgina, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and NY-23? The voters didn't want the same old establishment characters - like Mark Kirk - and the results show that. They didn't want Pelosi's agenda social or financial. That's everything we get with Mark Kirk, but you either didn't get that memo or you chose to ignore it.
What do you think the Tea Parties were all about Chairman Brady? Do you think we just gather to let off some steam, go home and then vote straight Republican? Are we sheep to you? It's that kind of interference and indifference by the "insiders" that we disdain. It's that kind of arrogance of being told who we should vote for because that's who the establishment likes (Shimkus, Schock, Johnson, and now you Chairman Brady) is what we hate. It's the stuff that Mark Kirk (Nancy Pelosi with a non-botox smile) stands for is what we despise. We want our party back and we want our state back. Don't you get it? Mark Kirk is everything we hate wrapped into one candidate - AND HE'S A REPUBLICAN!
In case you didn't get this memo, we have news for you Chairman Brady. We are taking our party back one precinct at a time, one township at a time, one county at a time. What happens, Chairman Brady, when the Tea Partiers and the other conservatives who hold precincts or townships refuse to help call voters, place signs, or walk their precincts for YOUR candidate? Remember how the Russians burnt Moscow to the ground to stop the invasion of Napoleon? Don't think we won't sit on our hands and watch YOUR candidate go down in flames in order to stop the establishment goons and the RINOs in Illinois from continuing their ransacking of our beloved Republican Party.
Will you get the message then? Or, you could stave off defeat in November by pulling your endorsement Mark Kirk, and force him to face his critics and the other candidates in the US Senate race. Considering it's less than 2 weeks until the election, it's clear you've made your choice Chairman Brady. That's fine, we've made our choice as well. What are the Vegas odds on who will be right?
Has the conservative branch of the Illinois Republican Party not made itself perfectly clear about supporting Mark Kirk? We'll let's try this again then:
WE WILL NOT VOTE FOR MARK KIRK!!!!
Do you get it now?!?!
Apparently not, because our new Chairman Pat Brady has decided to put his two cents in the US Senate race and basically endorse Mark Kirk. He also has decided that the "Dump Kirk" movement is a "fringe element". Where have we heard that one before? MSNBC? Pelosi? Reid? Gibbs?
I have written both here and at Redstate about how I believed that Pat Brady and the Illinois GOP establishment has been protecting Mark Kirk - seems I was right. It also seems Pat Brady didn't understand what took place in Florida with the ousting of Jim Greer as Chairman of the Florida Republican Party for his endorsement of Charlie Crist while basically ignoring the candidacy of Marco Rubio. Greer's unemployed now. Has a precedent been set? I don't know. The last Chairman allegedly used his office for his own gain, and couldn't find a way to defeat Blago in 2006, despite Blago's favorable rating of 30%. Here we thought we had a new life at the top of the party, but it seems it's just the same insider BS we have dealt with in the past.
What is so hard to understand about Virgina, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and NY-23? The voters didn't want the same old establishment characters - like Mark Kirk - and the results show that. They didn't want Pelosi's agenda social or financial. That's everything we get with Mark Kirk, but you either didn't get that memo or you chose to ignore it.
What do you think the Tea Parties were all about Chairman Brady? Do you think we just gather to let off some steam, go home and then vote straight Republican? Are we sheep to you? It's that kind of interference and indifference by the "insiders" that we disdain. It's that kind of arrogance of being told who we should vote for because that's who the establishment likes (Shimkus, Schock, Johnson, and now you Chairman Brady) is what we hate. It's the stuff that Mark Kirk (Nancy Pelosi with a non-botox smile) stands for is what we despise. We want our party back and we want our state back. Don't you get it? Mark Kirk is everything we hate wrapped into one candidate - AND HE'S A REPUBLICAN!
In case you didn't get this memo, we have news for you Chairman Brady. We are taking our party back one precinct at a time, one township at a time, one county at a time. What happens, Chairman Brady, when the Tea Partiers and the other conservatives who hold precincts or townships refuse to help call voters, place signs, or walk their precincts for YOUR candidate? Remember how the Russians burnt Moscow to the ground to stop the invasion of Napoleon? Don't think we won't sit on our hands and watch YOUR candidate go down in flames in order to stop the establishment goons and the RINOs in Illinois from continuing their ransacking of our beloved Republican Party.
Will you get the message then? Or, you could stave off defeat in November by pulling your endorsement Mark Kirk, and force him to face his critics and the other candidates in the US Senate race. Considering it's less than 2 weeks until the election, it's clear you've made your choice Chairman Brady. That's fine, we've made our choice as well. What are the Vegas odds on who will be right?
Does Mark Kirk Exist?
Mark Kirk is skipping the Republican US Senate candidate debate tomorrow night, which makes me wonder...does Mark Kirk even exist?
There have been several candidate meet and greets across this fine state and Kirk has yet to show up. Instead, he'll send a proxy out to speak for him or skip it completely. Now, if he doesn't exist, wouldn't that necessitate someone actually going out to convince people Kirk does exist and that they should vote that phantom candidate?
We've seen pictures in newspapers and interviews done with him. Is it really him? I've seen pictures of the Loch Ness monster but that doesn't exactly mean that Nessie exists now does it?
We've seen video of Mark Kirk but I've also seen video of Sasquatch running across a field. Doesn't make Kirk or Bigfoot real.
I've heard radio ads for Kirk, but I've also heard audio of a Sasquatch via a state trooper's dashcam, but that doesn't make Sasquatch or Kirk any more real.
Fine, but Kirk represents the 10th Congressional in DC so other Congressman have seen him. People have claimed to see aliens, chupacabras, ghosts and other strange things but does that mean they exist?
But Kirk has cast votes so we know he exists. Ok, we've seen cow mutilations but does that mean aliens are real? We've seen footprints of Bigfoot, but does that mean he/she is real?
The only way we will know that he exists is if he decides to come out of his hiding spot like he's some kind of Punxsutawny Phil, and show himself to the Republican electorate here in Illinois. We know he believes he is a conservative, but we know that's not real either now don't we.
There have been several candidate meet and greets across this fine state and Kirk has yet to show up. Instead, he'll send a proxy out to speak for him or skip it completely. Now, if he doesn't exist, wouldn't that necessitate someone actually going out to convince people Kirk does exist and that they should vote that phantom candidate?
We've seen pictures in newspapers and interviews done with him. Is it really him? I've seen pictures of the Loch Ness monster but that doesn't exactly mean that Nessie exists now does it?
We've seen video of Mark Kirk but I've also seen video of Sasquatch running across a field. Doesn't make Kirk or Bigfoot real.
I've heard radio ads for Kirk, but I've also heard audio of a Sasquatch via a state trooper's dashcam, but that doesn't make Sasquatch or Kirk any more real.
Fine, but Kirk represents the 10th Congressional in DC so other Congressman have seen him. People have claimed to see aliens, chupacabras, ghosts and other strange things but does that mean they exist?
But Kirk has cast votes so we know he exists. Ok, we've seen cow mutilations but does that mean aliens are real? We've seen footprints of Bigfoot, but does that mean he/she is real?
The only way we will know that he exists is if he decides to come out of his hiding spot like he's some kind of Punxsutawny Phil, and show himself to the Republican electorate here in Illinois. We know he believes he is a conservative, but we know that's not real either now don't we.
Effingham City Manager Referendum - Updated
We attended the informational meeting tonight regarding the referendum on the ballot to change the Effingham City Government from a Commissioner form of government to a City Manager/Council form of government.
There will be two more informational meetings: Thursday at the New Hope Church at 5:30pm and on January 25th at 6:30pm at the Council Chamber at the Effingham City Hall. Please read more about the city manager form of government.
One of the most interesting facts we learned about this evening was that Effingham's budget has bloated itself to the size of a city with the population of 100,000! And we're only 13,000 strong! Sad. Our budget has increased 4.4 times over the course of time to a budget of $29 million, $8 million in payroll, 5 unions, numerous funding sources, and has unique and complex TIF districts.
The presentation was great by Scott Kabbes and Matt Hirtzel. They outlined the problems with the current form of government and how only 2.1 % of cities of our size still have a Commissioner form of government.
A former city manager from Normal, IL - Dave Anderson - was present to detail what and why a city manager is good for Effingham. He gave us 12 points which I'll list here and it's not word for word, but a paraphrase of what he said:
1. The city manager would be a full time employee of the city which would have the time the part time commissioners do not have to run the city.
2. A huge budget like Effingham's requires qualified leadership (experience and education) to manage.
3. Easier to keep up with constantly changing Federal and State laws.
4. Allows for better communication of the State of the City to commissioners and public
5. Handles franchise and contract agreements
6. Hires, trains, and disciplines city employees except civil service, fire and police.
7. Helps make the city government productive and efficient.
8. Helps remove/lessen local politics/loyalties from decisions.
9. Is trained in city government/administration.
10. Better fiscal control over budget and expenses of the city.
11. Handles day to day operations of the city
12. One person is the focal point of the government.
On the ballot you will see this question: "Shall the city of Effingham adopt the managerial form of government?"
If you live within the city of Effingham, I urge you to vote YES on this referendum.
There will be two more informational meetings: Thursday at the New Hope Church at 5:30pm and on January 25th at 6:30pm at the Council Chamber at the Effingham City Hall. Please read more about the city manager form of government.
One of the most interesting facts we learned about this evening was that Effingham's budget has bloated itself to the size of a city with the population of 100,000! And we're only 13,000 strong! Sad. Our budget has increased 4.4 times over the course of time to a budget of $29 million, $8 million in payroll, 5 unions, numerous funding sources, and has unique and complex TIF districts.
The presentation was great by Scott Kabbes and Matt Hirtzel. They outlined the problems with the current form of government and how only 2.1 % of cities of our size still have a Commissioner form of government.
A former city manager from Normal, IL - Dave Anderson - was present to detail what and why a city manager is good for Effingham. He gave us 12 points which I'll list here and it's not word for word, but a paraphrase of what he said:
1. The city manager would be a full time employee of the city which would have the time the part time commissioners do not have to run the city.
2. A huge budget like Effingham's requires qualified leadership (experience and education) to manage.
3. Easier to keep up with constantly changing Federal and State laws.
4. Allows for better communication of the State of the City to commissioners and public
5. Handles franchise and contract agreements
6. Hires, trains, and disciplines city employees except civil service, fire and police.
7. Helps make the city government productive and efficient.
8. Helps remove/lessen local politics/loyalties from decisions.
9. Is trained in city government/administration.
10. Better fiscal control over budget and expenses of the city.
11. Handles day to day operations of the city
12. One person is the focal point of the government.
On the ballot you will see this question: "Shall the city of Effingham adopt the managerial form of government?"
If you live within the city of Effingham, I urge you to vote YES on this referendum.
