Showing posts with label Richard Daley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Richard Daley. Show all posts

Monday, July 20, 2009

Jack Franks Meets with the Mayor

Yesterday, I wrote about McHenry County Democrat State Rep. Jack Frank's Friday.

Franks rolled out evidence of spending big bucks in his campaign disclosure. Look at the contributions' side of Franks' D-2. No contribution limits yet, remember.

The display of ready cash coming in big chunks should make second tier Democrats contemplating a statewide race (like Julie Hamos) give new respect to the resources Franks can bring to the table on behalf of his political ambitions.

Even first tier candidates like State Comptroller Dan Hynes probably does not have the family money to match Franks'.

What's Franks interested in?

My guesses are here.

He told the Northwest Herald he was interested in running for governor and, I guess, Franks could play the role that Mike Howlett took when Chicago ward bosses threw everything into defeating self-styled reform Democrat Dan Walker in 1976.

Franks has never portrayed himself as an organization guy, even as he has taken money from every union he could tap, including teachers' unions.

Not only did Franks display his financial resources Friday, but he was on WTTW's Chicago Tonight again.

And that wasn't all that happened.

The McHenry County Democrat was granted a face-to-face with Chicago Mayor Richard Daley.

My guess is that in their heart of hearts that they are pretty close in political views.

The political arena in Chicago has, of course, resulted in Daley moving left.

Franks has shown similar leftward movement on abortion and gun control during the past year. But on abortion, at least, he backed off.

It will be interesting to see how Franks will modify his stands as he moves from conservative McHenry County to the liberal electorate that rules statewide Democratic primary elections.

No one would suggest those who control the Democratic Party statewide are not composed of tax eaters.

I can't wait to see how they will react to Franks' current opposition to an income tax hike.

Published first on McHenry County Blog, where there is information about Jack Franks you won't find anywhere else.

Read more...

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Walking the Walk – Gov. Pat Quinn Leads by Example

by Cal Skinner

Governor Pat Quinn has released his income tax forms to at least the Chicago Sun-Times.

Springfield Bureau Chief Dave McKinney reports that Quinn earned $120,226 last year.

More interesting to me was that he contributed to $12,379 to charitable organizations.

Over 10%.

10.26%, to be more exact.

You will remember the Biblical suggestion that believers tithe 10% of their income to church. In fact, tithe meant a tenth in Old English.

Why is this worth a story?

Check out what now-President Barack Obama gave to charity before and after he gained the national spotlight.

Compare what Obama, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and retired President George W. Bush contributed to the percentage donated by Quinn.

All are less than what Methodist Church founder John Wesley recommended:

Gain all you can.

Save all you can.

Give all you can.
Wesley died with very little, having given away what he got as it came to him.

Any other politicians who want to share their percentage of charitable giving, drop me a line at McHenry County Blog.

Read more...

Monday, May 12, 2008

We won’t see “Exposing Daley” anytime soon

WBBM-TV seems to have found a new franchise – “Exposing Xxxx Xxxxxxxx.”

It was a few months ago (Nov. 29, 2007, to be exact) that the CBS-owned television station in Chicago aired “Exposing Rod Blagojevich,” a nearly 8-minute report (or about one-third of the total newscast) that detailed just how unpopular Gov. Rod Blagojevich has become.

Monday night, we viewers of WBBM got to see political reporter Mike Flannery (with help from producer Ed Marshall – a long-time Chicago broadcaster who did a brief stint as former Illinois Comptroller Loleta Didrickson’s press secretary) do another similar report. This time, it was “Exposing Todd Stroger” – a 6-minute report that told us just how unpopular Cook County President Todd Stroger has become.

There wasn’t anything terribly new – or at least nothing that those of us who pay attention to the Chicago Sun-Times or other newspapers didn’t already know. Todd has several relatives and friends in mid- to high-ranking positions on the Cook County government payroll, all of who receive salaries of at least $100,000.

About the most interesting tidbit I got out of the WBBM report was that Stroger works out of a fancy office with an incredible view of Lake Michigan – just like a lot of other people who work in downtown Chicago.

The logical next step would be “Exposing Daley.” If one is going to go after the governor and the county board president, then “getting” the mayor of Chicago would be the natural completion to the trio of political powerhouses.

Somehow, I doubt there will be any such report.

Getting people to take pot shots at Blagojevich and Stroger is ridiculously easy. In fact, the trick for a reporter-type is to figure out which critics actually know what they’re talking about – and which are just sore losers.

Taking shots at Daley is a different matter – Hizzoner Jr. has the ability to crush anybody who tries to speak out against him, which will inhibit the number of people willing to go on camera and talk political trash. WBBM would literally have to resort to putting Daley critics in the shadows and distorting their voices to even consider getting them to talk.

In short, it isn’t going to happen.

We have a better chance of seeing “Exposing Madigan” (take your pick, Mike or Lisa) or “Exposing Obama” before we see anyone go after the Man on Five.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: For those who missed it, “Exposing Stroger” will live on forever (http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/exposing.todd.stroger.2.722376.html) on the Internet.

“Exposing Blagojevich” was entertaining by television news standards, but it hardly broke much (http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/exposing.rod.blagojevich.2.598424.html) in the way of new ground.

(Originally published at http://www.ChicagoArgus.blogspot.com/)

Read more...

Saturday, April 26, 2008

Daley's Gun Summit

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley held something called a “gun summit” Friday.

But, you know what?

He didn't offer to disarm his body guards.

And, he didn't ask aldermen and women to turn in their guns (which they are allowed to have...unlike ordinary citizens in need of personal protection).

There has been other recent news on Chicago African-American views on guns and those of the McHenry County Board.

Read more...

Thursday, April 17, 2008

Gun bill rejection is rural Illinois' annual "forget you" to Chicago

Every year for most of the nearly 20 years that Richard M. Daley has been mayor, he has pushed his people who work at the Statehouse in Springfield to get the Illinois General Assembly to approve a statewide ban on handguns similar to what is already THE LAW in Chicago.

The measures always get through legislative committees, where Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan – in keeping with his unofficial role of keeping the Legislature in line with Chicago’s desires – uses his pull to ensure that the issue gets a hearing.

Then, the Illinois House of Representatives engages in a rare act of bipartisanship as rural and suburban lawmakers, both Democrat and Republican, come to the conclusion that “the enemy” is Chicago. They gang up, and vote the measure down.

At a time when the rural portions of Illinois only account for one-third (at most) of the state’s population, this issue has become one of the annual acts of state government. They kill off Daley’s dreams of gun control to show him that he can’t run roughshod over the rest of Illinois.

The most recent political killing took place Wednesday.

This year, Daley allies weren’t so bold as to push for any outright bans on firearms. What they wanted this year was creation of a state law that would have required the sale of handguns in Illinois to occur only at federally licensed firearms dealers – who must comply with laws requiring criminal background checks.

It was a measure designed by Chicago city officials to get around laws that allow private sales of firearms by dealers at gun shows, where background checks on the gun buyers are non-existent.

City-oriented officials argue that these private dealers are the loop hole by which handguns wind up in the possession of people who otherwise would not be able to get a gun, but rural people say the Daley-desired change in law would criminalize individuals who privately sell a pistol to a friend.

The bill received a 58-58 vote, with two other legislators – Eddie Washington of Waukegan and Jim Watson of Jacksonville – not voting because of excused absences. Had those two legislators cast votes for the measure (a long-shot), it would have passed with the bare minimum of 60 votes.

Now for those who think the city is being picked on by the rest of the state, keep in mind that Daley allies knew full well they would lose again this year. A similar measure had already been rejected this spring. There was only one reason for the bill to be called for a vote, and that was because of Wednesday’s date.

April 16, 2008 is the one-year anniversary of the shootings at Virginia Tech University where 32 students were killed when a well-armed student went on a rampage on campus.

Every single one of the 58 state representatives who voted against the Daley plan now runs the risk of having campaign advertising used against them that tells would-be voters how their local legislator celebrated, so-to-speak, the one-year anniversary of Virginia Tech by voting against “reasonable restrictions” on firearms.

Some of the legislators who come from suburban areas (who are only voting against the measure because they are Republicans opposing Democrat Daley) could run the risk of losing votes from people in their legislative districts who are not government junkies and do not follow the nuances of every single one of the thousands of bills that come before the General Assembly every year.

For rural legislators, this is less of an issue. Many come from small communities where rifle ownership can often be a cultural tie passed down from generation to generation. They are more likely to want to believe whatever spin the Illinois State Rifle Association wants to put on the issue, rather than the Daley spin.

Wednesday’s legislative action is a case of rural Illinois exerting what little influence it still holds (as they will be the first to tell you, all of the state constitutional officers and the General Assembly’s top leaders are from Chicago) on an issue where it believes the city’s desires are too far at odds with their own.

It literally becomes an issue where Southern Illinois Democrats have no problem breaking with their Chicago counterparts to unite with central Illinois Republicans to show that they are united in their desire not to be an extension of Chicago.

One legislator, Mike Bost of Murphysboro, said he thinks this year’s measure would have made criminals of the gun dealers who operate heavily in his area, and would not have any significant impact on violence in the city.

“It’s not going to cure your problem with criminals in your city with handguns,” Bost told the Bloomington, Ill.-based Pantagraph newspaper.

“Your problem,” and “your city.” That is the sad thing.

Guns have become an issue of regionalism overcoming common sense and a desire to reduce violence, made worse by the fact that “Illinois” is, at best, a theoretical concept – rather than a distinct region with unified interests.

This different perspective is not new. I still remember the 1998 Democratic primary for governor – when eventual nominee Glenn Poshard (who takes great pride in being a Southern Illinois native with no ties to Chicago) started off the campaign as an outspoken critic of any measures to restrict firearm ownership.

Eventually, though, even Poshard moderated his talk against gun control, often telling the story of how he visited a Chicago hospital emergency room at a moment when some shootings were being treated.

He would say during the latter days of the campaign (while trying to convince Chicagoans he was not some rural ‘gun nut’) it was at that moment that he realized just why so many urban residents wanted handgun restrictions and were willing to put aside the desires of hunters and the theoretical notion of the Second Amendment to the Constitution (which guarantees the American people the right to arm themselves so they can be in a militia).

Perhaps the key is to drag every rural legislator into the Stroger Hospital emergency room to give them a sense of the chaos that can be created by firearms in the city.

Maybe then, people like Bost would start seeing that there are commonalities in Illinois’ regions, despite the roughly 300 mile difference that exists between Chicago and his hometown.

Admittedly, Bost is from the region that literally is closer to Memphis than either Chicago or St. Louis – the two cities that 95 percent of Illinoisans identify with. That could be just too large a social gap to bridge.

But there are political people who live on the fringes of the Chicago area who act as though they wish they could put space between themselves and the city. They are the ones who need to have a little arm-twisting.

Ultimately, it will have to come down to Chicago’s political muscle being used to let all Illinoisans know just how much of an economic and social stake they have in an improved Chicago – one that is safe and secure both in reality and in perception.

The scary thing is that too many legislators would see this as an excuse to extort Chicago for some sort of local project. No matter what they might want to think, rural legislators aren’t any more ethical than their urban counterparts. Just think back to how many rural lawmakers were upset that they didn’t get more for their support of a Chicago Transit Authority emergency funding measure that finally got approval early this year.

Short of an extra effort by Chicago, there doesn’t seem to be any sense that the two sides will come together any time soon. In the words of state Rep. John Bradley, a Democrat from Marion, “we’re always going to have philosophical differences about the issues involving gun ownership in the state.”

-30-

(Originally published at http://www.ChicagoArgus.blogspot.com/)

Read more...

Friday, August 10, 2007

Chicago claim: Just 24 homeless living downtown

A recently concluded City of Chicago census of homeless people living downtown states that there are only 24 homeless people living in the section of the city locally known as "The Loop." Rich at Capitol Fax included this story in his "Morning Shorts."

Take it from me, that number is a little low.

The next number is too high. From the Chicago Sun-Times:

Homeless advocates maintain the actual nightly homeless population is 21,078 because of an "invisible" group that includes people "doubled-up" with relatives and friends.

If you are living somewhere--other than a shelter or in an alley--then you are not homeless. Financially secure? Definitely not. But again, not homeless.

Chicago has an excellent chance of landing the 2016 Summer Olympics, Mayor Richard Daley is clearly trying to spruce up the city's image before the International Olympic Committee selects its host city.

Chicago is just not "The Loop." Every Sunday morning I drive through the northern end of Lincoln Park. I've never counted the sleeping bodies I see camped out there, but 24 seems like a reasonable number. If I got out of my car, I'm sure I'd find more.

To comment on this post, or to read about my recent trip to Kansas, click here.

Read more...

Saturday, July 07, 2007

An argument against the "Fairness Doctrine," Lar Daly


A liberal blogger, Rob of Illinois Reason, is having fun at my expense because I'm against the renewal of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine." The misnamed broadcast requirement became part of the regulatory swagger of the Federal Communications Commission in 1949 stating that broadcasters "afford reasonable opportunity for the discussion of conflicting views of public importance."

The broadcast airwaves were viewed as a scarce resource then. Since 1949, the number of television stations and radio outlets has grown dramatically, shooting the scarcity argument in favor of the "Fairness Doctrine" down.

In the 1980s the Reagan administration, no fan of government regulation, steadily chipped away at the "Fairness Doctrine" until 1987, when the FCC, stocked with Reagan appointees, abolished it altogether.

Well done, Gipper.

And shortly thereafter, conservative talkers such as Rush Limbaugh and a whole bunch of others put down stakes in the dying AM band of the radio dial, and helped engineer the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress.

The Democrats, whose supporters dominate the other media, plotted almost immediately after the it long overdue cancellation to put the "Fairness Doctrine" into law. But Republican Congresses and presidents have stood in the way since then.

The "Fairness Doctrine" is anything but fair. Pundits have rightfully remarked that re-instituting such constraints on freedom of speech is analogous to Hugo Chavez shutting down opposition television stations in Venezuela.

But the libs claim all they want are "equal voices" on the airwaves.

Be careful what you wish for.

Chicagoans my age and older may remember Lar "America First" Daly. Sometimes he ran as a Democrat, sometimes as a Republican, other times for his "America First" party.

For many years Daly campaigned in an Uncle Sam suit, until a tragedy of sorts struck--someone stole the costume and Daly never bothered to replace it.

Daly was opposed to public schools, supported casino gambling (he was ahead of this time on that one), and he was supporter capital punishment for members of the Communist Party, along with a whole bunch of other extreme causes.

In 1975, while my brothers and tuned in to WGN-TV early for a Saturday night Chicago Black Hawks hockey game, we caught in-progess Lar Daly instead. Daly, we learned at the end of the broadcast, had commandeered airtime from WGN as a result of the "equal time" provision of the "Fairness Doctrine."

This was not the first time Daly knocked the puck at the back of the net, so to speak, as Time Magazine described in 1959 and 1964.

After several presidential runs and attempts to win the office of Mayor of Chicago from the incumbent Richard J. Daley, the legendary "Boss of Chicago," "No 'E'" Daly threw his hat in the mayoral ring once again. And he forced WGN to air a half hour of his mindless ramblings before the Black Hawks hit the ice.

I can't remember his precise political positions for that campaign, but it was standard, for him that is, whack job stuff.

But what stands out to me 32 years later was the "Lar Daly Curse." During on Channel 9 rant, Daly explained in his resonant baritone that he had placed a curse on the Kennedy brothers, John and Robert of course, for knocking him off of the Democratic ballot in the 1960 New Hampshire primary.

I can't remember his precise words, but he said something along the lines of "Both of them are now dead."

Both men of course were assassinated, and the Kennedy killings in 1975 were still fairly recent events. To put it into perspective, 9/11 happened six years ago--seven years to prior '75, Bobby Kennedy was shot to death.

Daly then went on to place a new curse: This time on Mayor Richard J. Daley.

Read closely now supporters of the "Fairness Doctrine": Because of that ditched regulation you want put into law, it's by no means a stretch of the imagination that you'll have a crackpot like Lar Daly on television implying a death curse on a leading public official. Or worse, a Jihadist nut.

Is that your idea of "fairness?"

Be careful of what you wish for.

Mayor Daley did die, of natural causes, a year later. Not to be outdone, Lar Daly followed him to the next world in 1979. History has not recorded if he had been cursed beforehand.

Of course Richard J. Daley's son now rules Chicago, the Daley family, with an "E" that is, one-upped Lar Daly.

And if Lar Daly was around today, he probably wouldn't think that was fair.

To comment on this or any other Marathon Pundit post, click here.

Read more...

Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Too Charitable to Obama?

When I wrote “Giving Obama His Due,” I based by story on this year’s income tax return.

A Tuesday story entitled, “For Obama, charity really began in the U.S. Senate,” by the Chicago Tribune’s Bob Secter today makes it clear that I may have offered too much credit.

Secter looked at income tax forms for both U.S. Senator Dick Durbin and Barack (note that I spelled it correctly this time without being reminded) Obama going back to 1997.

Obama’s contributions in 1997 appear to be a bit less than 1% of income, with $400 to his church. Durbin’s were a bit below 2%. Secter notes the national average is 2.2%.

The Biblical admonition is a minimum of 10%, the tithe.

Both politicians had increased their contributions to about 4½% by 2005.

Obama, as I calculated earlier, gave 6.1% to charities last year. Secter does note that Obama contributed just 4/10ths of one percent of his income--$1,050 as recently as 2002.

The recent ramp-up lets Obama avoid the 1998 ridicule of ridicule of Al Gore for contributing only $353.

Secter reports that Obama’s church, Trinity United Church of Christ “encourages its members to donate 10 percent of their income…from 1997 through 2002, the Obamas reported devoting less than 1 percent of their household income to charity.”

While reporting the contributions and total income of President George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, the Tribune article left the calculations to the reader. Cheney was at 6.5%, while Bush gave 10.2%.

McHenry County Blog reported the 10.2% figure in a story comparing Bush’s percentage with Mayor Richard Daley’s.

More, of course, at McHenry County Blog.

Read more...

Sunday, April 22, 2007

Protection Free Zones

I don’t usually comment on national issues, but this article from World Net Daily sent by a friend of McHenry County Blog is spot on and I've added an Illinois angle.

The very short article is entitled,

Death toll limited before campus gun ban
5 years ago, shooter subdued by armed students

It explains what happened January 16, 2002, when a student started shooting administrators at Appalachian School of Law.

A couple of students, one an off-duty police officer, got guns from their cars and subdued the gunman.

He was more than tackled by bystanders, as most press reports said.

Since then, the state legislature banned guns on college campuses last year in the interest of safety, the article says.

My gubernatorial campaign manager Ted Semon referred to areas where guns are banned as “protection free zones.”

Mayor Richard Daley’s reaction, of course, would have pleased the Virginia assemblymen who voted to ban guns on campus after the Appalachian School of Law murders.

ABC reported this Saturday:

The mayor's state legislative package includes laws that ban assault weapons and magazines that hold more than ten rounds.

"There just too many guns in our society," Mayor Daley said. "Too many guns leads to too many accidents, and you have too many victims."
He’s “pushing for what he calls ‘common-sense’ gun laws,” ABC says.

Common sense would suggest that what worked to limit deaths at the law school might have worked at Virginia Tech.

More at McHenry County Blog. I didn't spend the weekend in the yard.

= = = = =
And, Monday in the Chicago Sun-Times a Tom Toles cartoon appeared, the bottom of which said,
Also, if everyone on campus had been armed…it’s hard to imagine anything bad happening.

Read more...

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Charitable Giving – Daley, Bush and Us

Back when all those rich Republicans were running for the senatorial nomination, I tried to do a story on what percentage each was giving to charity.

From what I remember, current GOP state chairman Andy McKenna was the highest, closing in on the Biblical 10%.

Today I saw stories on Mayor Richard Daley’s and President George Bush’s income tax returns.

The Daley’s reported $13,690 out of $363,647 went to charities (and churches, I would presume, but the story does not say).

The Bush’s reported $78,100 to churches and charities out of their $765,801 income.

The percentages are

3.8% for the Daley family and 10.2% for the Bush family.
Both are less than what Methodist Church founder John Wesley recommended:
Gain all you can.

Save all you can.

Give all you can.
Wesley died with very little, having given away what he got as it came to him.

A Korean Methodist bishop recommended willing about one-third of one’s life’s assets to one’s children and giving the rest to charity.

High standards indeed that few can live up to in this materialistic world.

And the Skinners' favorite charity this year, besides our church, is Rise International, which builds schools in rural Angola for $12,500.

And, with local elections coming up Tuesday, there is and has been a lot more on McHenry County Blog about them.

Read more...

  © Blogger template The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP