The Washington Times ... Men need not apply

This makes for interesting reading: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/2/men-need-not-apply/

So, now I'm a fiscal terrorist

At first I was offended; the lamestream media, Vice President What's-his-face, and other pundits on the Left have taken to calling TEA Party folk like me 'Terrorists" (I guess they got tired of calling us racists). Generally speaking, I don't like being compared to a wacko whose idea of a good time is to strap bombs around his waste and blow himself and others into little bits.

In my outrage over the latest verbal assault from the Left, I turned as I often do - no, not to a schematic of how to build a human bomb - but to my trusty Merriam-Webser's Collegiate Dictionary (Tenth Edition). There, I sought the solace from this latest verbal assault and the definition of this word that has caused the Left so much angst over the last 10 years or so: a word they struggle to use against human bombers but so easily apply to fiscal conservatives.

Reading the definition, I suddenly realized that, maybe, they're right. Maybe I am a terrorist.

According to Webster, a terrorist is someone who uses "systematic ... terror ... as a means of coercion."

I will not deny that the TEA Party, through its elected officials, has sought to coerce, cajole or otherwise convince the government to apply some fiscal sanity to our burgeoning debt crisis. Considering, if someone finds fiscal conservatism to be a form of terror, than seeking some restraint on government spending could be a terrifying experience.

I like to think of this in terms of a family setting. Joe and Cindy Somebody have found themselves up to their necks in debt and Joe has decided it's time to take a stand.

"Cindy, we have got to stop spending like this."

Suddenly, the neighbors peer through the window shades to see why Cindy next door has run into the street screaming as though chased by a knife wielding psychopath. And there's Joe, sitting at the kitchen table with a shocked look at his face wondering what happened to make his wife act that way.

If spending within our means or trying not to saddle our children and grandchildren with our irresponsible debt is so incredibly frightening for liberals, maybe we should make the same suggestion to them that Joe will most likely make to Cindy when she stops running.

"Honey, I love you, but if being responsible about the way we spend money has that affect on you, maybe I should handle the finances from now on. I mean, honestly, if we don't do something about this now, the alternative is bankruptcy and ruin. Besides, the neighbors are starting to talk, what with you running around screaming every time I suggest balancing the budget."

So, as a fiscal terrorist, I apologize to Biden, Chris Williams and all the other liberals who find my position so scary. If we had known you were so incapable of handling money within the bounds or reality, well, maybe more of us would have refrained from putting you in these frightening positions where you'd be called upon, by some, to deal with issues like debt, income and fiscal responsibility.

They say the first step is admitting there's a problem. Now that we've identified the problem, maybe you should focus on things that are a little more comfortable for you, such as attacking Sarah Palin just because she's a woman with too much sense to be a liberal.

In the meantime, as the next election approaches, keep in mind that, if people are careless enough to put you back in office, you'll probably have to deal with scary financial matters again. If you're not up to the task, maybe you should let someone with a stronger stomach and a little more common sense do the job.

Harvard's 97-pound-intellectual weaklings should consider marching in a parade

Let me get this straight, the 'geniuses' at Harvard actually conducted a study to find out that Republicans are more likely to appreciate 4th of July parades? These people are supposed to be smart, right? And, they needed a study to figure that out? By what stretch of whose imagination did anyone think otherwise?

When Barack Obama said that America is exceptional in the same sense that someone from another country finds their country exceptional (in other words, America is no more exceptional than any other country - i.e., not exceptional at all), he wasn't just speaking for himself; he was speaking right out of the liberal progressive bible. The vast majority of liberals believe that. And, if they see nothing truly exceptional about their country, what do they have to celebrate on the 4th of July? It's just an excuse to start a fire in the barbie and crack open a few beers - kind of like Christmas with outdoor cooking but without Santa Claus.

It's scary to think that Harvard is supposed to be the premier educational institution in our country. I used to have a coffee mug with a Gary Larson cartoon on it of a boy pushing on the door where the sign says "Pull" under another sign that says "School for the Gifted." Did Larson secretly mean Harvard? For my money, you don't need to look any further than the announcement of this study to recognize how deeply this country is in trouble.

FDR, bless his socialistic little soul, was right: "All we have to fear is fear itself." He was speaking to the power of positive thought.

If you want to start a business, if you want it to succeed, the first thing you have to do is envision it as a successful endeavor. Without that, there's little point in trying. Liberals, many of whom want America to fail so that we can join some wishful-thinking, socialistic/communistic utopian vision of a one-world order, have leveled many attacks against American values and culture. To some degree, that's part of the process of stripping away our vision of American Exceptionalism, which is essential to our success.

But, America is exceptional and far beyond the limited imagination of a minority of crackpots on the Left. America is exceptional, not because of a flawless and perfect past, but because the basic principles contained in our constitution provide the landscape where mankind has opportunity and hope.

What is opportunity? Opportunity is not a guarantee of success - it's the chance to succeed. You can't have a chance to succeed without a chance to fail. The good news, in America, is that, if you do fail, you get to try again.

Liberals think they're driving us toward a secular version of heaven on earth where John Lennon's vision of the world becomes a reality: "... no need to kill or die ... no need for greed or hunger ... And the world can live as one."  Unfortunately, none of the liberals have bothered to ask themselves, "Then what?"

I am an aspiring entrepreneur. I have a vision of a successful business. What if someone could flip a switch and make my business all I could imagine it to be? What if a wealthy investor gives me so much money that my business can't fail? Well, I'd certainly take the money, but it's not going to fulfill the motivations that drove me to start my business in the first place.

In 1992, the liberals told George HW Bush, "It's the economy, stupid." Today, we could say the same thing to Obama, as well as, "It's employment, stupid." But, whether 1992, now or any other time in history, we can rightfully point out to liberals, socialists and communists: "It's the journey, stupid."

Liberals haven't stopped to consider that there is little or no value in life if everything is handed to us without any effort. When you lie in a hospital bed for too long, or watch too many "Is he the father?" episodes on Maury Povich, your muscles atrophy. If you don't need them or use them, they dry up and die. It's the same thing with life - if you don't live it, if you don't challenge it, it shrivels and dies.

That's why it's wrong to demonize those who have achieved the American dream. They validate the goal for those with the wisdom and courage to take up the challenge. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Obama and the liberals ultimately achieve their vision for America, they're going to want to 'eliminate' me. And they might as well. Their vision for America is so unexceptional it offers nothing I want and I am entirely unwilling to live in it.

Of course, on the other hand, their efforts have given many of us, who enjoy 4th of July parades, more and more reasons to exercise our patriotic muscles. As for me, I'm going to a parade Monday to get a little conservative workout. I'm a little worried about those poor folks at Harvard, though. Here they are, at the 'greatest' mental fitness center and they come off like 97-pound weaklings who are kicking the sand in their own faces.

Double-talking Anderson Cooper should look in the mirror first

Do you ever have the feeling that someone like George Soros created MSNBC so that, by comparison, CNN would appear more in the center? The center of what – a cesspool of ignorance and arrogance, of deceit and the abandonment of journalistic principles? And, at the head of that shining example of liberal propagandist vitriol stands Anderson Cooper – silver haired beyond his apparent years, boyish looks with a starchly serious demeanor.

Here it is, just two or three days after Michele Bachmann surprised everyone by polling at 22 percent among conservatives and only one point behind lukewarm, front-runner Mitt Romney, and already the liberal hatchets are out, starting with Cooper’s.

I couldn’t hear what he was saying. I was in McDonald’s where the sound is down and they either support the liberal slant of CNN or have bought into the mighty media midget’s posturing as the mid-ground source for news. Cooper’s expose on Bachmann had a text box tucked into the left corner through most of the segment. In that box, with a rolling bright light, were the words, “Keeping Them Honest: Bachmann’s Double Talk.”

No, I didn’t hear what Cooper had to say. Apparently, the claim is that Bachmann is “on the government doll” while decrying big spending. If that’s the case, I expect Bachmann to come clean about whatever accusation Mr. Cooper has put forth. My problem is that, for the last three years, we have yet to see Barack Obama’s academic records. Has Cooper done an expose on that, particularly in light of Obama’s promise of “transparency?” We’ve watched tax-cheat after tax-cheat join his administration. Has Cooper gone after them?

Now that Obama actually has an elected record, has Cooper made even a hint of suggesting Obama should explain some of his contradictions? Did he do anything other than defend the future First Lady when she said, “For the first time in my life, I’m proud to be an American?” Did he take Pelosi and Reid to task for the backroom methods used to pass Obamacare while brazenly flaunting another promise of transparency? If he has, I haven’t seen it.

Of course, you might point out that I don’t watch this fraud of a journalist so how would I know. Simply put, if he had, that in itself would be news. I’d be watching Bill O’Reilly and he would start a new segment, “Today, in a surprise turn towards actual journalism, CNN’s Anderson Cooper actually dared to challenge the president/administration over the contradictions between its promises and its actions.”

But, I haven’t heard that and I’m not going to hear that. Cooper and his quasi-journalistic cronies at CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, and the Huffington Post will persist in pretending that they’re real journalists while continuing to use the news as a not-so-subtle campaign platform for Obama and other liberals.

Then again, maybe I’m being a bit hard on Mr. Cooper. He certainly seems to know enough about double talk employing that variety of programming on a regular basis.

The Left is Right - we are racists

I've come to the conclusion that our attackers from the Left are right - we are racists. Of course, that's only by definition and, in this case, the Left's definition.

I've long said that I can't think of a single white-male Democrat who could count on my vote in a presidential race against Condaleeza Rice, who, in my eyes at least, is a black woman deserving of considerable respect. But, by the Left's definition, Ms. Rice isn't really black, just as she's not really a woman. She can't possibly fit into either of those categories if she hasn't accepted her role as the oppressed victim of white male dominance for which the last several millennium are ripe with examples.

That also explains why the Left-stream media and all them folks on the Left consider Barack Obama the first black president instead of another male president who happens to have black and white ancestry. Obama has successfully denied his white heritage and, if I understand correctly, in the book 'he' wrote about his struggles (his struggles? where have I heard that before? Hmmmm - sorry, I was drifting there) ... he even points to the time when he made a specific decision to 'choose' his black heritage and deny his white.

Of course, from the Left's perspective, Obama made the right choice. Rice, on the other hand, was almost assuredly led down the primrose path by fat-cat industrialists who wanted to take advantage of her outward appearance as a black female. For the most part, the same, of course, can be said of Sarah Palin.

It just aggravates the bujeebas out of liberal progressives when they see someone from their cast who doesn't recognize the oppressive nature of society. In a sense, for failing to recognize those obvious trials and tribulations, people like Palin and Rice deserve all the derision the Left can mount against them.

It's as if the Left is standing pool side in its Mickey Mouse swimwear shivering while Palin and Rice are standing in the water saying, "Come on in. The water is fine."

But, the water can't be fine. Just as the earth is facing impending doom from Global Warming, the pool of 'traditional' society is full of contaminated water. And, now, Palin and Rice have got it all over them.

I guess it's kind of like the old Uncle Tom perspective. The basis for that perspective, of course, is to recognize 'white male dominated society' as fatally flawed. I'm not going to stand here and tell you the 'traditional' society, to which I hold considerable allegiance, doesn't have flaws.

There are rumors that Benjamin Franklin had 82 illegitimate children. While some have argued the rumors are untrue, if they were, Franklin's political career would have ended in about midstream when someone noticed he spent a little too much time with the ladies in the courts of France. But, true or false, the ultimate truth is that Franklin was one of America's greatest individuals, regardless of race, creed or color, and, in spite of any flaws, he was definitely a keeper.

I see both sides of our society - the good and the bad. I admire people like Rice and Palin because, it seems to me, they also see both sides and yet, like me, they recognize that, all things considered, our society is overwhelmingly weighted to the positive side of the scale.

Many on the Left want to abandon our Constitutional government. They want to tear down the edifice of free-market capitalism. My thought is we've got a darn good house here with a strong foundation. There are some things that need a little work but that doesn't suggest it's a good idea to burn the structure to the ground and dig up the foundation walls to build a new structure. That's particularly true when the new structure the Left is suggesting has proven to contain significant structural weaknesses.

So, I don't care if I'm a racist by the Left's definition. In the first case, I don't have a whole lot of respect for the Left's opinion to begin with. In the second case, if the reasons for the respect I have for Rice and Palin are related at all to color or gender it's only in that they have had the courage and foresight not to follow the herd.

Silly rabbit, tricks are for liberals - and SEIU affiliated Wisconsin judges

My friend just sent an e-mail suggesting that the Wisconsin judge who placed a temporary halt on the recent and contentious labor law passed in Wisconsin has a son who is connected with SEIU and, therefore, by rights, the judge should have recused herself from the case.

Of course, where my friend is concerned, it's easier to point out the flaws in another's thinking than to recognize them in our own. Still, we should continue to point out these flaws in the hopes that our friends will do the same for us someday.

Any how, back to the judge from Wisconsin; just because her son may wear SEIU-purple footie pajamas to bed at night, doesn't mean the judge would allow that affiliation to soil her reputation ... I mean, to influence her decision. And, the fact that her son, apparently, grew up with an attitude that fits so well with an ultra-Left-wing organization like that doesn't mean Mom had anything to do with the development of her son's perspective. Look at Ronald Reagan and his son Ronny? Maybe Mom's a devout conservative and her son is still rebelling against common sense.

Of course, Mom's decision from the bench does appear devoid of the same kind of logic. And, maybe she is a liberal, as well. Maybe that's where her son got it all, like picking up a virus from someone who spent too much time cleaning the dog pen without the help of a pooper scooper. That doesn't mean she should recuse herself.

And here is where logic failed my friend. He forgot that the world operates under two distinct rules of nature - one for conservatives and a completely different set of rules for liberals.

The problem is intrinsic to the core values of the two groups. Conservatives have chosen a narrower path in life. They believe that, just because you can do something doesn't necessarily mean you should. For instance, just because a person has the ability to put something putrid in their mouth doesn't mean they should. Or, for another example, just because we can elect a black man president doesn't mean we should elect the first one with superior teleprompter skills.

Liberals, on the other hand, aspire to a lower set of standards. Sexual shenanigans, while generally devastating for the careers of conservative politicians, are accepted among the liberal herd as nothing more than an expression of creativity. I mean, only a liberal would try to passionately argue that oral sex is not sex.

And so, in terms of conflict of interests, from the liberal perspective, this is called acute justice. Which makes sense, after all. It's acute because it's in touch with their inner feelings. To heck with legal precedents, does the decision give you a warm fuzzy, that's the question. The application of liberal justice does tend to leave a bit of a putrid taste in ones mouth but, after a while, their breed seems to have gotten used to the flavor.

Common sense in a blind spot for Illinois liberals - Crystal Lake company departs for Wisconsin

It's no longer hypothetical. Catalysts Exhibits, Inc., is soon to depart Crystal Lake, IL, for a warmer environment - warmer at least in terms of the embrace and support it will receive from its new state government. Check out this story on Triblocal.com: http://triblocal.com/crystal-lake/2011/03/17/crystal-lake-loses-business-to-wisconsin/.

This situation is indicative of the blind spot in the liberal perspective. They are so completely focused on the idea of financial equity for the 'little people' under their elitist benevolence, that they can't understand an engine won't run without fuel. It's like the episode of The Twilight Zone from years ago where the killer, unable to accept the existence of terrible scars on one side of his face, which he hides from the television audience until the very end, is stunned when he's identified for the crime.

"How did they know it was me?"

"Well, no one else has that particular type of facial disfigurement."

Liberal progressives just don't see it.

"Ahha, I know the answer - tax all the wealthy owners of companies in the state."

"But, what if they move, say, to Wisconsin or something?"

"I'm sorry. I know your lips were moving but nothing was coming out."

It's as though logic is spoken at a decibel the liberal progressive ear can't pick up. "YES, YOU CAN TAX ALL THE CREATORS OF JOBS - BUT MANY WILL TAKE THEIR JOBS TO OTHER STATES RATHER THAN PAY YOUR TAXES."

"Do you think he heard you?"

"Judging by that blank stare and incoherent smile on his face, I doubt it."

The only apparent means of getting through to these Bozos is by speaking loudly at the ballot box. Hopefully, enough Illinoisans have hearing that is effective at the common-sense level and we can do some elective shouting next time these Bozos run for re-election.

NPR exec claims intelligence while exhibiting none

It really didn't bother me when I was taking a class at Northern Illinois University and the professor suggested that, "One day, computer programmers may be able to take all of your brainwaves and create a program of your mind and thoughts so that you would live inside the Internet." Flaky? Sure. A little bit moronic? Absolutely. Does that kind of thinking have a place in the 'real world?' Come on? But, at least he didn't ask me to watch a performance of two people having sex or something.

On the other hand, I was bothered today when I saw the video of NPR executives Ron Schiller and Betsy Liley speaking to what they thought were two men with $5 million to give from the Muslim Brotherhood in America.

There was a lot said by these two NPR geniuses that bothered me, like the laughable statement that TEA Party people are fanatically involved in people's lives, but there was one other thing that prompted me to write here today. I was bothered by their comments that fit with the knuckle-dragging Neanderthal brush the Left has consistently tried to use to paint conservatives and, in particular, members of the TEA Party.

Schiller spoke of how 'his' country has disturbed and disappointed him. He said that the "educated, so-called elite is too small a percentage of the population (but, apparently, a couple members smaller than he was counting)."

He added that "you have this very large uneducated" group that is more "about anti-intellectualism."

I used to talk to people about how the things they taught in college didn't exactly fit well in the real world - like making a computer program out of your brainwaves. But, it really goes much deeper than that. Many of the ideas better left in academia are not as obviously idiotic as abandoning our bodies to exist as programs in the Internet.

If you want an example of what happens when someone takes naively wild ideas out of the classroom and tries them out in the real world, you need look no further than the White House. Barack Obama is the epitome of someone better placed in the figurative world of ideas than operating where the rubber meets the road. It's like giving the keys to someone who once read a book about driving a car instead of someone who has actually been down the road a time or two.

Above all, what Schiller exhibited is the kind of arrogance I love about 'the elite' - it makes them such easy targets. And, in the process, it reminds us 'little people' that all those letters beyond their names don't necessarily make them any wiser than the rest of us.

I don't have a Phd after my name. I do have a dozen credits towards a masters degree, however. During the time I've spent in academia, I've met some very intelligent people. Some of them have less common sense than a lab rat but they can still provide the solutions to complex mathematical equations.

We have a need, in the real world, for people who can solve such problems. However, when I checkout of the grocery store, in spite of the rise in food prices, I still don't need a scientific calculator to do the math. We also have a need in this world for intellectuals, people who will explore and consider those things we don't otherwise have time to consider. But, thankfully, engineers building aircraft for Boeing don't apply theoretical equations to the process. They like to test out the theoretical before launching airplanes filled with hundreds of living, breathing, non-theoretical bodies.

The truth is, after numerous years in academia, where I've met some very intelligent people, I can honestly say that, some of the smartest people I've ever met never went to college. Some of them never even finished high school. I had a friend who couldn't read or write but could do things with a tool-and-die machine that were out of this world.

One of the most important things I've learned about intelligence is that it's value is dramatically diminished when accompanied by arrogance. Arrogance, after all, is the exhibition of absolute confidence that one is correct. Once we reach that point, there's no reason to search any further for answers. And if Schiller is disturbed and disappointed, I suggest that he look within first before casting stones where he obviously hasn't really looked.

Oh My Gosh - government spending is wasteful (gasp)

Did you hear - there's governmental waste in Washington, D.C, as reported in the Wall Street Journal. Oh my!

Of course, it's entirely reasonable that the WSJ would cover this story. It deserves to be covered. Any reasonable/ethical publication has a responsibility to cover this story (that's why it's in the Wall Street Journal). But, it's not news.

Raise your hands. How many of you actually thought the government wasn't wasting our tax dollars? How many of you thought the government did a moderately good job of using our money? No hands? How many of you thought the government was doing a poor job of handling our money. There's a few hands - mostly those who didn't anticipate a final option in this informal poll. Now, how many of you think the government is doing an abysmal, horrible, horrendous, stupefying, negligent, criminally inefficient, wasteful and disgraceful job of handling the nation's purse strings?

There they are - all the hands are in the air.

We all know government wastes our finances like someone trying to bail out a sinking ship with a pasta strainer. If we heard that, for every dollar well spent by the government, another $10 are utterly wasted, no one is going to express any serious surprise.

And, with that level of faith in the government, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, the other Democrats in Congress, the Liberal Progressives from universities to soup kitchens, from union halls to abortion clinics, from East Coast to West - all believe in bigger government. If you'll pardon the mixed metaphors, it's like asking your teenage daughter to hold onto the family credit cards in order to stick to your budget.

This is why, beyond the unConstitutional nature of Obamacare, it's a moronic idea to give the government a bigger say in health care. Less ... less of a say, that's the solution.

Obama claims Bush drove the economy into the ditch. Of course, that makes as much sense as blaming the last lemming over the cliff for the bloody mess on the rocks below. But, regardless, the point is that the government has a function and the people in the Beltway seldom seem to recognize the limitations of their roles.

Big government translates to a more powerful government. And a more powerful government translates to a less empowered populace. A more powerful government also translates to a more wasteful government.

Let's assume the government is not as bad as the example I used in the fifth paragraph of this story - wasting $10 for every dollar well spent. Let's suppose that the government only wastes $1 for every two dollars it spends. That's still 50 percent wasted.

Based on this scenario, if the government has access to $1 trillion of our money, that means they're wasting $500 billion. If the government has access to $14 trillion, that means they're wasting $7 trillion. I choose a number closer to the prior than the latter. For your final question in this unscientific poll, which do you choose? And, no, you can't raise your hands for both answers. That kind of logic is only accepted in places like Detroit and Washington, D.C.

Rahm Emanuel? Are people just tone deaf?

Sometimes, I just don't understand. This morning, someone posted a photo in Facebook that showed a Rahm Emanuel for Mayor sign planted in the snow-covered grass between the lanes of a Chicago boulevard. While the person who posted this pointed out that Rahm must have some kind of clout with the city to pull that off, since it is apparently not otherwise acceptable, she still likes Rahm.

I'm a big fan of Ronald Reagan. I think he was possibly the best president since George Washington. And that's saying something since we've had some other remarkable men in that office since 1789 when Washington was first sworn in. But, as much as I appreciated Reagan, I never quite got the "Great Communicator" thing.

Sure, I was impressed with what he said but it was his message more than his delivery that really got me. The same thing with Billy Clinton and Barack Obama, both of whom have also had similar monikers attached to their names. I never got that at all. With Clinton, when the Lewinski scandal broke, I felt like I was the only person who wasn't surprised. I mean, the guy had hound-dog written all over him as far as I could tell.

And Obama - it's as though people who love him are absolutely tone deaf to the rather peculiar things he has to say. I want to scream at them: HE'S A SOCIALIST/WELFARIAN WHO BLAMES AMERICA FOR MOST OF THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS. But, I guess people will only hear what they want to hear.

I recently wrote a column where I spoke of Emanuel setting off the same alarms for me that Stuart Levine did. I once interviewed the former head of the Illinois Health Facilities Planning Board, who is now in prison for using that position to fatten his wallet, for a story about the IHFPB's decision making process related to a proposed hospital in Crystal Lake, IL. I was right about Levine and, in my recent column, I wrote of how Emanuel sets off the same alarms for me. But, nobody else seems to see it.

I told someone about that today - about how I think Emanuel is dirty to the core and, with any luck, will go from City Hall to 26th and California in the near future. My friend said he doesn't see it. In his eyes, Emanuel is merely a pitbull who will get things done one way or the other.

"That," I said, "is the point. How will he get things done and for what purpose?"

I believe Emanuel escaped an investigation into his involvement with Fannie Mae because the investigators were largely sympathetic to his position and influence. But, with or without any solid evidence, I'm convinced this guy is dirty. And I can't understand why other people don't see it.

Maybe I'll one day admit that I was wrong. More than likely, I'll only admit that he hasn't been caught yet. Then again, if Chicago is really lucky, he'll prove me right.

Rahm has me dreaming of Rockford

Have you ever been in a car accident? Not all accidents happen suddenly. Sometimes, you can see the accident unfolding around you realizing there's nothing you can do about it. All you can do is to try to grab hold of something solid, brace your body and wait for the impact.

That's kind of how I felt watching the elections in Chicago today. I could see the accident coming as I did protest in a recent posting here. However, even as I expressed my concern over what I see as a lack of foresight on the part of voters in Chicago, I knew there was little I could do to avoid the political equivalent of screeching tires and busted glass and a dismal choice for mayor of the Windy City.

I don't live in Chicago but that offers small comfort. On a clear day, if I drive about halfway to the city, I'll begin seeing the high-rise buildings of the Loop - Sears Tower, the Hancock Building, if that's what they still call them, and others. But, even from a distance, Chicago cast a big shadow. That shadow isn't merely from tall buildings blotting out the sun; it's also a political shadow cast upon Springfield, the state capital a few hours to the Southwest.

For those of you less familiar with Illinois politics, you may still remember the name Rod Blagojevich - you know, the guy with the hair. Blagojevich made Illinois something of a laughing stock with the scandal that drove him from office, not to mention the way he handled himself in the midst of the personal crisis he shared with the state. Embarrassing Illinois politically takes some doing. Think back to the prior Richard Daley - not the one who just stepped down. Richard J. Daley was the guy who had this to say to a fellow Democrat when the 1968 Democratic Convention turned into a riot in the streets:

"F--- you, you Jew son of a bitch, you lousy mother-f---er, go home." said to US Senator Abraham Ribicoff after he blasted Daley and his administration at the 1968 Democratic Convention for their handling of convention riots."

That's about the same time that he pumped out this beauty: "The policeman isn't there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder."

Now that's a touch of class, isn't it. And that was eight years before he left office due to a fatal heart attack. The lesson, reinforced in Chicago today - Chicagoans just don't care. Or, more aptly put, they know which side of their bread is buttered and that's the key to their hearts.

But, back to Chicago's long shadow. What you may not have heard about during Blagojevich's impeachment-shortened term as governor was the joke about the Governor's Mansion. Seems Blagojevich, a former Chicago Alderman, thought the mansion was in Chicago - not Springfield. In fact, from the way he acted, he seemed to think the state capital rode a little to the Northeast of center, as well.

It makes sense that a city with the population of Chicago should have a little more pull than other communities. But, just as our national government was setup to ensure that smaller states and regions were not left in the legislative dustpan, the government in Illinois is setup to protect the interests of smaller communities, too.

That balance doesn't work as well when we have people in office who are not entirely committed to the arrangement. I'm not sure where Pat Quinn stands on the matter. And I have no doubt Richard M Daley was adept at pulling Springfield's strings for the sake of his voting district - Chicago. But, I find it disquieting to think that the big city to the Southeast of me is now in the hands of someone who, while Chief of Staff to Barack Obama, demonstrated what I consider a total lack of respect for Constitutional authority - well, beyond the opportunities it gave him to take advantage of a crisis or two.

I used to like to take a day trip into Chicago from time to time. Rockford is looking much more appealing these days. For that matter, Lake Geneva isn't that far.

Chicago: some cities don't care who is listed as a reference

I heard the Rahm "Deadfish" Emanuel ad on the radio again this morning. It was the Obama-giving-a-testimonial ad again. A testimonial is kind of like a reference. You're applying for a job and the prospective employer wants references. In Emanuel's case, though most employers ask for three, he has two significant references. One is the sitting president of the United States and one is a former president of the United States. I guess it's no wonder they're saying Deadfish is a shoe-in for mayor of Chicago. Of course, deep GeorgeSorian pockets don't hurt, either.

In same neighborhoods, those two references will play very well. It's just like going into a job interview with Sammy Sosa and Mark McGuire as references. Those are well-known names. Both men had significant careers in a widely followed profession. Of course, both are strongly suspected, last I heard, of using performance enhancing drugs to further their careers.

There are some neighborhoods where people won't care that Sosa and McGuire may have tainted their reputations to get ahead. Some neighborhoods, however, might not look upon that kindly. Some prospective employers would not be impressed.

It's the same thing having Obama and Clinton as references while campaigning for the job of mayor of Chicago. In Chicago, those names seem to carry a lot of water. In other neighborhoods, those names would represent the kiss of death for a political career.

I don't like to criticize voters but this, in my opinion, doesn't speak very highly of the character of those who would elect Deadfish. Maybe if Obama and Clinton were current and former rulers of the land, it wouldn't matter that one chased a chambermaid around the thrown and the other seems to want to share the keys to the economy and defense with other countries, friendly or otherwise. Besides, if they were kings, we wouldn't have anything to say about their misdeeds to begin with.

The point is, I just don't feel any kind of "tingle down my leg" when someone says the word "president." It's not that I don't respect the office or that I see myself on an equal social and political footing. It's just that I'm an American. I don't bow to presidents and, if I did, I wouldn't be bowing to them; I'd be bowing to the significance of their position - all the people they represent. And, I'm not automatically impressed because they are or were presidents.

I think Ronald Reagan was quite possibly the best president since George Washington. Some people were utterly captivated when Reagan spoke. The media called him the great communicator. Well, I never felt a shiver down my leg when Reagan spoke either, at least not one inspired by the simple aural pleasure of hearing his voice. I was impressed with Reagan because, to use the words from a television commercial of his time, when he spoke I didn't have to ask, "Where's the beef." He made sense. And I didn't feel like he was selling to me. I felt like he was simply giving it to me straight.

Some people do feel a shiver down their legs when Obama or Clinton speaks. I don't see it. Even though it didn't happen for me when Reagan spoke, I could at least see why others might feel that way. With Clinton and Obama, it just comes off as too contrived. They're just too smooth. I listen to them and I feel like they could give Eddie Haskell lessons.

That, for me, speaks to their sincerity. But, when you put those names - Obama and Clinton - on your application as references, I want to know what kind of presidents they are or were. Did they or do they respect the office of the presidency? How about the Constitution - did/do they feel that their very lives were/are secondary to their oath to uphold the Constitution? If not, can I expect the same from you, Mr. Emanuel?

Recently, Deadfish took a commentator on WGN to task because the commentator didn't apply the title "president" before every reference to Obama. Clearly, Deadfish holds 'Obama' in high esteem. And, I suppose, that's why his commercials seem to play so well in Chicago. In Chicago, they don't care that Clinton used his office to get a little from a young intern or that Obama seems to think the Constitution is optional as he 'governs' from the White House.

Chicago is a neighborhood where liberal progressivism is well bought and paid for. It's in the lay of the land. In Chicago, the only reason McGuire isn't warmly received is because he played for a team from a rival city. But, in Chicago, it doesn't matter that Clinton is from Arkansas, or that he seems a little too rehearsed, as long as he's from the liberal progressive side of the aisle.