Bamboozled all week long

The press was bamboozled twice this week. First, there were the men who claimed to have found buried treasure in their front yard who were later arrested for having stolen it from a barn they were hired to repair. Then there was the Georgia woman who ran out on her wedding.

No, I guess I'd have to say they were bamboozled three times this past week because there is the once again false notion that Bush held a press conference for which the networks postponed primetime sweeps programming. Oh, yes, there was a press conference, but was Bush really having it, or was it some guy behind a curtain Wizard of Oz style?

Kos discusses a Nightline segment that aired on the west coast on why reporters don't ask the tough questions in news conferences. In that piece, they go around about how you have to go easy on Bush to get any answer at all, but I think it has more to do with the profits that they value far more than their journalistic ideals. (See my March 3, 2005 posting on Why the Gannon/Guckert case is important re ethics in journalism.)

I see it all over, not just in journalism. Businesses actually instruct their employees to say and do just about anything for a buck. Businessmen who are lying and cheating learn that all they have to do is yell and scream in feigned displeasure to prevent the other side from objecting and the businessmen on the other side acquiesce to just about anything because they are afraid of losing the leftovers of a bad deal. People have become apologists for fraud, forgery, lying, cheating in the name of squeezing out that last dollar and it's all considered ok. Values and religion have been appropriated into political partisanship. They have become empty words and motions and are not internalized into thought and purposeful action. Character is just what you can get away with without being caught. No one complains because they want to be able to do it to make their bucks.

In journalism, it is way cheaper to bring in a few guys claiming to have found antique currency and interview a few coin collectors than to go to the site and investigate it yourself to see if the story makes sense. It is more ratings friendly to interview a weeping family and bad mouth a fiance than to chronicle a purposeful hunt for a missing woman. It makes better and more saleable theatre to orchestrate a news conference to look like its running smoothly and nothing disturbing is being revealed than to demand real information from a reluctant president. It is way easier to get watered down happy news from Iraq from the administration than to defy Rumsfeld press rules and get the tough interviews.

How did it work before? Broadcasters had an obligation to serve the public interest and were legally required to devote time, money and energy to public interest programming. That law was repealed under Reagan in 1987. Journalism became pure business ever after, so when you get lousy reporting it is no different than getting lousy service at the neighborhood restaurant, or lousy auto repair, or past freshness date food at the grocery store, or forged checks accepted by the local bank.

We don't get good products and services because we don't demand them. We don't get accurate and fair reporting because we accept whatever is dished out. We don't get good government because we don't demand it. We demand fast, cheap and our own chance to make an easy buck.

Housing

I was looking through the local Pioneer Press for the letters to the editor. Several letters were responses to their editorial insinuating that the Democrats should stop running township slates because we bring partisan politics to the township (but that's a whole different story).

Anyway, I noticed the real estate ads and even the most modest house on the most modest street was running about $400,000+. Only the wealthy can live here any more. Even up north north north in Antioch or Lindenhurst, the prices were high.

How are average people supposed to live?

The republican answer is that they really don't care.

Well, they might care soon as some real estate experts are predicting a crisis. I am not surprised. What I am seeing (and I hear Chicago metro is not the worst market for this) are speculators purchasing up units in new developments and pushing up the prices. Only "luxury" housing is being built other than the limited HUD funded housing. Rentals, even the most modest, are turning into condominiums and the prices are high. Foreclosures are also up and some days I see nothing but short sale closings--sales to quickly pay off the mortgage during a foreclosure as the sheriff deputy readys himself to come over and evict. They are called short sales because the lender agrees to take less then the entire payoff to release the property from the mortgage for the new buyer. Both loan purchasers and owners lose in a short sale while the mortgage brokers and initial lenders who have sold the loans to people who cannot afford them have already made their fees and are long gone.

Back in the early 1900s my great-grandparents lived in tenaments on the west side of Chicago and in Brooklyn, NY and dreamed of getting out and giving more to their children. Now, the poor dream of having a nice tenament to live in while they lose their cash rapidly in daily or weekly rate motels without kitchens.

Housing is going to be the big crisis in the next decade without a doubt because it is so hard to get those with housing to care about it, and when they even think about it they worry about what lower income housing will do to their property values. All I can say to the people of our district is that they need to think about where their children are going to live. It might be with them, forever.

A Must Read

Al Gore's speech is a must read. He even mentions my favorite federalist paper, Madison's Federalist Paper #10. Here is an excerpt from VP Gore's speech:

Our founders understood that there is in all human beings a natural instinct for power. The Revolution they led was precisely to defeat the all-encompassing power of a tyrant thousands of miles away.

They knew then what Lord Acton summarized so eloquently a hundred years later: "Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely." They knew that when the role of deliberative democracy is diminished, passions are less contained, less channeled within the carefully balanced and separated powers of our Constitution, less checked by the safeguards inherent in our founders' design-and the vacuum left is immediately filled by new forms of power more arbitrary in their exercise and derived less from the consent of the governed than from the unbridled passions of ideology, ultra-nationalist sentiments, racist, tribal and sectarian fervor -- and most of all, by those who claim aunique authority granted directly to them by the Almighty.

That is precisely why they established a system of checks and balances to prevent the accretion of power in any one set of hands -- either in one individual or a group because they were wary of what Madison famously called "factions."

Yet today that is precisely what a small group of radical Republicans is trying to do. And they threaten a fundamental break with a system that has served us well for 230 years and has served as a model for the rest of the world.

Thank you Vice President Gore, for your courage and willingness to speak out against these unimaginable attacks upon our Constitution by extremist factions. You could be sunning in the Carribbean, but instead chose to fight the hard, but good fight here at home.

Are they laughing at us?

President Bush and Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah holding hands

My mom wanted me to write about this and give her point of view. She thinks that the Saudis are laughing at Bush and at us.

She understands that in Saudi culture there is nothing strange about men holding hands and being a good liberal Democrat she is not particularly concerned about homosexual overtones either. However, she thinks the Saudis are laughing at us. She thinks so because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi and because we have become dangerously dependent upon their oil with no end in sight from the Bush energy plan which is more interested in new refineries then oil independence.

All the hand holding and kissing between Bush and Abdullah won't change the fact that the American people turned away from Carter's thoughtful 1979 energy independence plan in favor of Reagan's 'do nothing and consume as much as you want' plan culminating in the current oil industry control of the white house and US foreign policy. The Saudis can make nice to us for a while, or not, but they have the control, and we gave it to them. SUV drivers in the US still insist that they will never give them up no matter how much oil prices rise or how bad our foreign policy gets because of our dependence. Industry never did much of anything to end its oil dependence and we never really made them, wrapped up as we were in Reaganomics and fundamentalist religion. For its better than $2 million investment in Bush's reelection campaign, the oil and energy industry is getting the Bush energy plan.

The "they" that are laughing, of course, are the Saudi royal family, not the typical Saudi family. They typical Saudi family sees their oil going to the US, but little of the profits therefrom adding fuel to the fundamentalist fire that produces terrorists like the ones that hit the WTC.

As an attorney, I am amazed by the bargaining position in which we have put ourselves--the American people, not the administration. I don't even think Herb Cohen could negotiate himself out of this one. We get oil that we rapidly consume and end up in a vicious cycle of needing more. Saudi royals get obscene amounts of money that they keep. Saudi families get little and grow poor and angry at their royal family and us. Terrorist groups seek recruits from among the angry Saudi poor. Terrorists threaten us and Bush uses the threat to scare people into voting for him, against their own economic interests. Who wins? Bush, Saudi royals. Who loses? Saudi and American Families.

So, is my mom right? Probably. The Saudi royals are laughing at Bush, or laughing with him, and everyone is laughing at us--the American people, and maybe we deserve it here.

Mark Kirk doesn't represent us---and says it to us

The Herald on Kirk's position on Social Security:

When he was first elected to Congress in 2000, Republican Rep. Mark Kirk came out against letting people invest their Social Security contributions in the stock market ... On Thursday, Kirk said he doesn't want to automatically come out against Bush's plan before the details are released. (Krol, Chicago Daily Herald, 2/4)

One of my 10th district collegues made this remark that I think best describes Kirk's position:

On the biggest domestic issue of the day, Kirk claims to be sitting back not taking any direction from the people in the 10th district - he doesn't represent us, he represents the political machine in DC.

Keep your seat by keeping Democrats out and decreasing affordable housing in the country (even more)

This article really hit a nerve because of the huge decrease in affordable housing across the country in general.

In Farifax, Representative Tom Davis has a new campaign strategy: prevent housing likely to attract Democrats from being built. Outside of the sheer wrongness of this type of republican fortress thinking, it is yet another plan to decrease affordable housing.

The Fair Housing Act of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 will again have to be amended to provide fair housing for Democrats as well as minorities and the disabled.

It is so very sad to see the type of country in which the republicans want to live and bring to the rest of us.

Something Local--Impact Aid for Increased Military Housing

Impact aid for an increase in military housing has become an important issue in Highland Park, Highwood and Ft. Sheridan. The increase in the number of children served by the school districts due to new military housing will require the building of a new school and there is concern that the low impact aid and tax contribution by the military housing will decrease school effectiveness and increases taxes for the civilian residents outside the base.

Mark Kirk co-introduced H.R. 390 to mandate full funding of the impact aid program, but some of my friends living in Highland Park are now telling me that he no longer appears interested in the legislation. He has stopped attending meetings on the subject and is not pushing the legislation.

Since Kirk is in favor of the new American militarism and the Iraq War in particular, one would hope this would be a key issue for him. Also, sounds like many children will be left behind.

The worst use of religion and Kirk and Co. say nothing

When I was in High School, my english teacher had us read the Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne. Written in 1850 it is considered an American classic despite the really bad Demi Moore movie and is about sin and redemption in 17th century New England. One main character, the minister, Arthur Dimmesdale, is very outspoke in his religious fervor and very tortured because he is the father of Hester Prynne's child, the having of which was a crime (of her's only of course) punished by imprisonment and afterward wearing the scarlet letter, a scarlet A (for adultry) sewn into her dress.

Anyway, the story prompted my teacher, a former minister, to tell us to watch out for people who loudly proclaim their religious piety and fervor as they are usually the ones with the most sin. Tom DeLay for example.

If you haven't caught any of the clips of Justice Sunday, I suggest you do so. I caught a few minutes of it on Keith Olbermann's Countdown. It was one of the scariest events I have ever seen designed to whip Christians into fortress mode against Democrats and liberals. It is the use of religion for political gain which is the worst use of religion possible and why the founders of this country sought a clear line between government and religion.

So, where does Mark Kirk come in here? He comes in here because his party is perpetrating one of the most dangerous campaigns in the history of this country--invoking religion to argue a partisan political point with subtle and some not so subtle threats of violence connected--and he says nothing. It's ok with him because being courageous and statesman like has nothing to do with his reelection. Best to say nothing so no one from either side can criticize in the 2006 campaign.

Sorry, Rep. Kirk, saying nothing is saying something here. We need a statesman and we got a political hack.

Kirk voted in favor of Real ID

This was under my radar, but on February 10, Kirk voted for H.R. 418 known as the Real ID Act. This is categorized as "Legislation that threatens civil liberties" by the Bill of Rights Defense Committee.

The Real ID Act makes it more difficult for immigrants to find asylum in the US. They have to prove their motive under the act and provide credible evidence. Sounds fair to you? Go prove something that is inside people's heads while fleeing a country with only the clothes on your back? Try obtaining credible evidence from some of the governments in the world (ha, including ours).

In addition to all the folks they may want to keep out, this proposed law will keep out people with genuine asylum needs such as people fleeing religious persecution and women fleeing sex trafficking, forced abortions and genital mutilation. Also, some of the grounds for deportation are so vague and general with guilt by association provisions, that giving aid to Tsumani victims could be interpreted as a terrorist act leading to deporation even of someone holding a green card.

Ironically, the bill also limits access to federal courts to appeal an immigration judges ruling. Ironic because that is what the republicans argued was needed in the Schiavo case and there was not even a federal question in that case.

The Real ID Act also imposes new federal driver's license standard designed to prevent immigrants from obtaining driver's licenses. It also prevents immigrants from obtaining auto insurance. This will likely create a black market in licenses and people will be driving unskilled and illegally and without insurance.

The Real ID Act also waives state and local laws for the construction of immigration barriers such as fences and walls, including labor and criminal laws.

With this vote, his support for the Iraq War and Patriot Act, Kirk has positioned himself far from the values of his constituency, many of whom are the children and grandchildren of immigrants who fled Europe for religious and economic persecution. Mr. Kirk, if you feel so differently from us, how can you represent us in Congress?

Vietnam War Forgiveness Misplaced

Seeing Jane Fonda at the Schakowsky event and hearing about the recent spitting incident made me think about Fonda and the Vietnam war and forgiveness.

Fonda became, and apparently still is, somewhat of a villain among conservatives and veterans for her 1972 trip to Hanoi where she appeared on the radio and asked the American troops to think about what they were doing. She did not tell them to put down their weapons and revolt, but to think about what they were doing. I imagine she was hoping they would put down their weapons, but as she said in a later interview, that was for them to decide. At the time, Fonda was a young actress just learning how to be an activist.

At the time of Fond's Hanoi trip, Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara was in his mid-50s, was at the pinnacle of his career advising President Johnson about the war from his luxurious office in DC. McNamara was a professor from Harvard Business School, a former President of Ford Motor Co., and had served in the Army Air Force during World War II as a statistician. As the republican Secretary of Defense to Johnson, McNamara was there when the telegrams from the USS Maddox, a US destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin, first reported a missle attack and then sent a subsequent report that the attack did not happen explaning that their first notice was based on a misread of sonar signals. He was there when the Maddox was instructed to provoke a North Vietnamese attack. He was there, but silent on these two major points that could have prevented escalation of the war. When asked about the incident, McNamara's response was "Our Navy played no part in, was not associated with, was not aware of, any South Vietnamese actions, if there were any." South Vietnamese actions? People were asking about US and North Vietnamese actions.

Then, there is McNamara's famous reponse to Johnson telling him that some want the US to leave Vietnam, "I just don't believe we can be pushed out of there, Mr. President. We just can't allow it to be done. You wouldn't want to go down in history as having...."

As chronicled in Daniel Ellsbergs book, Secrets, McNamara also participated in lies about a US Drone crash in China. He looked to aides to write up alternate lies for the president to use to explain away the situation.

In his book, In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam McNamara admits that the Vietnam War "was fought in order to protect the profits of oil and natural gas and tin and shipping and gambling industries and for the benefit of military brass who feared a decrease in funding and on and on and that the dreaded "Domino Effect" was only a cover."

McNamara now acknowledges that the Vietnam war was a huge mistake, but at the time failed to disclose the lies that led up to the war and allowed the war to escalate. He was a highly educated, experienced man who participated in the "groupthink" that created and maintained that war based on lies as discussed by David Halberstam in his book, The Best and the Brightest. Thousands of American soldiers and Vietnamese people, including children, died for McNamara's lies and omissions. Yet, these conservative and veteran groups rarely exhibit the same vitriolic criticism of McNamara as they do of Fonda.

Personally, I can forgive Fonda for her role in Vietnam. She had little effect except to help rally the anti-war movement and the pro-war groups against the anti-war movement and was young and stupid. Young, stupid and right.

McNamara cannot argue young, stupid or that his actions had little effect. He was mature, experienced and oh so terrible wrong.

I am mad a Fonda, though. I simply cannot forgive her for Barbarella and Cat Ballou.

Jane and Jan at the Ultimate Women's Power Lunch

This afternoon, I was fortunate enough to attend the 4th Annual Jan Schakowsky Ultimate Women's Power Lunch. I sat at the table of my state representative, Karen May. We were 10 Ultimate Power Women from the Southeast 10th District, including newly elected Moraine Township Trustee, Cynthia Plouche’.

The keynote speaker this year was Jane Fonda. Ms. Fonda is on tour promoting her book, My Life So Far.

The theme of the discussion was that women need to find their voices and bring them to the table. Ms. Fonda observed that women still lack confidence and give away their leadership to their male peers and companions. That was what she found herself doing most of her life. She also observed that even young women now who grew up in times of unprecedented women's prosperity and achievement succumb to the condition.

I have previously written on this blog about women giving up their leadership. It plays out on CBS's Survivor every season; I saw it on the Kerry campaign and even see it in my legal career. After today's function, Rep. May mentioned that she was surprised by the comment that even young women limited their achievement. I had to tell her that I was not surprised at all. I have recently been training young female attorneys and paralegals and find them to be terribly timid and fearful of negotiating with customers and making mistakes. I always talk to these young women about the need to have courage, make mistakes and learn from them, and to prepare themselves to take on leadership roles. They seem surprised by the lecture, so I wonder if they were ever taught about courage and leadership. Where were their parents and teachers, I wonder.

I am beginning to think I was raised in an extraordinary family where the expectations for the girls were no different than the expectations for the boys. As a child, I was given expectations of future leadership. I was taught to visualize a life of professionalism, analysis, opinion and communication. These young women I train (shockingly born and raise well after the women's lib movement of the '70s) apparently were not, but find as adults that they need these skills and it's rough on them to learn what they need the hard way, on an adult playing field. I see lots of tears at work all the time and it's not the men crying, and it's not the men doing the best work either.

So, again American conservatism exhibits its great hypocrisy. Women living it a world that requires them to work for survival and compete on an unlevel playing field for jobs and salaries are still educated to live in a world of marriage and paternalistic protection. Frist, DeLay, Hastert, Kirk and Bush want to keep it that way.

Jane Fonda says she learned this lesson at 60. We need to start training women to become leaders at 6, not 60.

**************************************

Jan spoke too and I'm a Jan Fan because she always makes me feel better with her optimism and unapologetic outspokenness. Jan talked about not only women's, but Democrat's failure of confidence. She urged us to stand up "unapologetically and joyfully" for our values and beliefs. We have no reason not to because the vast majority of Americans agree with them.

Jan said that one thing that she admired about the republicans was their ability to declare victory from the depths of defeat. The dog of a Social Security Plan Bush is stumping for is still on the table; the marginal and perhaps fraudulent victory over Kerry is dubbed a mandate; and the systematic destruction of the middle class and environment are named fair, clean and good. She's right, but I never understood why Americans so admire fake good, fake victory and unsubstantial bravado.

Jan also observed that women have lost positions of power and leadership in the low numbers of women in public office. Carol Moseley-Braun said the same thing at the Convention in July. We are losing ground and have to show up with confidence. When women run for office, women win. Cynthia Plouche’ proved that April 5th, and she was not alone in the 10th. There was also Michelle Feldman, Harriet Rosenthal, Adrienne Johnson, Mari Barnes, Ellen Gussin, Bryna Gamson, Margoth Moreno and others.

As the republicans preside over a war based on lies and the massive transfer of wealth from the world to the richest Americans and corporations, we Democrats, men and women, have to speak out with courage and strength for real American values of fairness, truth, caring, and compassion and shape public opinion in our own right, not sit around and wring our hands as the the fake Tom DeLay values are repeated and repeated until they seem true.

Jan is feeling good about our ultimate victory. She said, "you cannot fool all the people all the time and their time is running out."

Sorry Mr. Roeper, Free Speech is Barely Breathing in the US

In Monday’s column, Richard Roeper sarcastically dismissed complaints that the Secret Service is overreacting to perceived threats against the President and declared free speech alive and well in the US.

Mr. Roeper missed the point because he failed to address the recent arrests and forced removal of people who attended Presidential appearances. During the President’s Social Security sales tour, people were barred and arrested for demonstrating against the privatization proposal and for as little as wearing a t-shirt with a slogan in disagreement. On March 4, nine protesters were arrested outside a Westfield, New Jersey town hall meeting for shouting. On March 22, University of Arizona student was barred from attending a Tucson forum despite having a ticket. His crime was wearing a UA Young Democrats t-shirt. This is only a description of a couple of stories, but there are many many similar stories out there.

Here in Chicago, the President not even in attendance, we must not forget the March 19th images of the police in full riot gear lining Michigan Avenue, 5 deep in some places, for a peaceful anti-war protest.

Mr. Roeper was wrong to exclude this relevant information from his commentary and free speech in the US may be breathing, but barely.

And the war based on lies goes on

Interesting site that calculates the cost of war in dollars and compares it to what is being spent on education, hunger, health care issues.

Not to mention the cost to our reputation, integrity and souls in a war based on lies and maintained on silence and news supression.

Where are all the religious faithful in this discussion?

Busy threatening judges.

Pope John Paul II was against the war.

Where were his followers when we had to opportunity to send Bush back to Crawford on Nov 2?

Pushing Religion in Life and Politics and can God be Found in the Pavement Under the Expressway?

CNN's early morning web poll showed that over 50% of those responding were not paying attention to the Pope selection process even though it had been featured on just about every television news program and major media website. Has mega-media content-controlled news become the new church? Everyone says it's important, but many don't go and many who do go don't pay attention.

There is an article from Will Pitt that really hits the issue of religion in our government:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/041905Y.shtml

Why are people who question the motives of these "religious" elected officials supposed to feel bad or be silenced because they might hurt someone's religious beliefs? Shouldn't people of faith have faith strong enough to withstand questions? Don't people with different beliefs have the right to an opinion? Can't one interpret the stigma on questioning professed religion as a defense mechanism designed to prevent questioning?

How dare you question faith?
How dare you question my right to question.

Also, I have to ask, what can be said about a people who are looking for God in a crack in the pavement on an underpass in Chicago?

I have a suspicion that people are very unhappy with the new corporate-owned world--Bush's Ownership Society. They feel out of control in their lives and are looking for something to give them some peace and hope. On ABC's Good Morning America this morning, Diane Sawyer reported on a story about men who were hiding out in Starbucks mornings on their way to work rather than helping out at home with the kids or going straight to work. Not surprising that people are finding it tough to cope with everyday life when they are required to work harder with fewer resources for less pay and with more pressure of bills, family and urgency.

There are always people to take advantage of the situation and the theocrats described in Pitt's article fit the bill here.

Tomorrow is Equal Pay Day

Tomorrow is Equal Pay Day which is the day on which women's salaries catch up to what the men earned as of Dec 31 in the year before. It's already April, so that is pretty bad in my opinion.

To commemorate the day, wear Red (even if it pains you to do so) to symbolize that women and minorities are in the red on salary compared to their white male counterparts and support Senator Hillary Clinton and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro who will be reintroducing the Paycheck Fairness Act to strengthen equal pay protection through better enforcement on April 19.

What do you think Mark Kirk will do with the Paycheck Fairness Act? Maybe he'll ask Tom DeLay.

Don't know Kirk, just follow Tom, and see his progressive scorecard

If you are not all that aware of the voting record or ideology of Mark Kirk, you need not look too far, just study Tom DeLay.

According to cq.com, Kirk voted with DeLay 91% of the time between January 1, 2004 and March 31 2005. Not convinced? He also voted to weaken the ethics rule sponsored by DeLay to protect him from himself. See Roll Call #6, while contributing to the defeat of the Democrats attempt at a bi-partisan approach to ethics rules. See Roll Call #70. (Thanks to New Trier Dems for the info.)

However, the link to DeLay is not all for tonight. I found this interesting site: http://www.voterpunch.org/members.jsp Here, house members are given a Progressive Score which is calculated using a methodology described here.

Particularly interesting to me was Kirk's Progressive score on housing, a ZERO. Kirk earned the Zero by voting against H. Con. Res. 393 modifing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans and using the extra funds for domestic programs, and for voting against Rep. Barbara Lee's Amendment to H.R. 2861 to increase funding for HUD homeless assistance grants and and against the Nadler Amendment to increase funding for Section 8 housing. In 2003, Kirk also voted for bankruptcy changes that reduced protections for people being foreclosed on...sort of like he did last week, but this time they weren't defeated and we are going to have to live with them.

Kirk's Progressive Score was also under 10% in helping the poor, fair taxation, health care, justice, government for all--not just the rich and war. He also scored low on government checks and balances and civil liberties.

Basically, what we have in our Representative Mark Kirk is your basic class warfare republican extremist who votes pro-choice about half the time for a largely pro-choice district, sometimes votes for the environment (about half or less) for a largely pro-environment district, and follows Tom DeLay more often than not on behalf of a district no where near Texas.

Maybe it's time to send a representative to Congress who represents our district better. Do you think?

Guest Writer Matt Lowry From Our local 10th District DFA Reports on a Meeting with Kirk Staffers re Social Security

Matt Lowry from Lake County Democracy for America (DFA) here. Here's a brief summary of our meeting with Rep. Mark Kirk's (10th district) office in Deerfield on Thursday afternoon.

THE MEETING:

Our delegation - myself, Marti, Florian, Ivan, and Doug - met with two of Kirk's staffers to voice our concerns on the Social Security issue and to tell them how we expect the Congressman to move forward on the issue.

The meeting started with introductions - we also informed the staffers of where we lived in-district. From then on, we did most of the talking, and they did most of the listening (and they took a LOT of notes!) -- in the beginning we had their attention when I off-handedly mentioned that we, as a group of concerned constituents, had organized through Democracy for America.

After that, we each took it in turn to explain our biggest misgivings on the privatization plan. Marti mentioned that she was concerned with the Bush 'solution', which by his own admission doesn't seem to solve any problems, and to us it makes the situation worse... such as by raising the deficit. Florian took issue with the fact that nobody in the administration seems to be paying attention to the inevitable disabilities and benefit cuts that would result from privatization. I made comments, from the perspective of the youngest member of the delegation, that Bush's plan would add $2 trillion to the federal deficit and that would fall on my generation in the form of higher health-care costs, cuts to public education, etc. I further mentioned that this seemed to be contrary to fiscal responsibility. Ivan brought up the question of fairness -- in the 1980s, there was a regressive tax imposed on the middle and lower-classes that apparently, after privatization, won't be coming back to the very people who paid it. And Doug told of very personal concerns that he would soon be eligible for Social Security, what could happen to his benefits, and what could potentially happen to his children if Social Security were to be gambled on the markets.

A discussion then ensued, whereupon we were told that Kirk has no official position on Social Security privatization. This is due to the fact that, we are told, the President hasn't come up with anything specific. Florian pointed out that Bush is on record as stating that he wanted Congress to propose a plan, and we seized on that. One of the staffers, when pressed by Florian, even admitted that "they didn't agree with Bush" on the manner in which he was approaching the issue. Very revealing...

We then listed some things we wanted to see Kirk do in order to take the initiative on the issue. I stated that we expected Kirk to exhibit leadership on this issue and that, rather than taking his cue from Washington or the President, he should be taking his cue from the people in the 10th district of Illinois. Our next suggestion was that Kirk hold a public town-hall meeting on this issue sometime in the months to come, so that he can get feedback from his constituents. It was at this point that Doug reminded the staffers that Kirk's predicessor, Rep. Porter, held regular town-hall meetings and was held in high regard as a result.

The response from the staffers was, to be expected, non-commital. And we were told more than once that we could leave feedback directly to Kirk via his website and that he would read every message. Shortly thereafter, we had to finish the meeting because our time was up, we thanked them for the time, and we shook hands and left.

All in all, we did exactly what we intended to do -- we showed up, spoke our minds, and illustrated our expectations. And we put the ball firmly in their court. The discussions were cordial and Kirk's staffers paid close attention. In my opinion, a good experience!

WHAT TO DO NEXT:

Karyn Garber, Kirk's "point person" on Social Security, told us to leave feedback via Kirk's website. So I propose that we do just that. I propose that we try to get as many people from the 10th district as possible to write in to his site and request that he conduct this public town-hall meeting! Some phone calls or written letters to his Deerfield office might help too. Here's where to go...

http://www.house.gov/kirk/zipauth.shtml --> Please make sure you live in the 10th district!!!

Our group has already started to issue press releases describing the meeting. If anyone knows a reporter who might be interested, please direct them my way. My email is lowryclan@yahoo.com.

We further suggest writing letters to the editor of your local paper. Mention that you know someone who attended this meeting on Social Security with Kirk's office and that you're interested in seeing the Congressman set up a public town-hall on the issue. The more letters that get written and published, the more this will become an issue that Kirk will have to face, rather than hide from.

Last, but not least, spread the word about the issue and Democracy for America!

Thanks for reading this far. Have a great weekend!

Cheers,

Matt Lowry
Lake County DFA Organizer
http://dfa.meetup.com/95

A reasonable response from one of the good guys

April 14, 2005

Dear Ms. Gill:

Thank you for contacting me about bankruptcy reform. I appreciate knowing your concerns.

Bankruptcy law is one of the most arcane legal fields in America. Its premise is that honest debtors should be given a fresh start, free from obligations incurred through uncontrollable financial misfortune.

An increase in filings over the past decade has led some to conclude that the law is too lenient. The need for balanced reform has guided me over the years that Congress has considered bankruptcy legislation. I believe that any reforms imposing stricter requirements must also address abusive tactics by the credit industry.

Financial service companies have the right to reasonable protection from spurious claims of bankruptcy or from outlandish loopholes that leave some assets untouchable. I support reasonable limitations on the amount of home equity those who file for bankruptcy can keep, so that people with lavish mansions cannot exploit a system that is meant to protect those who are truly in need. At the same time, consumers have the right to better information about and protection from aggressive credit card solicitations and other offers of easy credit that can quickly trap people in debt.

I voted against the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 because it failed to deliver the balanced reform that we need.

Ninety percent of all bankruptcies are triggered by the loss of a job, high medical bills or divorce. Yet, the bankruptcy bill sets up a rigid means test to determine who is eligible for relief. Courts are left with no discretion to waive the means test even if the debtor is seeking bankruptcy relief because of some terrible circumstance beyond his or her control.

This legislation also fails to provide for credit card disclosure that would give consumers the information they need and deserve to know inorder to make sensible financial decisions. All Americans would benefit from receiving more specific information on their monthly credit card statements, such as how many months it will take to pay off a debt if only the minimum monthly payment is made. But this sensible proposal was not included in the bankruptcy measure. In addition, the bill fails to address the practices of some sub-prime lenders who offer high-risk borrowers loans that carry steep interest rates and fees. Some sub-prime lenders prey on vulnerable members of our society, including senior citizens and the poor, often driving them into serious debt and home foreclosures. I offered an amendment to the bankruptcy bill that would have helped protect consumers from predatory lending. Unfortunately, my amendment failed by a vote of 40-58.

I offered another amendment related to corporate bankruptcies. Most of the provisions of the bankruptcy bill related to individual, rather than corporate, bankruptcies, despite the clear abuses of bankruptcy laws inthe corporate world. When a corporation files for bankruptcy, the workers are left standing at the back of the line without their jobs, retirement savings, or health care benefits. Yet this bankruptcy legislation goes after employees who fall on hard times, while failing to hold corporate abusers accountable.

In an attempt to level the playing field for employees of bankrupt companies, I offered an amendment to allow bankruptcy courts to scrutinize and set aside questionable transfers made by corporate insiders, including huge payouts, loans, and bonuses that exceed a reasonable compensation amount. It also would have given employees of bankrupt companies reliefin bankruptcy court by giving them a place in line as a creditor. This amendment also was defeated by a vote of 40-54.

I am pleased that the Senate did adopt, by a vote of 99-0, an amendment I offered to protect disabled veterans who incurred debts while at war. As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I have worked to protect consumers and promote a balanced approach to bankruptcy reform that will benefit all Americans. I will continue to pursue those goals.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to stay in touch.

Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator

I've seen some of the abuses Sen. Durbin mentions in his letter to me. My friend Lisa was left holding the bag on the WorldCom bankruptcy losing her 401K and other benefits. She ended up at a much lower paying job with far fewer benefits and may lose her house. As for the high risk loans the Senator mentions, I see that all the time. People are getting 100% financing and are sure to lose their homes.

I thank Senator Durbin for working hard to curb these abuses and hope he continues. We have to encourage him to do so.

Mark Kirk in Action (for the rich of course)

Voted in favor of making the repeal of the estate tax permanent. This takes away the only fairness that was left in the tax code permanently placing most of the US tax burden on the poor and middle class.

What is your guess on Kirk's vote re the bankruptcy changes?

What is your guess on Kirk's ultimate vote on Social Security? Now, apparently, he's trying to liken social security to pensions offered in the auto industry back in the 50s and 60s stressing how those pensions destroyed the companies. No mention of making cars too big and gas guzzling and sinking under pressure from Japanese competition that made a better product.

They will stop at nothing to create their slave class.

Your Congress at work

Yesterday they:

Introduced legislation to end the estate tax in their final push to make our tax system the most regressive it has ever been all under the guise of protecting the family farm and, hey, it doesn't matter that their ag policies basically end family farming anyway...just another lie from the lie factory on capitol hill.

Introduced a resolution to include a Community Bank Option in upcoming Social Secuirty reform (uh, we mean destruction) legislation. Basically, this means that the banking lobby is getting their payback.

Steve LaTourette of Ohio wants to give rental housing vouchers to the homeless, but doesn't say what they are supposed to do with them as affordable rental housing availability shrinks dramatically across the nation.

They named a post office too. (Actually, there is a lot there, go look!)

An American Agenda in unAmerican Times

Some are calling this a liberal agenda, but when you think about it, it's an American agenda replete with fairness, environmentalism and helping those in need while rejecting gambling as an answer to state budget problems.

The Democrats in the Maryland legislature, with a ton of hard work, won:

• a $1 increase in the minimum wage
• rights for unmarried couples, some gay, some not
• employers must now spend at least 8 percent of their payroll for health benefits
• the right to put on the 2006 ballot a constitutional amendment that would restrict the governor's ability to sell state parkland.

It makes me wonder why republicans fight so hard to take away rights, throw money at the wealthy while rejecting any help for the poor or sick. What happens to someone's mind that makes him think that the republican agenda is correct or moral? How do they explain away the unending and flagrant corruption to get there?

That is not what American is about. That is a corporate agenda that is being sold to Americans with the biggest lies ever told in the history of governments.

It seems to me that the average republican needs to ask himself this: why, if our agenda is so wonderful, do we have to sell it with lies, political games and supression of speech?

Dear Rep Kirk;

There is a very important bill scheduled for vote on Wednesday and that is the vote on the ill-reputed changes to the Bankruptcy Act. I think you should vote no.

There are a lot of reasons to vote against the bill, but I figure you should vote against the bill because its the least you can do given your positions on related issues.

First, it is yet another act of the republican party based on a lie. The lie is that the changes are needed to protect innocent creditors from dead beats living lives of luxury. It is well known that the largest group going bankrupt these days are people who have suffered medical catastrophies. Bankrupts are not buying diamonds and minks, but hospial stays and medicines. Since you were in favor of the war based on a lie, the least you can do is show that you have some respect for the truth and vote against this gift to creditors based on a lie.

You also owe it to your distict to make up for your stance on health care issues by voting against the bankruptcy bill. Since you voted for the prescription drug bill that ensured high prices for drug companies and did little to help seniors pay those prices; and since you voted against reimportation from countries such as Canada where drug prices are not artifically and politically inflated; and since you are against providing any kind of reasonable health care for Americans; and since you are in favor of capping awards for medical negligence, the least you can do is preserve the possiblity of bankruptcy relief from all the debt the poor sick and elderly people are going to rack up because of you.

Also, think about your district. All those fancy houses in the 10th are pretty expensive and people's ability to afford them on stagnant Bush economy (of which you are also in favor) salaries is dwindling. If you knew anything about the real estate in the area, you would know that many people in your district have no equity in their homes. They are being sold a bill of goods from the lending community that provides 100% financing to people who simply cannot afford it. Amendments to the bankruptcy revisions were sought limiting lenders' ability to make predatory loans, but they were all rejected by your party. What are the people in your district going to do as unemployment rises and their ability to pay their mortgages diminishes even more? You could have a district full of foreclosures and bankruptcies and no true bankruptcy relief. Since economic instability is one of the major causes of divorce, you will be increasing the incidence of divorce in the district and that would not be very family values oriented, which you are of course as a good republican.

So, Rep. Kirk, please vote against the bankruptcy bill on Wednesday. Even by your low standards, the bill is a disaster.

Affordable housing trust fund

The Senate finally gets it, sort of. Affordable housing is one of the probably the important issues in the nation today as unemployment increases and even the working poor can no longer afford, or even find, an urban rental.

The Senate is again proposing a national housing trust fund be created from the pre-tax profits of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. This proposal is similar to the bill introduced in the Senate in 2003 by John Kerry which sought to use the profits from federal mortgage insurance to distribute as mixed use housing funds among state and local governments with 25% available for eligible private groups. The original bill got stuck in committee and expired in 2004. So did the house bill and, of course, you could not find Mark Kirk on the roster of sponsors. He has a nice house, so what does he care.

I have seen projects like this where there is mixed low income housing and retail intermixed with some standard housing. The ones I have seen are well run and provide the only available lower (not necessarily low) income housing available in the suburbs. This could become true in the city as well as high property taxes are forcing a lot of landlords out of the business and even the most modest urban two and four flats are becoming condominiums. Bush's cuts to HUD will eliminate many of the maintenance loans which could doom these projects to become like the projects or eliminate them alltogether. So, another funding source like the trust fund is necessary.

However, I do have one concern about creating another trust fund. Bush thinks that the social security trust fund is just play money for him to play with in Iraq. He describes the fund as nothing but worthless IOUs (because he intends to make them worthless).

Will the national housing trust fund be just another fund from which to start more wars? Will the national housing trust fund end up just profiting corporations and destroying lives?

I do not disagree with the idea, but I hope they are going to put safeguards into the law to prevent another looting of the poor and middle class to benefit Bush's rich friends.

Read about the national housing trust fund here.

Encouraging misleading advertising in medicine

I have been irritated with ABC news ever since the 2004 election for their unbridled idolatry of Bush and willingness to spread lies about Kerry, but at least they reported on this one: Physician of the Year.

To become Physician of the Year, all a doctor has to do is give a $1250 campaign contribution to the National Republican Congressional Committee. I knew they were proclaiming over 100 years of evolutionary sciences invalid, but I didn't know they were accrediting doctors now.

Not only are they sending out certificates for Physician of the Year, and make no mistake, there are several such Physicians, they are encouraging doctors to use it as a marketing tool.

BUYER BEWARE.

I wonder if a court will allow the NRCC to be sued if one of their Physicians of the Year negligently kills someone...well, that is what the NRCC is trying to stop with all this...injured people from getting fair judgments against providers of negligent medical care...or if a court tried to make the NRCC a party to such a lawsuit, will they just go after the judge a la DeLay.

The saddest part of all is that ABC reported that one of the winners of this great award made a plea for affordable healthcare insurance and that fell on deaf ears.

Physicians of the Year...you should be ashamed of yourselves. NRCC has no shame.

27.60% of our attention

From the website of the Lake County Clerk:

PRECINCTS COUNTED (OF 458). . . . . 458 100.00
REGISTERED VOTERS - TOTAL . . . . . 387,053
BALLOTS CAST - TOTAL. . . . . . . 106,832
BALLOTS CAST - BLANK. . . . . . . 9 .01
VOTER TURNOUT - TOTAL . . . . . . 27.60

I think the big lesson of the April 5th local elections was that 72.4% of Lake County registered voters did not vote and I really do not think it was because they did not care. I think it was because they did not understand the offices or know for whom to vote.

I was at the Deerfield train station on April 5th wearing my Proud to Vote sticker and heard from some people who had not yet voted. I was not campaigning or actively telling people to vote, but just sitting on a bench waiting for a train. Nonetheless, it seemed that everyone who passed me acknowledged my sticker by a smile or nod and many asked me how late the polls were open. Some told me that they might not vote because they would not make it back to town in time to vote, but several said that they just did not know for whom to vote. Voters simply do not understand the offices, the duties, and the branches of local government and do not see how local government affects their everyday lives. That is amazing considering how local governments affect everyday life far more than the federal government.

Do you need your road plowed or pavement repaired? If you live in an unincorporated area, you might want to contact your township government. In W. Deerfield Township, the condition of the roads was a major issue in the race. The people who live in Del Mar Woods, which is not a part of any municipality, but unincorporated Lake County, were very concerned about their aging sewers and roads and getting no help from the township. That may have been one of the reasons the old regime was ousted on Tuesday.

According to the Lake County website, townships also provide social services for the needy, assess property and have public health duties. While not all do, townships may also "establish libraries, medical clinics, museums, community buildings, recreation districts, mental health facilities, cemeteries and youth committees."

Are there improvements you want to make to your property? The community development department of your municipality will decide whether or not you can and if there is anything additional you will have to do to make your plan acceptable to them so you can get necessary building or demolition permits. Many municipal governments now have tree ordinances, so if you need to cut down a tree to complete desired improvements, you may have to replant one somewhere else. Some people think this is important to keep mature trees in our area and others see this as an unnecessary control on private property ownership. That was a big issue in many municipal races and the tree lovers won for the most part.

From where do you get your water? Most of us get our water from Lake Michigan. Some towns have their own water facilities and others enter into Joint Action Water Agencies or JAWAs to get water. A big issue in the City Council race in Highland Park was the aging water filtration system. This is also just part of the larger issue of municipal infrastructures. Some parts of the Tenth District are older and have to deal with issues about the replacement of existing but outdated infrastructures and others are newer and have to make decisions about the infrastructure they intend to provide.

In addition to control of property improvements, municipalities can create their own public improvements like community recreational facilities, they also provide police and fire protection or work with other municipalities to do so, provide hospitals, health boards and cemeteries, make and enforce traffic regulations, license certain activities that require special skills or safety conditions or are a nuisance.

You might notice that the townships and municipalities have several overlapping duties. This is partly because some areas are not incorporated into municipalities, so they get all their services from the township and county. Some people believe that township governments are unnecessary and should be eliminated.

Public safety was also an issue in the April 5th election. Both townships and municipalities have public safety responsibilities. One group of township incumbents laughed at the Homeland Security needs they would have to fill. They were never called on it publicly despite Coroner Keller’s strong objections to their comments made in a letter to the Pioneer Press that was never published.

Library boards, what do they do? They plan library use and maintenance. In the Cook Memorial Library District, there was a controversy over Vernon Hill’s residents’ (not part of the Vernon Area Library District) right to use the Cook Memorial Library and to maintain a Vernon Hills adjunct library. The old regime was made up of residents of Libertyville who resented paying for the Vernon Hills adjunct and the suggestion by Vernon residents that the library be enlarged. (Note: Vernon Hills residents pay taxes to the Cook Memorial Library District.) The battle got ugly when one incumbent library board member personally sent out a mailing claiming to be from a larger group and then sent a subtly threatening letter to a citizen who then wrote a letter to the editor about receiving the letter. Many others, including my mom, wrote letters to the editor asking people to oust the incumbents because that member also removed materials from the library that did not fit into his fundamentalist religious would view. The incumbents were ousted on Tuesday in favor of a more balanced board.

School boards govern the school districts and are created under the State School Code. Basically, the review and approve contracts that the school districts enter into such as teachers contracts, contracts for books and other supplies, building purchase, sale and maintenance. They also set policy, curriculum, student placement and standards and create mechanisms for accountability.

It is hard to know who all the candidates are and their positions on the issues. Maybe we need a better system. The press no longer seems to be able to handle the job—they endorsed the library board candidate knowing of his questionable activities and a Township Trustee candidate so ill it was uncertain if she would even be able to take office. Yard signs only give name recognition and mailings are self serving resumes and do not give people a balanced statement of the issues.

How we are going to communicate local issues and discuss local candidates in the future is an important issue with which we need to deal before the next set of local elections. Local governments are involved in most of what we live every day and local elections determine who will have that influence upon us. In addition to that, as re-elected Highland Park City Councilman Jim Kirsch recently said, “local elections determine the individuals who will lead the greater community. Our elected officials establish not only policies, but also the moral and civil tone of a community.

Local elections are important and deserve more than 27.60% of our attention.

Sorry no posts for a while

I could not get into the Blogger at all. Snuck in from a tangential page this time to get in. Sheesh.

Dems WIN BIG in the 10th Local Elections

Congrats to all Dems who won:

Jim Kirsch
Michelle Feldman
Adrienne Johnson
Ron Levitsky
Ron Schwartz
Bob Rochenbacher
Mari Barnes
Ellen Gussin
Cynthia Plouche
Bryna Gamson
Jeffrey A. Zaluda
Margoth K. Moreno

I am hearing that there are more, but the Cook sites are down.

Night all....I'm pooped.

Wear Your Proud to Vote Sticker

I went to vote this morning at Village Hall. Voted for Michelle Feldman for Village Trustee and Adrienne Johnson for Township Trustee and Lane Young for School Board. Why Lane? Because he was out there yesterday at the Highland Park train station with us and anyone who works hard to win will work hard in the job.

Anyway, I wore my sticker to the Deerfield Train station and people started asking me about it. Yes, the election is today and yes, the polls are open till 7pm.

Then, the conversation got better. "Ok, Ellen, who should we vote for?" I got to pitch my favorite candidates. Hopefully, I got them each 3 more votes.

Have to go VOTE

This has to be short because I have to go vote.

What's up today?

1. Judges blamed for violence against them. Government by thuggery.

2. Get your congressman to vote against the debt slavery act.

3. A new website, and they link to me bless their hearts!

4. Will Mark Kirk meet with constituents on Social Security on April 14?

Somewhere in Palatine, a 40-year-old daughter says "No Thanks, Dad"

On Friday night, the Illinois Tenth Congressional District Democrats, the Eight District Democrats and Independents and Palatine Township Democrats sponsored a forum on Social Security. One of the guests was David Kelly of the Progressive Democrats of America who spoke about the current condition of the social security trust fund and how private accounts would affect individuals and the system as a whole.

During Mr. Kelly’s presentation, an elderly man raised his hand with a comment. He angrily told Mr. Kelly that he should stop spreading lies about the privatization plan for Social Security. The man wants the Bush plan because it will allow his 40-year-old daughter to become a millionaire in the stock market.

About that time, I wished I had some swampland in Florida or the deed to the Brooklyn Bridge handy, as this guy would have been a great customer.

The chances of a 40-year-old becoming a millionaire under the Bush Privatization Plan are pretty slim. To become a millionaire by age 65, the average 40-year-old making $50,000 each year will need to get a raise of 3% every year and save 11% of his income with a 10% return each year. That doesn’t sound all that bad, but that calculation uses averages over a long period of time. The averages don't always hold for any given person over a given period of time and investing is always risky. It all depends on your luck and what is happening when you need the money. Some win and some lose. I owned Lucent stock in the late 1990s when it was at $76. I held onto it, and now it hovers around $2 to $3. Good thing I did not need that money for my retirement.

According to Robert Kiyosaki, the Rich Dad Poor Dad guy who makes his living encouraging people to become investors, investing is very risky for the average person because the average person does not have the necessary financial education, so he ends up basing investment decisions on tips from the media or friends. Even Robert Kiyosaki does not encourage people to invest money that they cannot afford to lose. He finds that most people invest with the buy and pray method, which is really more like gambling than investing. Also, when investing money they cannot afford to lose, most people will make “fear based decisions” turning paper losses into real losses.

Studies have found that the average person is just not all that good at investing. They found that most people are still pretty hands off when it comes to investing their 401K money and even after scandals like Enron and World Com, many people unwisely keep their 401K money in their employers stock.

AARP warns that:

The majority of mutual funds under-perform the market average. The stock market goes down as well as up, and sometimes it stays down for quite awhile. Many retirees who thought they were set financially are having to cut their budgets dramatically or even return to work because the value of their portfolios has declined significantly over the past few years.

I met someone that happened to, Bob, my tour guide at the Grand Canyon back in spring of 2002. Bob was a retiree happily living near Phoenix when the post 9/11 stock market took a tumble. He had to come out of retirement to keep his small home. I sort of felt sorry for him. He clearly was in no condition to be a tour bus driver on a tour from Scottsdale to the Grand Canyon—my sympathy turned to fear as his driving deteriorated. I survived the trip and I often think about Bob and wonder what happened to him when it became evident to his bosses that he could no longer drive.

Apart from the basic risks of investing, people with Bush-style private accounts will not be finding themselves listed in Forbes any time soon because the investment choices will be limited to keep administrative costs down. They are modeling the plan on the Federal Thrift Savings Plan, which limits investors to 5 choices based on different levels of risk. So, a person will not have all that many ways to become a millionaire under the privatization plan.

What will happen if Social Security is privatized ? Well, one thing for sure is that people will pay a lot more in investment fees adding to the riches of Wall Street brokers. They will also have to pay the government back for the use of the money to invest. This is called the clawback. The Social Security Trust Fund, in pretty good shape now by all reliable accounts, will be drained of contributions and the administrative costs of creating the secondary system will add to the burdens on the system. The safety net of the current system will be gone and some will win and some will lose in the market. What will happen to the losers? The only thing safe to say is that Bush doesn’t care. In the “ownership society”, they will own their own poverty.

Then, you cannot forget the emergency situations for which the current system provides. If your 40-year-old dies young with young children or becomes disabled, the private accounts won’t help her.

So, to the gentleman who wants the Bush privatization plan so his daughter will become a millionaire: You’re the type of person upon whom Bush is relying to get his way. You do not understand the plan and know little about investing. Your financial ignorance makes you susceptible to swindles and scams such as this. Chances are your daughter will not become a millionaire on the Bush plan and chances are, in the years to come, she will not thank you for you support of the Bush plan because she’ll likely be too busy working through her retirement.

Remember to Vote on April 5th!

Busy helping local candidates!

From the people who brought you sanctity of life

The images, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told Congress, depict "acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel, and inhuman." After Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) viewed some of them in a classified briefing, he testified that his "stomach gave out." NBC News reported that they show "American soldiers beating one prisoner almost to death, apparently raping a female prisoner, acting inappropriately with a dead body, and taping Iraqi guards raping young boys." Everyone who saw the photographs and videos seemed to shudder openly when contemplating what the reaction would be when they eventually were made public.--Matt Welch reporting for Reason Magazine.

They tell us the war is going fine, they tell us that Social Security must be transferred to private accounts to survive, they tell us that tax cuts for the wealthy help the poor, they tell us that the Lord above is leading foremost in their decisions.

Time to stop believing them. Time to pay attention. Time to get involved.

Democracy is great, but its a burden as well. When good, regular people are not involved, they leave all the important choices to extremists and liars.

Get involved. Join the Illinois Tenth Congressional District Democrats and don't be fooled again.

"We Won't Get Fooled Again" Social Security Forum

"We Won't Get Fooled Again"
Social Security Forum
Friday, April 1
7:00pm
Fremd High School Cafeteria
1000 Quentin Road
Palatine

He said he was a Compassionate Conservative. Some believed him... and then he cut funding of programs for the poor so he could give tax cuts to the wealthy.

He said he was a Fiscal Conservative. Some believed him...and then he rang up the biggest debt in American history.

He said he was an Environmental President. Some believed him...and then he backed out of international environmental agreements and pushed for destruction of the Alaskan wilderness to drill for a limited supply of oil.

He said he was an Education President. Some believed him...and then he failed to fund the major education reform that he claimed as a major achievement.

He said there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Some believed him...and we all know what happened next.

Now he says the Social Security program is headed for disaster. This time...
We Won't Get Fooled Again.

Join us for a public forum on Social Security. It's open to the public at no charge. The guest speakers will be:

David I. Kelley, Progressive Democrats of America, Social Security Policy Board Chair; Certified Financial Planner, pension consultant, and author of numerous books and articles on pensions and Social Security.

William McNary, Citizen Action/Illinois, the leading coalition of community activists in the state of Illinois.

Michael Brennan, Metro Seniors in Action, a coalition of over 15,000 members representing the interests of Illinois' senior citizens.

Sponsored by the Illinois Tenth Congressional District Democrats (Tenth Dems), Eighth District Democrats & Independents (EDDI), and the Palatine Township Democratic Organization. For more information call 847-266-VOTE (8683).