DOWNSTATEILADVOCATE.COM

"Moving Out"

downstateiladvocate — Sun, 13 May 2012 15:13:50 GMT

I love Billy Joel's music. So when I heard that Eduardo Saverin, co-founder of Facebook, renounced his US citizenship in order to get around paying taxes on his income from Facebook's IPO I immediately thought of Billy Joel's song "I'm Moving Out". To see the entire song's lyrics, go here, but I want to show you one stanza to drive a point home:

You should never argue with a crazy mind
You oughta know by now
You can pay Uncle Sam with the overtime
Is that all you get for your money?

It seems such a waste of time
If that's what it's all about
Good luck movin' up cause I'm movin' out.

Moving out - or rather renoucing his US citizenship - is exactly what Saverin is doing. Saverin has been getting grief about circumventing the US tax code but I'll stand up and defend him.

First, he helped found a company that has taken off to Microsoft or Apple powerhouse status. As a result, Saverin, Zuckerberg and others have made a whole bunch of money. Isn't that why people start businesses in the first place? To make as much money as possible while seeing your company expand? Did I mention that unlike Microsoft and Apple, Facebook doesn't charge you money to use their service?

Second, Saverin is emblematic in my mind of other individuals and companies moving to escape oppressive tax regimes. Take the election of socialist Francois Hollande as the new President of France as an example. The rich are already looking across the English Channel because Hollande has stated he rejects austerity measures in France and is looking to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for the unsustainable government programs and pensions.

California now has a budget deficit of $16 billion, part of which is an estimated $2 billion in missed revenue from California's income tax. This shortage of income tax revenue comes from one or two ways - either people are earning a great deal less because of the economy and/or the rich have moved to more favorable tax climates. California's solution? Raise taxes again.

We see the "moving out" in other states whether it's New York City losing its rich because of high taxes or businesses moving out of Illinois because of high taxes. People and businesses - that have the means to do so - are moving to Texas, Tennessee or Florida where there is no state income tax, are Right to Work states and/or less regulatory. On a national level, we have seen companies "move out" their company or their investments to other countries with more favorable tax structures - hence GE paying no US corporate taxes on their profits the last two years.

A government cannot tax an economy into prosperity. A government cannot spend itself into prosperity either. However, states like California, Illinois and New York seem to think otherwise. As a result, we see continued budget shortfalls and calls for higher taxes rather than the opposite.

From a business standpoint, if your competitor is offering similar services at a better price, you don't raise your prices in hopes of getting more revenue. Instead, you will do your best to match your competitor's prices in hopes of luring customers to your company's product rather than risk losing current and potential customers to your competitor.

Likewise, states - especially Illinois - need to operate on the same level. If Indiana is more favorable to business - and thereby the wealthy who own most businesses - then Illinois needs to become more competitive to keep what business Illinois has and to allure more business to start or move to Illinois.

Saverin renoucing his US citizenship on the surface seems like a greedy move but when you get below the surface, you see a problem with redistributive taxes and an overregulated economy. We shouldn't curse Saverin and businesses for doing what they have done. Instead, we should be cursing those that have promised unsustainable pensions, created massive government programs/agencies and have created a hostile business environment.

Those that we should be cursing - Democrats in power in Springfield as an example - remind me of a debate I had with a student during Law Day a short while ago. The student was stating that he believed the 2nd amendment should be out of the Constitution because "guns are dangerous and kill people" and "it would help stop the wars we are in now". I was quick to remind him that a loaded gun sitting on a table is not dangerous and won't kill anyone until the gun is picked up and fired by a person. I also stated that if you don't like US foreign policy, don't blame the guns, blame the people we elected that decide and carry out our foreign policy.

It works the same way with Saverin, et al. Don't blame them for moving out. Blame those that have caused them to move out.

More Anti-business, Pro-union Fun From Springfield

downstateiladvocate — Thu, 10 May 2012 02:07:46 GMT

Last year, the Illinois General Assembly passed a bill, signed into law by Gov. Quinn, that required the use of project labor agreements (PLAs) in most of the economic development zones in Illinois. To be short, PLAs basically require that companies that do business with a government entity play by union rules and/or pay. The result of which is usually an increase of 15-40% cost to do construction within these zones. One of President Obama's first executive orders - consistently reinforced by Rep. John Shimkus - was to require PLAs to bid on federal projects.

As stated above, Gov. Quinn quickly followed suit with a more than sympathetic Democrat majority in the IL General Assembly.

Now, there is a new bill - HB5657 - which would mandate that any municipality, county or township that refuses PLAs by rule, initiative or ordinance will not receive state funding/aid for projects.

As a city official, I cannot explain to you enough how difficult it is to recruit new business our city with Illinois being as anti-business as it is. The tax increase on personal income and on businesses was a punch in the gut. One advantage we used to have was our economic development zones, but Gov. Quinn and his allies pulled that rug out from underneath us. Now, if HB 5657 ever finds Gov. Quinn's desk, he and his lock-step followers in the IL GA will be essentially kicking us while we are down.

The cost of government is hard enough to control without Springfield handing down mandates that placate their union lobbyist friends. While Wisconsin and Gov. Scott Walker are taking steps to curtail union control which is resulting in more jobs and less taxes, Illinois is doing the exact opposite. Wonder why the Wisconsin Democrats from Madison took refuge in IL last year? HB5657 is an example of why they thought Illinois would be so hospitable to their flight.

The importance of this next election cannot be overstated. We MUST take back at least one house in Springfield to stop this madness. Call your State Reps and State Sens to ask them to stop the madness that is HB5657!

Effingham Unit 40 Is Wrong, Plain and Simple - UPDATE 1x

downstateiladvocate — Thu, 03 May 2012 03:27:22 GMT

UPDATE 1x: I recieved this email today from Jane, a long time Tea Partier, about my post below. It reads:

We went to SIU-E graduation Saturday, and several of the graduating guys wore their uniforms INSTEAD of the black cap and gowns! I saw and I’m sure others saw nothing wrong with it. Same should apply to high school.

Jane is absolutely right.

END UPDATE 1x

I have never served in the military. My father did and both my grandfathers did. My future stepson is currently serving and has done several tours in both Afghanistan and Iraq. My cousin is currently in Afghanistan. I know several others that have served in our military including a classmate - Chris Donaldson - who lost his life in the field. Other soldiers in our area have also lost thier life in combat during the last decade of warfare.

Recently, 2nd Lt Charles Moritz's remains were returned to Effingham. Mortiz was KIA during WWII in England.

What do all these men and women who have served in our miltary have in common? They have all volunteered to defend our republic, defend our freedoms and have put their lives on the line on our behalf.

So when I read about Effingham Unit 40 denying US Army recruit and EHS Senior Josh Daughtery's request to wear his US Army rope and tassel at graduation May 20th, I got a bit upset.

What really got me upset was Asst. Principal Lewis' remarks on why he denied Daugherty's request:

Lewis today said that the school has 844 students that have a variety of pursuits, like Boy Scouts, church activities and others, but those aren't recognized at graduation, only school-related accomplishments. He said the one exception is when a member of the graduating class died, and each graduate wore a patch in memory of the student.

Lewis said he understood the family's disappointment in the decision, and said that's not the intent. He said the district's interpretation of school law is that if any outside activities are recognized, they must recognize all of them, and some could be undesirable.

There's a huge difference between volunteering to serve in the military and other organizations. But I guess this is just liberal educational logic at work.

The school system, yes, even here in conservative Effingham, wants to make everyone uniform with no room for deviation from the system. Liberal logic rules supreme in education.

Why read names at graduation Mr. Lewis? Some people get more cheers than others when they walk the platform to get their diploma. According to liberal education logic, that is unfair and un-uniform. Why seat the kids in alphabetical order? It's unfair to those kids who throughout life have had to wait because their last name falls between S through Z. Just let them all get their diplomas enmasse. Why have a Valedictorian? Isn't it unfair to honor the top student because other kids may not be good test takers? Liberal logic would dictate you would stop that practice.

Lastly, the continued degradation of our military personnel and those that choose to serve by liberal logic is now being put on display at Effingham Unit 40. We know the left despises the military because it is an organization that promotes uniformity yet is largely conservative. Go further on the left - think Occupy Wall Street goons - and the military is seen as the oppressive arm of our government forcing its will upon other nations while killing innocent people.

I personally think Asst. Principal Lewis should reconsider his denial of Josh Daughtery's request. Daughtery is proud that he enlisted and Effingham Unit 40 should be proud that Daughtery has chosen to defend our rights and Constitution - which he learned about in his American Government class -- where else? At Effingham High School.

Your Chance To Help Effingham CASA On April 14th!

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 18:21:29 GMT

If you have never heard of CASA before, let me fill you in.

CASA stands for Court Appointed Special Advocate - for children.

CASA exists to help protect at-risk children by being their guardian in the court system. The state has DCFS which handles abuse/neglect cases regarding children. CASA fills in the gaps between the courts and DCFS by being an impartial and neutral party representing the children as they progress through the state and court systems.

CASA volunteers go through 30 hours of training where they learn to notice signs of abuse, understand children's behavior, how to handle different situations surrounding the children they watch over and how to detect possible problems in their case's home.

CASA volunteers are the children's Guardian Angels of sorts. They make sure that everything is good in the home and speak up on behalf of the children in court - always representing the best interest of the child/children while keeping a strict confidentiality about the children and the cases they are assigned.

With the average case load for DCFS workers in Illinois at about 45 cases per 1 DCFS worker, CASA helps ensure that these at-risk children do not fall through the cracks of an over burdened system.

My girlfriend Stephanie Rieman is a CASA advocate. With hearts the size of Texas, Stephanie and a handful of volunteers devote a portion of their lives to defend others than cannot defend themselves. Children are some of the most vulnerable people in our society and CASA's volunteers strive for the highest to protect those children.

Why am I tell you about this? First, it's a great program that is always seeking new volunteers. Second, because those that help the children need your help too! Since CASA is a volunteer program, they operate largely from donations from people in our community.

On April 14th, CASA will be hosting their "1st Annual Tips for CASA Celebrity Bartender Challenge" fundraiser. Stephanie will be slinging some drinks for a good cause from 11-12pm (I double dog dare anyone to make a better Long Island Ice Tea than her!). Below is the flier for CASA's event. I hope you all can make it out to CASA's fundraiser! With YOUR help, CASA's volunteers can continue helping at-risk children and ensure the program has a long beneficial future!

Giving Conservatism & Republican Bad Names

downstateiladvocate — Wed, 04 Apr 2012 17:13:37 GMT

Over at RepublicanReporter.com, Bob Schultz has been conducting an ongoing expose on Link card abuse and fraud in Illinois. So far, Bob has been nearly always on the mark regarding his findings and/or anonymous tips. However, this time around I believe the anonymous contributor got it wrong and I urge Bob to think about removing the post from his site.

What you read below has to be one of the least conservative, least Republican posts I've read in a long time on a Republican site. In fact, the anonymous contributor by the end of his post stops just short of implementing a Fascist/Hitler-like ghettoization of poor. Posts like below give fuel to people like President Obama's class warfare argument. It reeks of Social Darwinist elitism and reinforces the stereotype of the blue-blooded country club Republican. Conservatives don't think like this. Republicans don't think like this. This helps prove my point I have often said that people quickly forget where they came from when they run into money, or those who were born with silver spoons in their mouths have no idea how the real world works.

Let's go through this and where the anonymous tipster went wrong:

Bob,

I agree with you as I have often said that those who prefer to “live” on “Link” cards should not have the same shopping experiences as those of us who are “supporting” their habits. Let me be clear on the following recommendations. I am setting forth examples for those people who are fully “Wards of the State” but who are capable of acquiring an education or trade in order to be a contributing member to society. I am NOT referring to those who suffer debilitating mental or physical health. (No, being STUPID is not debilitating, just a continual aggravation to society.)

So apparently being poor equals being stupid. Here is Social Darwinism rearing its ugly head. Rich = smart, poor = stupid. Therefore, the rich know better and are the upper crust of society because they rise to the top of the human gene pool. This is at the heart of Social Darwinism. I feel like I'm reading The Great Gatsby again. I'm actually surprised that the anonymous tipster didn't go further and advocate for forced sterilization of the "stupid" because as Oliver Wendell Holmes Fr. in the Buck v Bell opinion stated "[t]hree generations of imbeciles are enough".

Therefore, I decree that the government should take over the “empty” Wal-Mart buildings, K-Mart, Kroger buildings etc and have the newly acquired “State Run Food Stores” stocked with basic staple foods that a family needs to sustain a healthy life. (Fruit juices, off-brand

Soft drinks (no energy drinks – these people are not exerting themselves in any fashion) appropriate cuts of meats (not t-bones, filets) no “sugary” children’s cereal, no frozen dinners, (they have all day to prepare a healthy meal).

Let me get this straight. Conservatives and Republicans believe less government is better and businesses can do better than the government in controlling costs and fraud yet this anonymous contributor is claiming the opposite. He/she would rather see the government bureaucracy expanded, not to mention the state's payroll which inevitably would be public union jobs. Additionally as a friend of mine pointed out, what happens when the government has exclusive control over a business or agency? It becomes a breeding ground for electoral corruption. How soon would it be before "voter drives" were set up in these "Stores"? Of course we know which party will be doing this and who these concerned citizens will be telling the poor to vote for in the elections. Here's a hint. It's isn't the Republican party that would be doing those things.

However, I do have to agree that certain purchases should be limited to exclude certain unhealthy items or at the very least limit the number of those items that can be purchased. As Bob has detailed on his site previously, there is no reason why somebody should be buying 10 cases of soda with a Link card. But my agreement ends there. The reasoning the anonymous contributor states for these limitations are cruel, nothing more as in "these people are not exerting themselves in any fashion". So now the poor are not only stupid, but also lazy. What are "appropriate cuts of meat"? Is it Spam, 70/30 hamburger, or others? Finally, I have no problem with "frozen dinners". If mom or dad can't be home to cook dinner, are the kids supposed to not eat? When I was growing up, there were kids we used to call "Latch Key Kids" because the kids basically had to fend for themselves until Mom and/or Dad got home from work.

Oh, and by the way, there will be basic cake mixes where a family can bake their “own” birthday cakes instead of ordering a $50 birthday cake from the bakery !! - (Can’t you see the family sharing quality time baking their “own” birthday cakes.?)

Wow. Let's cancel Christmas while we are at it. How dare the lazy, stupid poor give their kids gifts if they are on the public dole. Cancel Halloween too. Candy just makes the lazy, stupid poor into fat, toothless, lazy, stupid poor.

This State Store will not have a liquor sales department but will have a hair analysis drug testing center. If the hair analysis shows evidence of drug use, the State issued Link card will be confiscated. The Link card will be reinstated once the “drug addict” can

Be retested and deemed free of drugs. (Should the drug addict eventually become baldheaded during the ongoing process, other testing means will be provided.) (No, the State Store will not have a cell phone department, remember, they all have one of those already.)

I don't have a problem with drug testing. We have to take drug tests when we get jobs, why not for public aid? In fact, I believe that politicians should also undergo drug testing. The cell phone comment though was a cheap shot. The general trend in the public is landlines are disappearing while cell phones are increasing which makes for funding 911 an issue that communities and states are going to have to face sooner rather than later.

This State Store will also be voluntarily manned by Link recipients. They will be responsible for the following:

Unloading the delivery trucks (Yes that could possibly mean an “early” morning trip to the store – we’ll furnish them with an alarm clock)

Stocking the shelves

Cleaning the store

Preparing fruits, vegetables etc. for display

Basic tracking of inventory

Policing the attempted shoplifters

Filling grocery bags

Assisting the disabled to their vehicle

Etc., Etc.

Their “wages” would be the equivalent to their acquisition of needed household food. “What do I do with my four children, (three different dads) while it is my turn to volunteer at the State Run store??” You find another Link recipient and share in the babysitting needs. Something tells me you know of other people in your predicament who could help you !!

Ridiculous. Would you work at a job being paid in script which can only be used at the company store? One only has to look at the history of Pullman, IL to see how that worked out. For those that don't know, Pullman, IL was a city built by the Pullman Co. to house their workers. These workers were then paid in script, not money, that could be used at the company store owned and stocked by the Pullman Co. Rent was paid in script to Pullman. Want to change the color of your house? Better get permission from the Pullman Co. Quit your job? Move out of Pullman penniless because you were paid in script, not in real money. The anonymous contributor seems to think the lazy, stupid poor should be indentured servants to the state whereas at least prisoners get paid to make license plates.

The babysitting comment is a joke as well. "Four children, three different dads". So know the poor are promiscuous, lazy, and stupid. I am beginning to get a picture of our anonymous contributor here. He or she seems to be a person that has never known hardship in their life and has had no contact with the social classes outside his or her own. All he or she knows of the poor is what he or she has read, seen on TV or have had others tell them. Sad really.

Conservatism and being Republican is about helping the poor achieve what others have, not forcing them into forced volunteerism, aka slavery. Slavery? Yes, slavery. What is a slave but a forced volunteer working for nothing else but for the master (state) who provides for food/shelter? The Republican party is the party that freed the slaves, why in God's name would a Republican, let alone a conservative, promote a return to such a system?!

Also, a body scan will be taken on your first trip to “The Store.” The Store will document tattoos and piercings. Any person who obtains another tattoo or piercing while “on tax-payer’s assistance” will most likely have their Link card confiscated.

Seriously?! Another stereotype about the poor. So now our poor are tattooed/pierced, promiscuous, lazy, and stupid. I'm hoping we'll run out of adjectives for the poor by the end of this anonymous contributor's post.

Plus, did he or she just ask for government intrusion via body scan? Isn't it conservatives and Republicans leading the charge against the intrusive TSA body scans at airports? It's the left that trades in double standards, not the right.

Besides, what if somebody saved up for their tattoo or piercing? Sure, it's not like saving for a car but it's still saving for a purchase. Just because somebody buys a product or service does not mean they are abusing the system. In our anonymous contributor's mind, the poor should not have anything else than food, shelter and clothing. Outside those staples, it seems it's abuse or fraud of the system.

The Link Card also has an expiration date. Should the recipient prove (with a payroll check stub) that they are duly employed OR in an educational/ work training program, the taxpayers will be more than happy to assist them while they are struggling with their household budget. However, if the recipient is NOT working, nor actively seeking employment or educating/training for re-introduction into the workforce, the taxpayers can request that 18 months is sufficient in their subsidizing this individual’s lifestyle, and have the Link card terminated. You ask, “what will happen to this poor individual, he must eat ??” We can only assume

that “HE”LL FIND A JOB and FEED HIMSELF !!!”

This is not really anything new. Public aid is subject to termination within a certain period of time thanks to the Welfare Reform Act passed by a Republican Congress and signed by a Democrat President Clinton.

The anonymous contributor actually hits on something here because the way the system is set up now, it is hard for somebody who is working to receive aid because if you earn just $1 more than the cut off line, your benefits are terminated. Hence there are people that are stuck in the nexus that is being the working poor with no assistance and wanting to work more but can't because of this cut off line. So basically, you are damned if you do, damned if you don't.

However, the "[h]e'll find a job and feed himself" line is a bunch of hooey. If a person does not have a higher education, their earning potential is less. If that same person does not have a high school education, their earning potential is significantly less. Basically, a person with no higher education has to take a job at minimum wage or in unskilled labor. A minimum wage job does not pay the bills period. So a job = feeding himself does not equal out in reality. It's pretty clear to me now that the anonymous contributor has never studied sociology 101 or they have forgotten some of the concepts taught in that course. I'm not talking about the Marxist crap they teach either; I'm talking about the actual demographics that make up the "poor" in America.

Just my thoughts on the subject. I too, shop at (DELETED) (when I must) and the other day a female truck driver in front of me, after seeing a young couple with two very small children, no wedding rings, but tattoos, piercings and a Link card, check out their cart with frozen dinners, Oreos, Coke, Gatorade, etc. turns to me and says, “you would think that these young people could at least crawl out of their pajamas to shop for the food that WE are paying for.” She has a point !

I have met plenty of rich people in our area that dress sloppy when at the store. I have met plenty of rich people who allow their kids to wear baggy pants, or "pajamas" at the store. I know of a successful business owner that is tattooed, has long hair and who I have never seen wear anything that could be considered "business casual". My neighbor is tattooed, unmarried living with his girlfriend and her kids and they just had a child of their own. This guy fits nearly all the stereotypes our anonymous contributor hit on....only my neighbor is gainfully employed by a nationally known business here in Effingham. Stereotypes are easy ways for people to dismiss people that are different from them. Stereotypes allow people to feel better about themselves and attempt to create a class of citizenship that is present only in their minds.

One last thing about my neighbor. He is a nice guy who by all definitions presented by our anonymous poster stereotypes should be "poor" and reading between the lines, not a family man. In fact, he and his girlfriend and their children sit down every evening and eat dinner together or often work on their house or yard together as a family. So much for stereotypes.

Conservatives and Republicans care not for labels or identity politics. Those type of things are the realm of the progressives and the Democrats. Identity politics and labels are nothing more than tools to divide and conquer the voting populace. Conservatives and Republicans do not see color. They do not see differences. We only see people who have the power to enhance their lives if they use the most of their potential - all done with minimal government assistance. We care about the individual, not what ethnicity that individual claims. We believe the individual, through capitalism, can rise above one's circumstances or at the very least have the ability to help their children live a better life than they had and/or increase the probability that their children's socioeconomic status changes for the better - and that their children will do the same for their children.

Below are Bob's comments regarding the anonymous poster:

It's worth a try. Ever notice how Democrats are ADAMANTLY opposed to any type of experiment like this. Even Charter Schools and School choice are HORRORS, even if tested on a limited basis. Frankly, it's that form of experimentation that leads to some great innovations. It's always important to remember, that the automobile was invented more than 500 miles from our Nation's capitol. As one member of congress told me, "If the federal government had been responsible for creating the automobile, we would have had a mechanical horse!"

The problem with an "experiment" like the one Bob's anonymous poster writes about is that it isn't Republican, and it certainly isn't conservative. Government is not the answer, but a draconian system as stated above is not the answer either. Jonah Goldberg in "Liberal Fascism" stated that libertarianism would be a perfect political ideology if it had the answer to the poor and foreign affairs. Since libertarianism doesn't have those answers and progressivism doesn't either, conservatism hold the only hope for the poor and rich alike.

Democrats support innovation, but only if it emanates from DC. And yet, there in nothing in our history to suggest that they deliver.

The problem with the "experiment's innovation" is that is solely the intellectual property of progressives and Democrats. Nearly every step of the way we find the heavy hand of an intrusive and overbearing, if not cruel, federal and/or state government. Democrats and progressives are the ones that seek to keep people in their place by rigging the system so they can never rise above their current socioeconomic status and treat people like second-class citizens.

My final thoughts:

I generally do not like criticizing a fellow conservative Republican and/or his/her posts on their sites but I felt I had to say something about this particular anonymous contributor's post.

The anonymous poster's article that I have spent the better part of two hours writing about has nothing to do with conservatism or being Republican. In fact, it gives both conservatism and being Republican a bad name. It's those types of "experiments" that keep the Marxist, "fair share", class warfare promoters in business. It keeps progressives relevant because 1 post like this can undo years of hard work by conservatives and Republicans who are trying to change an image portrayed of them by Democrats, progressives, and their allies/associates in the mainstream media. We should all strive to uphold the principles that are Republican and conservative, not try to use progressive ideas to further our just cause.

Finally, on a personal note, as a Christian, as a conservative, as a Republican, as the Effingham Tea Party Co-Founder, as an elected official, and finally as a human being, I am thoroughly disgusted that such thought as stated in the anonymous post even still exists in America today. Such gross and blatant disregard for our common man has no place in society or modern political discourse. Go back and look at the events surrounding the French Revolution and see how the "First Estate" viewed the "Third Estate".

Obama Is Keeping You Poor

downstateiladvocate — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 01:48:55 GMT

President Obama said recently that a President running for re-election does not want high gas prices. It would seem that is the only reason he is opposed to high gas prices - himself.

To me, President Obama could care less whether we pay high gas prices. High gas prices fit in perfectly in his continual attempt at class warfare. High gas prices keep the poor poorer and allows President Obama to point out that the rich can afford the gas prices and that's not doing their fair share.

Also, the working poor who may or may not be getting government assistance are beaten down as they try to make ends meet or better themselves by an administration who has already depressed the economy and actually needs the working poor to stay poor or get poorer.

It's really a sick and twisted world liberals live in where they claim they fight for the poor, but do everything in their power to make people poorer and ensure that the poor stay on the government dole.

Take someone working minimum wage in Illinois. Let's say they are lucky enough to find a job working a full 40 hour work week. Let's examine how high gas prices hurt the working poor.

8 hrs @ $8.25 = $66.00 per shift

Now take the average vehicle's fuel tank at 17 gallons

17 gallons @ $3.89/gal (which it was in Effingham this past weekend) = $66.13

So the working poor just lost an entire shift's worth of wages and coupled with taxes taken out, actually lost money. Couple this with all the other bills, tax increases and other wonderful stuff our federal and state governments have thrown at us and it's amazing that anyone can afford to survive.

The problem is deeper though. I used the working poor as an example to get a reaction. So let's use another example. Those that work a second job as extra income to help pay the bills or put a kid through college. How many people do you know where the wife or the husband works a second job on the side full time or part time.

And it's not just gas prices. Because of QE1 and QE2, ethonal and higher fuel prices, inflation at the grocery has also gone up. Milk is approaching $5.00 a gallon as fast as gas is approaching $5.00 a gallon.

To those liberal reading this, no, you cannot just raise minimum wage and the problem will solve itself. Prices will then increase due to the increase in money available, cost of business, etc.

To solve these problems, we must start drilling in the US instead of relying on foreign oil. Simple. We have oil if the liberals would just let us get at it. In addition, our government must stop spending ourselves to oblivion. Printing money to pay off more loans from China causes a pain in our wallet as the dollar collapses and prices increase because of inflation (and in the case of oil, lack of supply vs high demand).

I'm getting sick and tired of watching people around me trying to make it in life only to have any rug they find to stand on ripped out from under them. There is nobody left to blame but one. Not Bush. Not Katrina. Not Iraq. Not China. Just one. President Obama.

I Want A Brokered Convention

downstateiladvocate — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 20:41:01 GMT

When I was taking education classes, they preached on and on about conflict resolution and compromise. They told us how to de-escalate confrontation so that the conflict between groups or individuals doesn't blow up into a larger conflict.

In our jobs, we are trained to defuse situations either as a manager or when we deal with customers. Don't escalate the situation because you will only make things worse.

Finally, in politics, we are told we must compromise. We are told that we must go with whoever is the most "electable". We have to pick whoever "appeals to the independents". Hard line stances on policy issues are taboo and labeled as divisive or being closed-minded. We see it happen every election in Illinois. Pick the guy or gal that the Chicago liberals want.

What's the result of all this conflict resolution and compromise?

We are left with a society that stands for nothing - hence the high level of "independents". God forbid we take a side in an issue or a party for that matter! We have been brow beaten into believing that any conflict is bad whether it's in our personal lives or an international conflict.

We, as Americans, have become a nation that goes with the flow. Whatever works as long as it doesn't effect me. We don't ruffle feathers because somebody's sensibilities might get hurt. We worry about saying the wrong thing in case somebody might get offended. We would rather go with the status quo than upend the apple cart. Risk is frowned upon, safe choices praised.

As a result, we get outcome based education in our schools, games like Duck, Duck, Goose and Musical Chairs are banned because kids might feel left out, football/baseball/basketball games with no scores so "everyone wins", businessmen not donating or getting involved because they worry about backlash to their business, politically correct language, refusing to publicly take a stand because friends or neighbors might get offended, etc. It used to be said that you don't talk politics or religion in a bar. Now, that same adage applies in our daily lives as people are scared to talk politics or religion in open society.

What happens when you compromise time and time again? We (conservatives and a nation) move just a bit more to the left. You see, it's not hard for the left to compromise because they basically get what they want knowing that the next time, they will get closer to their eventual goals. Conservatives on the other hand, cannot go back the next time because we already gave up ground to the left. There lies the problem.

If a teacher gives up a bit of control in the classroom to placate students, that teacher will never get that control back. Likewise, conservatives give up a little more each time, and we never get it back - ie center-right Supreme Court judges, moderate candidates, Romneycare, etc.

What does this have to do with a brokered convention? Everything.

Conservatives are being told right now that Mitt Romney is the most electable. Conservatives are being told that a conservative candidate cannot win against Barack Obama. Conservatives are being told that if the others in the GOP race don't get out, then we are hurting Mitt's chances and are only helping President Obama's re-election chances. Even in DC, a GOP led US House compromised with the President to raise the debt ceiling in exchange for the Keystone XL pipeline - and we all know how that has worked out. But we are supposed to keep compromising?

If everything was hunky-dory within the GOP and "independents" (God, I hate that term), then there would have been no Tea Party. If everything was fine in the GOP, then there would be less conservative candidates at this point of the game vying for the GOP nomination. If there was no problem within the GOP, then Tea Party candidates would not have beat GOP incumbents in primaries in 2010. If there wasn't a problem with the progressives, then those same GOP conservative candidates should have lost their elections.

For the longest time, conservatives have been told by the Beltway Boys, the Left Coast, and in Illinois the Collar County Crew that conservatives can't win. On the flip side, when their guy loses and the Democrat wins, it's also the conservatives' fault because we refused to compromise and support the moderate/liberal GOP candidate 100%. Time and time again, conservatives are treated like the step-child of the GOP. Even friends of conservatives who have made their money and reputations from expounding conservative ideas - like Ann Coulter - have drank the Mitt Romney kool-aid.

So I want to have that fight on the floor of the GOP convention in Tampa. I want a knock-down, drag out, cage match, last man standing war for the heart and soul of the Republican party. The establishment doesn't want that fight because of how it might look to the American public. The MSM media will go heads over heels in delight when it happens, but who cares about them?! A brokered convention isn't about them anyway. It's about the future of the GOP and the future of our country.

When we had a Presidential candidate in 2008 who was a squishy "walk across the aisle" type guy and the GOP now wants a candidate that is nothing more than Obama-Lite, what are conservatives to do other than pray for a brokered convention?

If the convention is brokered, the GOP could pick a candidate who is more conservative and someone that either wasn't on the ballot or someone who was on the ballot who dropped out. Remember, depending on the poll, roughly 70% of the GOP voters prefer someone other than Romney. That is why a brokered convention scares the GOP establishment. A brokered convention scares them more than what the MSM would say about it; it scares them more than what the independents would say about it. To lose control of the convention, the nominee, and ultimately the GOP itself scares the establishment GOP more than anything in this world. This nomination was supposed to be a cake walk for Mitt, and instead has turned into a gauntlet.

I want a brokered convention. Let's have the fight. Let's take the GOP back from the liberals and squishy moderates once and for all. Isn't that one of the goals of the Tea Parties anyway - to fight off progressivism and to reclaim the one party that - on paper - shares Tea Party ideals? Here's to a brokered convention.

Something Important About The Illinois Primary

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 14 Jan 2012 02:16:21 GMT

On March 20th, Illinois voters will head to the polls to vote in the Presidential Primary. In addition, many of us will cast votes in local primary races ranging from county board to coroner. However, one of the most important votes cast isn't for any of those races; it's for Precinct Committeeman.

One of the general criticisms of the Tea Parties is that they are very disconnected from each other and have generally failed to rally around a particular candidate or have split their support among a field of candidates. Hence the rise of Mitt Romney as the front runner and the others in the field splitting the other 75% of support.

Another criticism of the Tea Parties is their unwillingness to be absorbed into the Republican party or any party for that matter. They are staunchly conservative, but independent. This point has been both their benefit and their defeat. Staying independent has allowed the Tea Parties to largely operate outside of the normal political world while affecting elections to their liking in 2010. At the same time, the Tea Parties have failed to affect the Republican party leadership despite being instrumental in the takeover of the US House and other races.

There is a growing number of conservatives and Tea Partiers though that have recognized this problem of not affecting the Republican Party leadership at both the local and state level. As a result, these people have collected signatures on petitions within their respective voting precincts in order to be placed on the ballot on March 20th for a two year term as a Precinct Committeeman. An overwhelming majority - if not all - of those conservatives/Tea Partier Precinct Committeeman candidates you will find on the Republican ballot.

These people understand that in order to effectively affect change within the Republican Party, you must become a voting member within that party. Once a voting member of the Republican Party, these same conservatives/Tea Partiers can then help affect change at the leadership level.

Of course change won't happen overnight, but getting involved as a Precinct Committeeman is one of the important things you can do within the political world and voting for a Precinct Committeeman is one of the most important things you can do this upcoming Illinois Primary.

Unfortunately, the deadline for petitions to be on the March 20th ballot as a Precinct Committeeman has passed. But there is still hope for you! 28 days fter the Primary, your county Republican Party will meet for their County Convention to elect the new party leadership and only elected Precinct Committeemen can vote during this convention. After the County Convention, you can still step forward and ask to be appointed to any precinct that does not have a Precinct Committeeman elected to it. In this way, you can still affect the party through other ways since during the next 2 years, all Precinct Committeemen - both elected and appointed - can vote on party business at the county level. As a result, even though you missed the deadline to file, you still have an opportunity to make changes at the county level.

When March 20th comes around and you are in polling place casting a vote, make sure to check to see if there is a Precinct Committeeman running in your precinct. If there is someone running, then make sure you vote for him or her. If there isn't, then contact your county's Republican Chairman or another Precinct Committeeman (list available at your county clerk's office) to get involved.

If you are a Tea Partier, you must get involved in party politics, especially if you want the movement to survive longer than previous political movements before it. The machine that is party politics will leave the Tea Parties in the dust if the Tea Parties do not join in and attempt to take over the party machine. This Illinois Primary is your first chance to do just that. The next opportunity won't happen until 2014 - and pray it won't be too late by then. If the Tea Partiers don't get involved now, then they risk being nothing more than a blip on the map of political history like Soccer Moms, Reagan Democrats, etc.

To quote one of my favorite movies, "get busy livin' or get busy dyin'.".

The Scam of Higher (Lower) Education

downstateiladvocate — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 02:00:12 GMT

I may be stating the obvious, but 4 year universities and colleges are nothing more than scams designed to bleed the taxpayer of money and trick students into the idea they "need" to take and pass certain classes!

Mind you, I'm not taking issue so much with what is learned (though I have serious reservations about cherry picking information or skewing that knowledge taught from a liberal point of view). The courses you decide to take to achieve a degree within a chosen major are needed and the intro-major courses provide a scaffolding system for the student as the student advances through his or her major courses into more intense and narrower scoped classes within their major.

The scam of higher education begins with the "prerequisite" courses a student must take before that student can pursue their chosen major. For instance, the "general education" requirements at Eastern Illinois University include:

Humanities and Fine Arts	9 hours
Language	9 hours
Mathematics	3 hours
Scientific Awareness	7 hours
Social and Behavioral Sciences	9 hours
Senior Seminar	3 hours
TOTAL	40 hours

Of course the power that be that decided the "general education" requirements justify it as creating a well rounded, worldly minded student. Bunk. It's all about the money.

According to the EIU Financial Aid site it would costs a student, who lives on campus, $22,736.00 to attend one year at EIU @ 15 hours with a 12 meal plan in the dorms. If you live off campus, it will cost a student $14,194.00 per year (actually higher if you are a commuting student) less the costs of 12 meal plan/campus housing. For our purposes, let's just use the student living off campus as an example. The costs to a student just to get through 40 hours of "general education" @ $269.00 + fees per credit hour = $17,705.00 +/-.

One question I have is why are we being double taxed or triple taxed to pay for "general education" that should have been learned while a student was in high school? How are we double or triple taxed? Look at your property taxes - you pay a portion to your local school district and then you pay a portion to EIU and Lakeland. Then you are taxed on your state income which helps pay for higher education. Then your income is taxed at the federal level which some of it filters back to the universities or colleges. In addition, once enrolled at a university there are also activity fees, parking fees, book rental (at EIU students rent books instead of buying them), health services fee, etc. More money, more problems.

It's not my fault or your fault that a student is not prepared for college. It should not be our responsibility to reteach students what they need in order to do well in their major courses. It lessens the value of a college degree when students are taught, retaught, and then pursue their career chosen college classes. If a student can't write a paper when they get to college, they either need to learn how on their own real quick or maybe, **gasp**, they shouldn't be there in the first place? It's not our fault that a student's high school did not educate them correctly or the student didn't pay attention in class. If anyone can basically get a degree because they have been coddled and tutored the first 2 years of school (at considerable costs to the student and taxpayer) so they can make it in their chosen major classes, then what's the value of a Bachelor's degree? The value sure doesn't go up, but the cost of college always does.

I'm not that old, but I do remember a time when a college degree was something special. Your degree gave you an advantage over someone that didn't have a degree, and double that sentiment if you had a Master's degree. What happens to the value of a product or service when scarcity is no longer an issue? The value of that product or service goes down. Likewise, that principle transfers to a college degree but yet the costs associated with obtaining a less-valuable degree has gone up considerably. This is also a problem I have with "online universities", but that's a post for another day...

Furthermore, universities crank out degrees like Bill Maher cranks out stupid. If a certain major is a dying field or the job market is saturated, then universities should either limit how many they allow to major in that field or shut down the program altogether. But again, it's all about the money. Just because a student wants to major in something, doesn't mean the university should provide them the avenue to pursue such folly. As an example from a fantastic movie starring Jeremy Piven, Jon Favreau and David Spade called PCU:

Tom: What's he doin?
Droz: He's finishing his senior thesis. Pigman is trying to prove the Caine-Hackman theory. No matter what time it is, 24 hours a day, you can find a Michael Caine or Gene Hackman movie playing on TV.
Tom: That's his thesis?
Droz: Yes! That's the beauty of college these days, Tommy! You can major in Game Boy if you know how to bullshit.

Some might argue that it's a free country and if my kid wants to get a worthless degree in underwater basket weaving, then that's his or her right. I guess you can study, or do anything you want, but that doesn't mean the tax payers have to pay for it or provide a vehicle for your kid to be eventually unemployed (thereby costing tax payers more money).

It is beyond belief that it takes 4 or more years to get a degree because it should take only 2 at the most 3 to achieve a degree. When a student attends a university, the student should be placed directly in their chosen major courses. If they make it, great! If they sink, perhaps a university isn't for them - there is junior college though.

Junior colleges offer a 2 year degree where students do take general education courses and either graduate with an associates degree or then continue on to a 4 year university. Why are universities offering the same courses as junior colleges? Better yet, if universities and junior colleges are going offer the same courses, WHY DON'T ALL COURSES TRANSFER?!?!

That's right. Let's say you attend Lakeland, don't get an associates degree but decide after 2 years at Lakeland you want to go directly to EIU. Some of your courses will not transfer, and you will be forced to retake the same courses at EIU. Furthermore, if I attend EIU and decide after 3 years that I want to finish up my degree at SIUC or any other 4 year university, guess what....not all of your classes will transfer, if any do at all. Once arriving at your new university, you will have to retake courses you already took at EIU. So the scam for more money continues.

To continue, if I take courses at EIU but I can't fit one class or another into my schedule but Lakeland teaches the classes and is actually a class that transfers, one would think I could dual enroll, transfer my credit from Lakeland up to EIU to speed up the process towards graduation. Wrong. I used to be able to dual enroll, but universities have gotten wise and now if they find you have dual enrolled, the credit taken at the other institution will not transfer regardless if it would have transferred if you were only enrolled at the junior college. Money.

But it gets better! In order to graduate from EIU, a student has to take a senior seminar - that'll basically cost an extra $1000. If you transfer to EIU, a student has to reach "institutional residency" which means a student has to take a minimum of 30 hours at EIU to graduate.

Every step of the way, the student and the tax payer gets bled just a little more.

By allowing QUALIFIED students to attend universities and achieve their degree in less time also ensures they will have less student loan debt (not getting into that argument here) when they graduate. If a student has less debt, then they have more money to spend. If the graduate has more money to spend, then the economy benefits. And so on and so on.

As a result, we are left with archaic institutions of learning that are more concerned with ensuring our students are classically ~~indoctrinated~~ educated liberals, retaught in the finest education that our tax dollars can buy and pass out degrees like ice cream. It's redistribution of wealth - education style - and our universities are failing miserably. I can tell you horror stories of senior level students I had classes with that either could not write a coherent sentence or could not arrange the English language into a coherent sentence while speaking.

Our politicians are so concerned about reforming public education at the high school level they have completely ignored universities. I'm sure the heavily unionization of universities has nothing to do with the lack of reform in any way shape or form...

Our university system must be reformed. Dropping "general education" requirements and allowing transfer of credits from institution to institution without penalty would be a great places to start.

The Battle For The Republican Party

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 07 Jan 2012 01:42:19 GMT

Much has been made online and within the MSM about the conservative vs liberal (and moderate) wings/candidates of the Republican party during this Presidential GOP primary election.

On one side - the liberal or Massachusetts Moderate - we have Mitt Romney. On the other side, we have the rest trying to pit themselves as the poster child for conservatism (and the word "conservative" seems to be open to debate and interpretation this year as well).

I think this GOP primary is shaping up to be something more though, something that the Democratic Party had to go through in 2008 - Old Guard vs New Guard or better yet Old Establishment vs New Establishment.

Let me define "establishment" in these terms for our purposes here as those that are in a position of power within the party structure.

This thought first came to me awhile ago, but I was reminded about it and made more of a connection when John McCain endorsed Mitt Romney. This endorsement was really no surprise and in fact, I wrote a piece detailing that Mittens was actually McCain Version 2012.

McCain's endorsement coupled with the endorsement of former President George HW Bush and the less than tacit snubbing of TX Gov. Rick Perry there is a power struggle within the GOP (carried out almost daily on Fox News anytime Karl Rove opens his mouth). In effect, it's the Bush wing vs. all challengers to the Bush legacy.

We saw the same thing playing out in 2008 and since - the Clintons vs all challengers to the Clinton legacy.

As former Presidents, both Clinton and the Bushes, had the opportunity to place their supporters and loyalists in positions within their respective parties. Both the Clintons and the Bushes continued to shape their parties until someone came along to knock them off the proverbial hill. In the Clintons' case, it was Barack Obama's hostile takeover of the Democratic Party and when President Obama leaves office, his loyalists will control the Democratic Party until someone unseats the Obamaites' chosen successor(s). Right now, Obamaites have already fanned out across the country to lay the ground work to stay in power within the Democratic Party. Mayor Tiny Dancer in Chicago is a prime example of this, much like how Clintonites Bill Richardson ran for governor, Hilary ran for Senate, etc.

Likewise, we see this same situation taking place during the GOP primary. The Bushes, with their preferred candidate John McCain of 2008, have tried to crown their successor through Mitt Romney. Mittens will of course promote his people into positions of power, but those people will be aligned with the Bush wing.

Hence, we see one of the roots of the conservative vs moderate/liberal problem within the GOP just like we saw the battle between the center-left vs far left in the 2008 Democratic primary. The non-Mitt candidates represent varying different variations of conservatism different than George W Bush "conservatism". We have Reagan Republicans, Libertarian Republicans, and Clinton Era Republicans vs Bush Republicans.

I know I am working in grand generalizations here, but it's a working thesis. I would ask you to pay attention to who the pundits and commentators are talking up or down. Right now, it seems Mittens is largely getting pass from the conservative intelligentsia while these same critics are pointing out how Candidate X or Candidate Y doesn't have the money, doesn't appeal enough to independents, didn't make the correct speech, etc.

We are left with a power struggle for the GOP that could ultimately result in Obama's re-election.

Why Are We Tolerating Carpetbagging?

downstateiladvocate — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 13:00:00 GMT

It's a redistricting year which means all precincts, County Board districts, State Representative, State Senator, and US House districts are all redrawn to reflect the findings from the decennial census.

Sometimes, as a result of redistricting, a sitting US House member or sitting State Senator or Representative might find themselves on the other side of the fence a district they represent once the district lines have been redrawn.

As a result, this predicament places those redistricted incumbents into a precarious situation - retire or run in a sometimes partially or fully brand new district.

There's a word for those that decide to move to a district from a different district, in an attempt to make it easier to get elected or re-elected - carpetbagging. Generally, outside of a redistricting year, the voting populace usually has no stomach for people moving into a district last minute to run for office or for someone living outside of a district to run in a district where a candidate does not reside.

Since it is a redistricting year, the rules change a little bit for state offices**. Simply put (or not), anyone can run in any district as long as they move into the district they are wanting to represent by the time they run for re-election the next election after a redistricting year. So, if you win a IL House seat in 2012, you must move in district by 2014 or if you win a IL Senate you would have to move in district in 2014 or 2016, depending on which straw you draw since IL Senate terms are broken up into 2 year-4 year-4 year terms (or 4-4-2 or 4-2-4).

The quandary we find ourselves as constituents of the newly drawn IL 54th Senate District is that our sitting Republican State Senator Kyle McCarter is finding himself challenged by a fellow Republican, State Senator and Deputy Minority Leader John O Jones. Prior to 2012, McCarter basically represented the western portion of Effingham County and Jones represented the southern portion of the county (State Sen. Dale Righter - whom we are losing as a result of the redistricting currently represents the north/northeastern part of Effingham County).

My contention is why do we tolerate carpetbagging during redistricting years? It's not our fault that an elected official was drawn out of his or her district by political dealings or other means. In the case of McCarter versus Jones though, we are left scratching or head even more as to why this race is tolerated by the constituents of the IL 54th Senate district.

You see, John O Jones was not drawn out of a district, but rather his district radically changed. Instead of stretching basically from southern Effingham County south through Jefferson County (Mt. Vernon) where Sen. Jones lives, his new district would have stretched from Jefferson County west towards the Mississippi River, then south from there.

Instead, and in my opinion, to punish Sen. McCarter for not playing nicely with IL GOP leadership in the Senate - you know, they kind of frown on independent conservative thinkers in Springfield - Sen. Jones decided to run in a district that he DOES NOT LIVE IN - like the IL 54th Senate district.

If Jones were to win the primary and then the general election AND if Jones were to draw the long straw, he could live in Mt. Vernon and not have to move into district for 3 years...if he decided to run for re-election that is. If for instance, he draws the long straw for a 4 year term and decides not to run for re-election, we would have a State Senator that would not live in district for 4 years. What incentive would Jones have to represent the 54th district if he doesn't live there? We are supposed to trust that he would represent the 54th district as virulently as he has his current district? I'm a trusting soul, but not that trusting. I believe we need someone that lives in district to represent us in Springfield.

Why do we tolerate this? Sen Jones could easily run in the district that encompasses where he lives but instead, decided to run against Sen. McCarter. Carpetbagging is the highest form of a politician being a self-centered. The fact that he or she would have the gall to think they are so important to a district that a district and its constituents just cannot live without them is appalling to me.

We would not tolerate carpetbagging any other election year, why now? What's different? In short, absolutely nothing and we should treat such behavior in the same way - DON'T VOTE FOR CARPETBAGGERS OR SEN. JONES!

** (US House rules don't change during redistricting since according to the US Constitution, one must only reside in the state where the district located or in other words, it is within the realm of possibility to have a US Representative live in the state but outside a district he or she represents in Washington DC.)

Newt Is Like Newt, Nobody Else

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 16:50:40 GMT

Recently, Steven F. Hayward at National Review wrote a piece comparing and contrasting Newt Gingrich to Winston Churchill on two different points - personal faults kept/keeping both men from higher office and whether or not both men had/has learned from history. Although Hayward's piece is an interesting read, it is based on false historical analytical assumptions.

As a student of history, we are taught that we should not practice "presentism" or the practice of imposing history on today's events. We hear such presentism every day on the news whether it's a school shooting being described as a "Columbine type" shooting or a disaster being compared to Katrina. We also hear it from politicians or pundits comparing today to some event in the past like "the worst economy since the 1970s". We do it ourselves as well. Presentism is used to help connect today's events to a shared history or a shared time period or person in history and to help explain what is taking place today, but can lead the reader or viewer to a false interpretation of correlation-causation relationship.

We have to first understand that each event in history is unique time, place, and set of circumstances, so to compare one event to another is a misnomer. Likewise, to compare one person in history to another is fun, but is also based in the same historical untruths.

Knowing what we know now about the basic tenet of historical analysis, let's deconstruct Hayward's piece comparing one of the greatest statesmen in modern history - Winston Churchill - with Newt Gingrich.

First, Winston Churchill's faults as Hayward points out and believes - "his resolute stubbornness, his unconstrained and unpredictable imagination and occasional recklessness" kept Churchill from high office and also contributed to Churchill being distrusted by his own Conservative Party. Yes, Churchill was a stubborn man, but what got Churchill in trouble was his insistence that England take a hard stance against an emerging Adolf Hitler in Germany - which stemmed from Churchill's own military service and time as Minister of Defense - while the government and people still had fresh memories of leaving an entire generation in Flanders' Mud. Churchill also made a political miscalculation by picking the wrong side during Edward VII's abdication of the throne. In addition, Churchill did not always tote the party line, even as he became that party's leader. Churchill had friends, but he had just as many enemies.

Comparing Gingrich's economic "radical change" and past leadership to Churchill's defense of the economic status quo (he would lose reelection to Prime Minister to a Clement Atlee of the Labour Party who ran on a platform of socialist programs that plunged England into a democratic-socialist government until Margaret Thatcher's rollback of those programs) and Churchill's wartime leadership is incorrect. I would hope that if Newt Gingrich is the GOP nominee, that he too would not fall victim a head of government who has instituted several democratic-socialist programs.

Second, did Churchill or Gingrich learn from history? In a nutshell, no. Have both men used their experiences as a tool to leadership? Yes. Churchill used his experience as a military veteran and his experience in the government during World War I to sound an unheard alarm regarding events unfolding on the European mainland and to lead England during World War II. Gingrich, on the other hand, has used his experience as Speaker of the House to find compromises and hammer out a plan of action, including working with the opposition to enact his agenda and believes he can bring that experience to the White House.

Historical comparison is a dangerous game to play - like President Obama ranking himself as the fourth most accomplished President in just two years, ranking himself behind LBJ, FDR, and Lincoln. Arrogance to the point of megalomania to say the least. LBJ dealt with a country seriously divided along racial lines and divided over Vietnam. FDR dealt with an economic crisis not seen since the Crash of 1920. Lincoln dealt with a country literally and figuratively divided. Obama has accomplished nothing except dividing a nation whereas it can be argued that LBJ, FDR and especially Lincoln, did what they could to unite or reunite a nation.

Comparing Winston Churchill and Newt Gingrich to each other is like comparing apples and oranges while the circumstances of those apples and oranges are miles apart. Presentism is a road we, Steven Hayward, and especially President Obama should rarely travel down.

Link Card Fraud In Illinois

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 04:16:46 GMT

Over the last few years, our good friends over at Republicanreporter.com have highlighted the abuses of a system set up to help those that actually need it. Unfortunately, there are those in Illinois that think the Link Card program is their own playground to use and abuse at will - at the taxpayers' expense.

The Republican Reporter has once again landed an exclusive pinpointing yet another fraudulent use of the Link card system here in Illinois. I strongly encourage you to read the article, then take some antacid and some high blood pressure medication.

Link Card Fraud Exclusive via RepublicanReporter.com

Romney Plays It Safe With Newt

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:57:13 GMT

It's no secret that Newt Gingrich is a huge fan of Lincoln-Douglas style debates. Newt loves a good debate and quite frankly can destroy anyone he would go up against. So when a Lincoln-Douglas debate was proposed between Romney and Gingrich, Romney declined.

Romney's refusal may come off as running scared against Gingrich or "playing out the clock", but in reality, it's a smart move.

I remember working for the Patrick Hughes campaign for US Senate. Along with others in the race, now Senator Mark Kirk refused to debate any of the GOP US Senate candidate. Debates were held, but Mark Kirk was a no show. At the time, I raged about Kirk refusing to leave his ivory tower to debate my candidate - or any other of the candidates for that matter. On the practical side, if you are the front runner, why debate? You have nothing to prove, only something to lose.

As with Mark Kirk, Mitt Romney is in the same position. Newt is on top of the polls right now, but over the last 2 months, we have seen no less than 3 different candidates rise to the top only to fall as quickly as they rose. Meanwhile, Romney remains solid with his 20-24% polling. Gingrich is now on top, but for how long? Why would Romney expose his campaign to Gingrich?

Don't get me wrong. I am a full time member of the "anyone but Mitt" movement and I would love to see Newt debate Mitt. To see Newt call into question Romney's backtracking, flip-flopping, less than conservative ways would be well worth the price of admission. I'm just saying Romney refusing to debate Newt is smart politics given the fluid nature of the GOP leaders.

Such is politics. It's not always what we want or want to see happen but you have to see it for what it is - a contest to outlast your opponent.

Is Sarah Palin Still Relevant?

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:20:22 GMT

Sarah Palin jumped onto the scene in late 2008 as the VP nominee. She was a straight talking, brash, take no prisoners type of politican. Palin was targeted relentlessly by the left in an effort to destroy her politically, and possibly even personally - which continued even after the 2008 election.

She continued to influence the GOP via the 2010 midterm elections by raising money for her PAC and being one of the voices of the Tea Party. Of course she caught flak for "targets" on certain districts on her website - especially after the Gabby Giffords shooting. Needless to say, Palin is no stranger to controversy, contrived or otherwise.

But now we sit in 2011. In the course of less than a year, we have seen the Tea Party influence begin to wane, though they are still a force to be reckoned with politically. We also have a GOP primary to concern ourselves with as well. However, the question I want to examine is whether or not Sarah Palin is still relevant to the 2011 election cycle. Will she hurt or help the eventual GOP nominee? What role will she eventually play in 2012?

Palin has spent the last 2 years attempting to establish herself as the conservative kingmaker in GOP politics. In the year leading up to the 2010 elections, at the height of the Tea Party, many candidates for office on the federal level running as conservatives seemed to covet the opportunity to kiss Palin's ring to gain her endorsement.

That was then, this is now. One year is a lifetime in politics. Now, Palin is nearly a nightly event on either Greta or Hannity. She's on TV as much as Karl Rove these days, but like Karl Rove, she has yet to say anything different or groundbreaking other than to add commentary on different GOP candidates or rightfully criticize President Obama. I have to apologize, but when I listen to Sarah or Karl I don't feel like I know more afterwards than before they started opining.

Palin still has a very vocal and strong following among certain corners of the GOP (whom I am sure I'll here from because of this post). I'm not trying to be insulting here towards Palin, but she comes off to me as this generation's version of Ron Paul - only sane. Their followers are similar - passionate, devoted, and willing to defend until the bitter end. Nothing wrong with that per se, loyalty in politics is a rare thing.

Which brings me to relevance. Is Palin's endorsement really all that important going into 2012? Do the GOP candidates have to kiss her ring this time around? I'm not convinced. I believe that Palin has lost some of her punch as a kingmaker or being able to influence the GOP at large. Her unfavorables are fairly high based on the last time I could find polling about her - 32% favorable, 62% unfavorable.

Perhaps Palin's relevance hit a peak this past summer when she led the media around the country as she stopped at different US historical sites. Each speech she gave was half-way covered by the media just in case the announcement to run for President came - but it never did - leaving the MSM to scratch their head wondering what just happened. Her supporters wept and gnashed their teeth and did everything in their power to draft Palin or convince her to reconsider - to no avail.

Has the ship sailed on Palin? She declined to run for President instead deciding to stay on the sidelines to help defeat President Obama. Others have done the same from Mitch Daniels to Chris Christie, but both Daniels and Christie are not perceived must-have endorsements. As time ticks closer to the Iowa Caucus and the New Hampshire primary, I believe her relevance in 2012 diminishes without her endorsing anyone. After Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada,and Florida, will her endorsing anyone really matter anyway? The GOP field should be whittled down by a few candidates by that point anyway. Besides, isn't that the point of endorsements? To gain enough support to push the other candidates out of the race or create a perception of inevitability of one candidate over another?

What if Palin does endorse - given her high unfavorable rating - does she hurt or help the GOP candidate she endorses? If a candidate - at this time Newt Gingrich - can rise within the polls, maintain the lead, and win at least one of the early primaries, does Palin's endorsement matter, again, leading to whether she is relevant. At the same time, a Palin endorsement could hurt the perceived frontrunner as the MSM would have the ammo to run stories about how the "radical" Palin has endorsed a fellow "radical" so on and so on .

On the other hand, maybe Palin is smarter than the average bear. Palin protected her relevance/influence when didn't endorse Bachmann as Bachmann rose and fell in the polls. Palin didn't endorse Perry as he rose and self-destructed. Palin didn't endorse Cain as he rose fast and fell just as hard. Palin also hasn't endorsed the other candidates - Paul, Santorum, Huntsman, Romney or Gingrich.

Today, as I write this, a Palin endorsement in my opinion is about a 50/50 help/hurt chance. One just never knows how such an endorsement will be perceived by voters - which will be the real test of Palin's relevance and ultimately, her continued influence within the GOP. We know how such an endorsement will be handled by the MSM and the left attack machine (is there really a difference?).

To sum up, I feel Palin has lost some of her influence among the GOP voters. I believe her relevance in the GOP primary race lessens each day as the political world goes on without her blessing one candidate or another. Finally, in a real threat to Palin's relevance, influence, and another test on her base supporters, what if Palin came out and endorsed Romney? Whatever happens, at this point in the ball game a "none of the above" answer is unacceptable.

Illinois Straw Poll Results In Continued Failure

downstateiladvocate — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 18:34:06 GMT

This past week, the Illinois GOP has been running their online straw poll to determine who the Illinois Republican voters like in the GOP primary for President. Yesterday, November 5th, the Illinois GOP also had multiple locations in Illinois where people could walk in and vote in the straw poll as well. To cast a ballot, a voter only had to provide a minimum $5 donation. The results after 3,649 votes cast?

1. Ron Paul wins the online straw poll

2. Mitt Romney wins the walk-in straw poll.

3. The Illinois GOP loses again.

I have long detailed the failures of the Illinois GOP but the straw poll just seems to keep that losing streak alive.

Regarding the online poll, are we surprised that Ron Paul would win? I'm not. The Paulites have a long tradition of stuffing the ballot box and here we have yet another example. Seriously Illinois GOP? An online straw poll? Did they expect different results? The straw poll couldn't have been solely about raising money since the buy-in to the straw poll was set so low so I guess we should chalk it up to incompetence.

Regarding the walk-in straw poll, to my knowledge most of the polling stations were in northern Illinois which accounts for Romney getting the most votes at 35% but Cain, despite the ongoing Politico crap shoot, came in with 29% of the vote.

So why is this straw poll a failure for the Illinois GOP? Outside the Ron Paul ballot stuffing, it was a failure because the Illinois GOP continues to list like a sinking ship as it slowly takes on water before its inevitable demise.

The Illinois GOP continues to put their stock in "activism" through phone calls via Illinois Victory and doing PR stunts like straw polling. It's great, grand and wonderful that Illinois Victory "identified" the most voters than any other state that ran similar programs or that more people voted in the the Illinois GOP straw poll than other large electoral college voting states that conducted their own straw polls. But what did it accomplish other than a news headline and possibly a bragging point for not one, but two candidates? Isn't one of the goals of a straw poll to find one winner?

On November 28th in Illinois, the filing period for petitions to be Precinct Committeman. Has the Illinois GOP tried to recruit people? No. I have not heard a single word from IL GOP Chair Pat Brady - publicly - about Precinct Committeemen. Nothing. In fact, when I met with Pat Brady at the Illinois State Fair GOP Day, he stated to the group of Tea Party leaders present that he believed that the PC doing GOTV is going to the wayside because of online outlets such as Twitter and Facebook.

Nothing beats boots on the ground. Nothing. You can Twitter and Facebook all day long and it either gets lost in the noise or your message doesn't reach a large enough audience. This "strategy" also relies on everyone you are trying to contact being a member of some sort of online community.

But everyone does physically live in a real world community and therefore they can be reached by the PC knocking on their door to inform them about a candidate and/or to remind them to vote. The Illinois GOP doesn't seem to want or care about informing voters or GOTV, just identifying them. The Illinois GOP strategy of voter ID can be summed up like this:

That's their idea of getting people to vote. Furthermore it's apparent that the Illinois GOP leadership thinks that we will turn into Chris Farley when PCs do GOTV...

I have three stories of successful GOTV campaigns. The candidate didn't always win, but if this effort was multiplied across Illinois and within other states we could make a serious difference.

1. Bill Brady (R) vs Pat Quinn (D) Illinois Governor race 2010. Bill Brady lost by just shy of 20,000 votes. In my county, my girlfriend and just a handful of others walked door to door in each precinct for Brady and to GOTV. The result? Our county had a 58% turnout in an off year election with Brady winning by the second largest percentage than any county in the entire state.

2. Judge Doug Jarman. Running for Circuit Judge against a candidate who was related to and shared the same last name as the long serving retiring incumbent which equaled strong name ID. Jarman did not have as strong name ID as his opponent. We used Illinois Victory to try GOTV via phone calls but most callers would not give us a hard answer as to which judge candidate they preferred (a serious flaw within the Illinois Victory strategy) and actually seemed a bit insulted we were asking (a huge flaw in the Illinois Victory strategy). So we went door to door distributing literature and reminding people to vote. We walked our city's Halloween parade and we were able to distribute over 3500 pieces of literature for Judge Jarman. The results? Judge Jarman won his 9 county election with our county returning a considerable higher percentage of votes for him than any of the 9 counties in his circuit.

3. My city council election. I had some name ID because of our Tea Party efforts in town, but I was not running and did not run as the "Tea Party candidate". I ran solely on the issues. Our city council is an at-large bid so GOTV was important to success. My girlfriend (also doubling as my beautiful campaign manager) led the GOTV effort for my election as I was tight for time because I was doing my student teaching at the same time as running for office. We sat down and identified which precincts had turned out the largest number of voters the last city council elections and we targeted those precincts with our door to door campaign. The result? I won and I saw first hand the election result difference between the precincts we walked versus the precincts we didn't. GOTV was singlehandedly the deciding factor in my victory.

Why the Illinois GOP continues to waste time with PR stunts as straw polling instead of recruiting PCs so that we have our ground game in place is beyond me. Perhaps the Illinois GOP is stuck in a loser mentality and needs a shake-up at the top. Or perhaps we should make sure we are on the ballot to be Precinct Committeemen so we can snatch victory from the grasp of defeat because of the Illinois GOP leadership.

If you live in Illinois, November 28th - December 5th is the filing period for Precinct Committeemen. If you live out of Illinois, get on the ballot to be a Precinct Committeeman!

Northbound and Down

downstateiladvocate — Fri, 21 Oct 2011 04:30:07 GMT

One of my favorite movies is Smokey and the Bandit. In that movie, Jerry Reed played Snowman, a trucker who the Bandit played by Burt Reynolds ran as blocker while they bootlegged a load of Coors to Georgia from Texas. Reed also wrote a song called Eastbound and Down that was featured in Smokey and the Bandit about what else? Truck driving.

The trucking industry is near to my heart. My grandfather was a OTR trucker with Smith Transportation in Louisville, KY and then ran local for a company in Effingham, IL. He started driving truck shortly after exiting the Army after WWII and drove truck until about 1995/6 before he finally retired. I also know many, many truck drivers because of work and I have had plenty of conversations with them about issues facing the trucking industry and as truck drivers.

Drivers seem to be under attack at every turn whether it's DOT regulations or at weigh stations. I just recently talked with a driver that got hit up crossing the California border who was forced to pay $75 for a piece of tubing (along with every other truck in line) during a check, and when he asked for a receipt he was told that would cost him another $75. Other drivers have been fined thousands of dollars for loads that were just slightly overweight - despite having nothing to do with loading the trailer.

Since the economy took a hit, drivers have seen their expenses go up but independent drivers are seeing loads pay less today than a few years ago doing the same run. The repairs alone on a big rig will set you back thousands of dollars, which in itself could be considered highway robbery.

Now, drivers have to contend with Mexican truck drivers being allowed to enter deep in the US because of that wonderful treaty (sarcasm) NAFTA. I understand the benefits of free trade, but I believe free trade only works with countries with similar economies and pay scale. Free trade with countries like Mexico only hurt the US worker.

Unfortunately, the US does not really have a choice in the matter of letting Mexican drivers into the US because treaties have the force of law and Mexico has threatened to take us to the World Trade Organization because the US is violating the agreement. If this issue were to go the WTO, we would most likely lose the case and the WTO would force the US to comply or risk facing fines and sanctions against US products with WTO participating countries.

Of course the unions want to make this issue about them as Hoffa Jr has been been trying get this provision of NAFTA stopped at the 11th hour. Hoffa Jr has seen his numbers of members dwindle to about 12% of the trucking and warehouse industry in 2009. The trucking unions have already been taking a hit, especially with the revamping of the auto industry. Union members have had to take concessions to keep their jobs while others have seen their companies go bankrupt completely. However, the Mexican trucker entering the US has more to do with the non-union company driver and the independent than the union drivers.

Right now, the better paid company drivers get between 32 and 40 cents a mile based on experience, company and record. The union drivers that I know get about $1.00 a mile, plus benefits including 100% paid health insurance - and that is down from 5 years ago. The independent driver can earn more or less than the company driver depending on the distance of the load and who their broker is, but having to do their own repairs and pay for gas and lodging. I talked with a driver not too long ago that told me his load paid $1200 but by the time he was done with gas and lodging he was expecting to get $400. Yet another driver told me that after a load he recently took, he would actually be losing money.

Mexican drivers coming into the US will depress the earnings of US drivers as they will be running for much less than what the US driver gets paid. What is stopping shipping companies in the US from contracting with Mexican drivers would will make the runs for much less than a US driver? Nothing. As a result, we may see almost 100,000 drivers lose their jobs as a result of Mexican truckers entering the US.

Because of NAFTA, the US drivers will be forced to do one of two things - find a different line of work or work for less to compete for loads.

In addition, we have to take into consideration the safety of the Mexican driver, the condition of their equipment, and their willingness to follow federal rules regarding the trucking industry (ie mandatory restarts).

I have a further problem of letting foreign nationals en masse into the US. What is to say that we won't see an epidemic of Mexican drivers abandon their loads once they get into the US knowing full well our federal government no has a policy of not deporting illegal aliens? I know it's speculative, but US policy makers have to take this into consideration.

Furthermore, what recourse do US citizens have against Mexican trucking companies if a qualified or unqualified Mexican company driver causes an accident, injury or death on the US highways? There is no incentive or guarantee that a Mexican trucking company would pay damages if held liable in a US court.

While union drivers see themselves under assault, it really is the other 88% of non-union workers within the trucking and warehouse industry that are under assault with this provision of NAFTA.

In a few days, we will have Mexican truck drivers traveling our US highway system within the deep parts of our nation.

Let's check back in a year or so and see how enforcing NAFTA fully has affected the trucking industry. Until then, I guess it's northbound and down instead of eastbound and down.

Raising Cain

downstateiladvocate — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 23:35:28 GMT

Herman Cain has seen his candidacy ascend to the top or near the top of many national polls. Cain is a candidate that is outside the Beltway and is quintessentially the "outsider" as everyone else has held public office either as Governor or in Congress.

With Cain's rise in the polls, so comes the attacks - both personal and on policy.

Al Sharpton and MSNBC especially have been relentless in trying to paint Herman Cain as a sell-out, "house negro", and other terms that I just don't feel comfortable writing here, but MSNBC has no problem airing. But that's a post for another day.

The attacks on Cain are also centered at his 9-9-9 plan. Are there problems with the 9-9-9 plan? Yes, but to me, Cain is the only one so far that has had the guts to stand up on a stage and challenge the current tax system. Even if 9-9-9 will never be implemented, we could have a President in Cain that is at least willing to revise a broken system instead of playing the budget shell game that Washington DC plays now. Cain is also a skilled mathematician which helps when doing budgets and dealing with our complicated tax system.

Cain also speaks plainly and doesn't use the Beltway coached Romneyspeak. To me, it's Cain's race to lose, despite the media and Conventional Wisdom saying it's Romney's to lose.

Bachmann has never been able to gain traction from Iowa and her comments stating that the HPV vaccination causes mental retardation and stating that Cain's 9-9-9 plan was actually 6-6-6, she's done but doesn't know it yet or doesn't get it.

Santorum is running on social issues - and that about sums up his candidacy right there.

Huntsman is a guy running against Obama but yet Huntsman found it perfectly acceptable to work for Obama as Ambassador to China. Huntsman is left of Romney. Actually, I think Hunstman would be running for President as a Democrat if Obama wasn't in office now.

Gary Johnson. If you're asking yourself "who?", then you are like the rest of the GOP primary voters.

Ron Paul. As Cain said on Jay Leno, "grumpy old man".

Gingrich is also seeing a bit of rise in the polls. I think this comes from his debate skills, but whether or not the general voter can get past his past, is another question. Newt, in my humble opinion, is the smartest guy in the room.

Perry. Did you hear that giant sucking sound? That sound is Perry's much anticipated (by myself included) campaign going down the toilet. Bad debater and proves that just because they like you in your state, does not mean other people are going to like you. See Gary Johnson.

Romney. Rino, period. Flip-flopper.

Last night at the 3rd Annual Effingham County Republican Fall Festival, I was able to sign Herman Cain's petition to be on the ballot in Illinois. If you get a chance to, I would highly recommend signing his petition as well.

Until then, check out Herman Cain for yourself.

#Occupywallstreet: The Unwashed Left

downstateiladvocate — Sat, 08 Oct 2011 03:59:19 GMT

In the news lately are the wannabe hippies protesting banks and corporations down at Wall Street in New York. Some of the protests have spread to other cities, although it seems though that other than the protesters are angry at the banks and corporations they have no idea about what to do once they get to the protest. Other protests in other cities seem to have leaders, but the organizers don't seem to have a plan once everyone shows up. Of course, where there is a protest against corporate "greed", you can bet SEIU and the other unions will be there as well (see previous link).

What is on display in New York is not a grassroots effort to change the business climate or the way that businesses conduct business, but what is on display is the left's values - redistribution of wealth, and refusing to work for what you want.

With the Occupy Wall Street protesters, we get to see the left's ties to socialism which is and always has been the basis for the progressive movement since it found its ways to our shores towards the turn of the last century.

In New York at least, the organizers stated what they want with their 13 demands.

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Ah yes, the classic free trade argument, just like how the United Nations is supposed to be teach all those cocoa farmers to grow coffee? Because that's worked out so well. Free trade only works between countries of comparable economies, ie Canada and the US, not between countries of differing economies, ie US and Mexico.

Twenty dollars an hour minimum wage. What the amateur redistributionist economists at Occupy Wall Street don't understand is that when minimum wage is raised, two things happen 1) inflationary pressure drives up prices, so shortly that $20 an hour won't buy what it did when it was first raised, and 2) companies are not going to raise their current wages in proportion to the rise in the minimum wage. I know this last one first hand. I remember working at RR Donnelley and Sons in Mattoon when the minimum wage went up. I was earning $10.50 an hour and a minimum wage increase had just passed. I asked my supervisor if we would see an increase in our pay to reflect the change; he stated no. As a result, I lost about $1.o0 worth of buying power I had over those working lesser paying jobs because of the increase.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Obamacare, I get it. Don't get too attached to it whiners because thanks to Harry Reid if the GOP takes the Senate, keeps the House, and takes the Presidency, the GOP only has to change the rules of the Senate and we can repeal Obamacare outright with a simple majority vote. Precedent, the double edged sword.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Living wage. What is considered a living wage? Ricardo's Iron Law of Wages does not apply in the United States. Are there jobs that are underpaid? Sure, but that's only because somebody is willing to do the job. If there wasn't somebody to fill the position, then either the businessman must do it himself or must increase his wages in order to attract somebody to fill the needed position. That's the dirty secret is wages operate on the principle of supply and demand.

Regardless of employment? There is a difference between jobs, and there should be a difference between pay. I have a hard time believing somebody flipping burgers would get paid enough to make a mortgage payment, car payment and send kids through school. I guess it could be done, but I hope you like paying $25 for a Whopper or $70 for that double mocha latte.

Demand four: Free college education.

A good college education which some of the protesters could seriously need - besides, they'd fit right in with the leftist political science and economic departments. Free though? College is not a human right. But this starts getting down to the gritty details of the protestors. They want what others have, and they want it for free - or at least make somebody else pay for it other than them. They want to redistribute wealth and while they are at it, they want to redistribute education. The protesters could get a free education, but that would mean having to join one of their most hated institutions - the Armed Forces. It's called the GI Bill.

Despite what Dave Ramsey says, college loans are a fact of life in my humble opinion. I have them, many of my friends have them, and it's very hard to pay for college outright. That's not to say it can't be done, but it's very difficult to raise $10,000 or more either per year or semester depending on which college or university you might attend. I wonder if the protesters are also pushing for equal opportunity to the top colleges. I wonder how the liberals at Harvard or Yale would like that demand? Can you imagine the sons and daughters of the liberal elite hobnobbing with the common folk? Might be interesting to see...

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

The evil oil corporations. Or is it the environment? Like it or not, without fossil fuels, we might as well go back to the days before the Industrial Revolution while other countries like China continue to grow. By the way, if Bush was in bed with Halliburton and the left consistently makes mention of that (even 3 years after Bush left office), why no outcry by the same idiots regarding Obama and Solyndra? Third World status, here we come!

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Is Maxine Waters writing this list for the Occupy Wall Streeters? This demand sounds eerily familiar to something she said just recently. Somehow I don't see the protesters taking jobs pouring concrete or driving steel on a railroad - that would cut into their free time camping out on the streets of New York or their bed in their mother's basement. Besides, we just finished spending nearly a trillion dollars with Stimulus 1 and 2, and we still have a 9.1% unemployment rate. Does our infrastructure need to be updated? Yes, but infrastructure improvements are not the solution to America's unemployment problem. Of course, this is where the unions like the protesters because most of those infrastructure jobs would be union jobs.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America’s nuclear power plants.

The Johnny Appleseed plan. There is nothing wrong with being good stewards of the environment, but I suppose we should do away with hydrological energy (gasp! non-fossil fuel energy) by demolishing the Hoover Dam and the rest of the dams across the country to restore the "natural flow of river systems". Of course that means we have to demolish the lock system on the Mississippi as well. Nuclear power decommissioning. Guess the protesters don't like charging their iPhones. I could live with the nuclear power going away as long as we convert nuclear to and build Thorium plants. But until then, Montgomery Burns, fire them reactors up.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Racial equal rights amendment? It's called the 14th amendment. There's also this thing called the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This demand is like screaming Free Mandela! when he's already been freed. Gender equal rights. The ERA amendment has been dead for over 20 years. At the heart of this demand is gay rights. If a transgender transexual hermaphrodite eskimo wants to do what he/she wants, that's fine, but I'm not cool with him/her marrying himself/herself.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

I've warned my readers about the United Nations International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families before, I'll let you read up on it because there's just too much to explain here at this time. By the way, ask Europe how that open borders thing works for them...it doesn't. This demand also harkens to that whole concept that citizenship is wrong and unfair and that we are all just people on the same planet. Barf.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Dear protesters, we already have observers, their called poll watchers. Anybody can be a poll watcher if you are a Precinct Committeeman attached to a major party or if you are appointed as a poll watcher by a campaign. We don't need the international community prying their eyes into our election process; it works and works damn good. One last thing. Each major party can appoint one person in each county to sit up at the County Clerk's office to watch the ballots being counted (at least in Illinois that's the way it works). It's usually done under watch of law enforcement as well.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Here's the Latin American socialist ideas at work. Debt forgiveness. God forbid you pay back what you owe. Do you go to a restaurant, eat dinner and then not pay? Of course not.

The only thing missing in these demands is land redistribution Latin America style! Here's an idea for the protesters: if you don't have the money, then don't buy stuff you can't afford. Don't buy a house just because you want a house despite a crappy interest rate. Don't rack up credit card debt. "Gimme stuff for free" seems to be the mantra of this bunch of unwashed liberals.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

This would do nothing more than penalize those that actually pay their bills on time and watch their spending. Now they want redistribution of credit.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

At the core of the socialist movement is the union. Read The Jungle. The first part of the book is the part we all learn in school about worker safety, food regulations, etc. The second part of the book, we rarely learn in school - it's the part where Upton Sinclair's book devolves into a socialist pamphlet.

I have many union friends and they love being in a union, but they hate the union itself from Hoffa Jr. on down. I was talking with one of my union friends Sunday evening. He just got a letter from his union stating that he can no longer expect 100% pension at 62 and that he must now wait until 65 to collect 100%. He was pissed. He was asking why he should wait because 100% at 65 is not what his union promised him. He was now cursing the very organization that "gave him his great job". Remember one thing. Unions had their place, but unions are only in it for the upper leadership, they could care less about the rank and file member - just as long as they pay their dues.

These demands will create so many jobs it will be completely impossible to fill them without an open borders policy.

I guess the protesters had to toss in a hat tip to the pro-amnesty crowd.

After reading the demands, they really are nothing more than a redistributionist policy that the Democrats in Congress are afraid to state openly (other than Bernie Sanders) because they know it's political suicide.

The protesters are steeped in populist politics as well. Power to the people, right? Reset society and let's start again?

In the end, the Occupy Wall Street protesters are nothing more than a stinky (at this point) band of unemployed people demanding more from their government. We have raised an entire generation of people dependent on someone else rather than depending on themselves. This is the goal of the progressive movement - you are not responsible for anything, Big Brother will take care of you.

I'm a student of history. What is taking place is similar to what took place in Paris 1968. I hate Wikipedia, but the site does have a good explanation of the 1968 Paris riots.

The May 1968 protest refers to a particular period in French history. It was historically significant for being the first wildcat strike ever,^[1] and for being the largest general strike ever, bringing the economy of an advanced industrial country to a virtual standstill.^[1] It commenced with a series of student occupation protests. The strike involved eleven million workers for a continuous two weeks,^[1] and its impact was such that it almost caused the collapse of President Charles de Gaulle's government. In staging wildcat strikes, the movement contrasted with the trade unions and the French Communist Party (Parti Communiste Français, PCF), which began to side with the de Gaulle government.^[1] Groups revolted against modern consumer and technical society and embraced left-wing positions that were critical of authoritarianism and Western capitalism.

The first part of the explanation is precisely the goal of the Occupy Wall Street crowd. Notice the section I bolded at the end. Sound familiar? The protests in New York are not going to bring down the Obama administration - he's done that on his own, but the other parts similar except for the numbers of people and the violence.

As I said from the beginning, the Occupy Wall Street protesters are showing the socialist side of the progressive policies of the Democratic Party. It's on display on the streets of New York in its unwashed and unsanitary glory. The protesters are attempting to repeat a moment in history, but it's more like a repeat of a historical moment using flawed logic like from some Monty Python movie.

#iamthe53

3rd Annual Effingham County Republican Fall Festival

downstateiladvocate — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 22:30:13 GMT

The 3rd Annual Effingham County Republican Party Fall Festival
Witt's Smokehouse
Oct. 13th
Social/music 5:00 - 6:30pm
Dinner program 6:30- 7:00pm
Social/music 7:00 - ???

Featured speakers: State Sen. Kyle McCarter, State Rep. Paul Evans, State Rep John Cavaletto , and State Sen. John O Jones

Headline speaker: William Federer, author of Change to Chains and national known speaker who will be discussing the rise of sharia law within America.

Tickets are $20 a person, $10 per student.
Please RSVP ASAP by emailing anakrion76@hotmail.com or by calling Brian at 217-821-9306

All monies raised will stay local to help our candidates!