Archive for June, 2010 4:00 pm

 

Hultgren: Next Hours Crucial to Remove Pelosi

I need your help. We have a quarterly financial filing today, Wednesday June 30th, that will state our existing campaign funds.

The union bosses and radical special interest groups will put more money into incumbent liberal Congressman Bill Foster’s campaign only if they believe they can defeat me. Tomorrow’s report will be the last time the media, the union bosses, and the special interest groups look at our race and decide whether they should support Bill Foster, or send their money elsewhere.

Your contribution during this last 48 hours is vital to shutting out the potential flood of financial support to Congressman Foster.

Winning this election is the key to sending me and 38 other new conservatives to Congress whose first vote will be to fire Speaker Pelosi, and vote for a new Speaker that shares our Midwest values and commitment to families and common sense.

We’ve already seen how so much legislation has passed by only a few votes, and Congressman Foster has supported almost every part of Pelosi’s liberal agenda.

You’ll be pleased to know that I’m leading Congressman Foster in all four polls released since the Primary.  In fact, the most recent poll asked if Foster deserved re-election and only 28% of the voters of the 14th Congressional District said yes.  We have the opportunity to replace Foster and Pelosi, but we must first raise the money.

That’s why I am asking everyone to give any amount they are able to give. My goal is to raise $45,000. I know this is a really big number, but I also believe this is a really big election, and I need your help.

In addition to donating on-line, checks can also be mailed to the following address, but they must be postmarked by today.

Hultgren for Congress
1118 E. Main Street
St. Charles, IL  60174

Thank you so much for your support and your help!  I believe our Nation is at a tipping point and if we miss this great opportunity now, Foster will be gerrymandered into a safe seat by 2012 after the census and redistricting, and we’ll have lost our opportunity to pull back from the brink of crushing government debt.

I can’t do this without you! So please, forward this to your like-minded friends as well.

Thanks so much! I continue to be humbled by your support.

Best regards,

RANDY HULTGREN

Candidate for Congress

 
 
 

Video: Winfield Village Board ‘No Plan for Generating Needed Revenues’

Click the link below to go to the story.

Winfield’s Good Old Days Near An End?

 
 
 

U.S. Supreme Court: Chicago’s Gun Ban Struck Down

In a landmark, but not surprising, decision, the U.S. Supreme Court Monday struck down Chicago’s ban on private ownership of handguns, saying the Second Amendment applies to states and municipalities as well as the federal government.

The high court extended its 2008 ruling in Heller vs. United States, which allowed residents in Washington, a federal enclave, to have guns for self-defense in their homes.

During oral argument before the high court on March 2, it was clear the Second Amendment right to bear arms would be incorporated to the states and municipalities to some extent. Many people in Chicago — a city fraught with gun violence — braced itself for that eventuality.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley said the ruling was not unexpected and the city would revise its ordinance to comply with the decision.

In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, Daley said his main concern is protecting police, firefighters and paramedics responding to emergency calls.

“I’m disappointed by the decision, but it’s not surprising,” Daley told a news conference. “We’re still reviewing the entire decision, but it means that Chicago’s current handgun ban is unenforceable, so we’re working to rewrite our ordinance in a reasonable and responsible way to protect Second Amendment rights and protect Chicagoans from gun violence.”

Chicago lawmakers, seeing where the court was headed and cognizant Chicago’s gun ordinances are similar to those stricken two years ago, have been getting ready for Monday’s decision. The Chicago City Council was expected to address the issue Wednesday.

Among the proposals under consideration are only allowing face-to-face gun sales, keeping records of gun buyers’ identification and the amount of ammunition purchased, requiring gun re-registration every three years and prohibiting ammunition sales to those convicted of gang crimes.

McDonald is a landmark case, even though parts of the Bill of Rights have been brought into the states piecemeal through the Fourteenth Amendment as gun rights have historically been perceived to be different from the other rights because of the inherent danger. Earlier attempts at incorporation failed.

The 204-page decision penned by Justice Samuel A. Alito and joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, included four pages of appendix material provided by Justice Stephen Breyer, who was joined in a dissent by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.

Hearkening back to its decision in Heller, the majority said incorporation of the Second Amendment is consistent with the concept of ordered liberty:

“Self-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present, and the Heller court held that individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right. The need for defense of self, family and property is most acute in the home. The court found that this right applies to handguns because they are ‘the most preferred firearm in the nation to “keep” and use for protection of one’s home and family.’”

It was also clear from the oral arguments, that incorporation of the Second Amendment would be via the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause rather than the amendment’s privileges and immunities clause. The Fourteenth Amendment provides: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

The justices were reluctant to invoke the privileges and immunities clause — which was the petitioners’ first line of attack on the gun bans — as it would have overruled the Slaughter-House cases, a 137-year-old decision that rendered the privileges and immunities clause ineffective, saying the clause was not meant to apply outside of federal matters.

“For many decades, the question of the rights protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against state infringement has been analyzed under the due process clause of that amendment and not under the privileges or immunities clause. We therefore decline to disturb the Slaughter-House holding.”

Even more significantly, had the court used the privileges clause, it would have opened the floodgates for incorporating a number of rights that have not yet been brought against the states in the usual piecemeal fashion, such as abortion and gay rights, or grand jury indictment requirements that half the states do not have. The conservative majority certainly would not have wanted such a result.

The only justice who pressed for incorporation using the privileges clause was Clarence Thomas, who concurred with the majority’s result, if not its reasoning.

Thomas detailed the history of the Fourteenth Amendment to indicate the framers’ immediate purpose for the amendment was the complete protection of the newly freed slaves and their champions everywhere — not just under federal law.

“In my view, the record makes plain that the framers of the privileges or immunities clause and the ratifying republic understood — just as the framers of the Second Amendment did — that the right to keep and bear arms was essential to the preservation of liberty. The record makes equally plain that they deemed this right necessary to include in the minimum baseline of federal rights that the privileges or immunities clause established in the wake of the war over slavery.”

 
 
 

General McChrystal Tells Army He’ll Retire

WASHINGTON — Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who was fired last week as the top U.S. general in the stalemated Afghanistan war, told the Army on Monday that he will retire.

Army spokesman Col. Tom Collins said McChrystal, 55, notified the service of his plans, but he has not yet submitted formal retirement papers. It is not clear when he will leave the service, but the process usually take a few months.

In announcing McChrystal’s ouster on Wednesday, President Barack Obama praised his long Army career but said his intemperate remarks in a magazine article that appeared last week could not be abided.

McChrystal apologized for the remarks in Rolling Stone magazine and flew to Washington last week to resign as commanding general of the war.

The Army has been McChrystal’s only career.

McChrystal was promoted to the selective and coveted rank of four-star general last year. It is not clear whether McChrystal will be able to retain that rank in retirement. Under Army rules, generals need to serve three years as a four-star officer to retain that rank, with its prestige and retirement benefits.

The secretary of the Army can allow officers with as little as two years of service to keep their retirement rank, Collins said.

Three military and defense officials in Washington said Obama may use his power as commander in chief to allow McChrystal to keep all four stars. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because McChrystal has not yet submitted his paperwork.

McChrystal was the Pentagon’s choice to run the war following a year of Taliban advances in 2008 and early 2009. He replaced Gen. David McKiernan, also a four-star Army general, after McKiernan was fired for failing to apply the counterinsurgency strategy McChrystal represented. McKiernan retired from the Army almost immediately.

The Senate Armed Service Committee will hold a confirmation hearing Tuesday for Gen. David Petraeus, nominated to succeed McChrystal as the top U.S. and NATO general in Kabul.

 
 
 

Right to Carry Group to Hold Rally in Chicago

As gun violence in Chicago rises and Mayor Richard Daley continues to squash the Second Amendment rights of Chicago residents, supporters of Right to carry legislation will rally at Tuley Park Field House on June 30.

The event is being sponsored by IllinoisCarry.com, an online action group and discussion forum dedicated to seeing legislation passed that will put Illinois citizens on an equal footing with residents in 49 other states. The meetings will feature speakers with a wide level of experience and interest in the area of Right to Carry in Illinois.

The organization is working to get the word out to residents of Chicago that the right to carry a firearm for personal protection is fundamental and citizens of Chicago are being denied that right as compared to 49 other states.

“It has been widely recognized that the desire for passage of a Right to Carry law enjoys broad support across most of Illinois, but in Chicago itself  the issue is not as well understood ”, said Valinda Rowe, a spokesperson for IllinoisCarry. “The objective of the meeting is to build both understanding and support for Right to Carry legislation. It is hoped that those attending this meeting will be a catalyst for change and help build support in Chicago for the issue.”

Rowe said the right to carry is an equal rights issue for Chicago women who “are often the victim of the most serious and heinous crimes.”

Chicago IllinoisCarry spokesman Gerald Vernon says currently it is a felony to carry a loaded firearm for self-defense in Illinois and believes “no one should have to choose between being a potential victim, or a potential criminal.”

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to present its decision on Chicago’s handgun ban in the next few weeks, something Daley vows to fight, even if the court rules against the city’s current law.

The meeting will be held Wed. June 30, 2010, 6:30pm – 8:30pm, Tuley Park Field House, 501 E. 90th Pl., Chicago, IL.

For more information contact Gerald Vernon at 773-415-1814.

 
 
 

Oil is Humanity’s Original Sin

The BP oil spill in the gulf has been the cause of an enormous amount of editorial. If you are a Democrat the villain is BP, Tony Hayward and “Big Oil” and if you are a Republican it is the federal government’s lack of oversight and more recently President Obama and his “Shake Down” of $20 Billion from BP.

I personally believe the villain in this story is all of humanity and that oil, for now, is our original sin.

Consider the morality of eating meat. Meat, being made from animals, requires the death of the animal to fulfill our consumption of it. Would it be productive to vilify the slaughterhouse, excoriate the butcher and resent the clerk at the deli counter but have no feelings of remorse or responsibility while eating that sandwich? The simple fact is the supply chain from rancher to grocer exists to deliver parts of dead animals for our consumption. In much the same way, the oil industry and the risks they take are one-in-the-same as the risks we take to have the oil available to us. Our standard of living is delivered to us by oil. When you see an oil covered albatross, that’s your oil covered albatross.

The reality is if it flies, someone will crash it. If it rolls, someone will wrap it around a tree, and if it floats someone will sink it. Technology, from transportation to chemical manufacturing to oil exploration is all done for the benefit of humanity and in the end, all of the activities that provide the conveniences of a 21st century life have risks. From a thirty-thousand foot view, the BP oil well disaster is still ongoing is just another industrial disaster. It may be worse than crashing a 747 loaded with people or better than hitting a school bus load of children with a freight train but in the end it is just another disaster that is the result of getting the products and services that humanity wants to the places they need to be. Underneath all the bluster and anger focused at BP is a denial that we are all to blame. It is counter productive to a boot on the throat of BP when the truth is, we all couldn’t or wouldn’t want to live without oil. To do anything less than take full responsibility for our own culpability in this accident is nothing less than hypocritical.

It makes much more sense to me to realize the best that man can do is find a harmony with nature where we are neither preservationists to the exclusion of modernity nor consumers to the exclusion of a healthy environment. To me, we should endeavor to be good stewards of the environment where minerals are mined, the earth is altered and animals are eaten with an eye to being responsible and yet with a clear understanding and personal ownership of the risks and responsibilities involved. After all, the most important animal on this planet is the human animal.

 
 
 

At the Board Meeting with Mr. Allen

Village Board Meeting News, June 17, – 2010

1) A presentation was given on how Winfield & West Chicago’s jointly owned waste water treatment plant’s life could be extended until 2025 with only $17 Million in investment to retro fit it with the proper equipment and get the proper certification from the EPA.

2) The village board discussed taking a vote to put the two Road Referendum ballot questions on the ballot. (apparently this hasn’t happened yet) We heard a presentation from the bank in charge of floating the bond issue. The final price per home owner would be $233.99 in additional real estate taxes per year per home that has a value of $300K. The bank representatives talked about “Build America Bonds” which are part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment. During the public comments part of the meeting I had that exchange with Village Manager Curt Barrett that I wrote about here.

2) The Winfield Chamber of (not so much) Commerce asked the village board to pick up the cost of Police & Public Works for Good Ole Days. The cost is $6000 and there was some skepticism in their voices. It would not surprise me if Good Ole Days was canceled. The newest development is there will be no carnival rides this year because none of the carnival ride operators can make any money at the event. Bob Bersodi (sp?) made the public comment that Winfield should move the festival to a more prominent place to increase attendance and I completely agree. Winfield’s village board has relegated Good Ole Days to an afterthought and it has been dying for a longtime now. It would be nice if one or two of them would get some business sense and move it to a place where everyone can make money.

3) The New Sign Ordinance is closer to passing but still not voted on. The only thing worth reporting is how Joel Kunesh found it so amusing that the sign ordinance has been in the works for 3 years. Note to Joel; 3 years for a sign ordinance should be a clue that you are incompetent.

The only thing left to report is, during my running gun battle with Village Manager Curt Barrett, apparently Trustee Mrugaz took issue with my final public comments on the matter.

There is a bit of a story to report but first you need to understand the procedure. The village board meeting has a “committee of the whole” section. In Committee of the Whole there are bullet points that get discussed and after each bullet point, the public gets to comment on the bullet point that is being discussed. At the end of all of the bullet points, the public gets to comment again on anything (at all) they would like to talk about. After the general public comments, the village board gets to make general village board comments.

So I took the general public comments section to rebut some comments made by Village Manager Barrett. Then, I confess,  I walked out of the room. Some have characterized it as “Stomped” out of the room. Either way, I have not seen the video of what happened when I left but there was some additional discussion.  I guess Trustee Mrugaz felt like I should have waited around to hear him yell at me. The way I see it is, I routinely send the village board emails or stand before them and ask relevant questions about the subjects at hand and most often they ignore me. I see no reason why I should give them a courtesy that they so often deny me.

 
 
 

I Like the BP Guy More than the Clowns Who Grilled Him

Every time a bunch of congressmen get some capitalist “villains” in their cross-hairs – whether they’re  bankers from Wall Street or carmakers from Detroit or most recently Tony Hayward from BP — and take shots at them for hours on end on national television, I wind up rooting for the “bad guy.”

It’s not that I think the money boys from Wall Street are saints, or the guys who run the car companies in Detroit are so wonderful, or that BP should be nominated for a Nobel Prize.  It’s just that I have a hard time listening to a bunch of sanctimonious, windbag politicians who couldn’t run a lemonade stand put on their populist tinfoil hats and treat the poor bastards worse than they would treat Osama bin Laden if he showed up at one of their sub-committee hearings.

I watched the BP hearings and am wondering if I’m the only one who feels sorry for Tony Hayward. Look, if it turns out that what happened in the Gulf was more than a terrible accident, if it turns out that BP was cutting corners to increase profits, then it’s fine with me if the government brings criminal charges against anyone and everyone who was responsible.  It just irks me to watch a parade of nitwits who live in glass houses throw boulders at the guy.

One of my fantasies is to see the tables turned on those politicians who treat CEOs like war criminals.  Imagine if we could grill them they way they grill everyone else.

US: Congressman Waxman, is it true that you voted YES on Bill XYZ, a bill that ultimately cost American taxpayers $20 billion dollars when you told them it would cost $20 MILLION?

WAXMAN: It was George Bush’s fault.

US: Do the honorable thing, Congressman:  RESIGN!

US: Is it true, Senator Reid, that you voted for numerous laws that cost us billions of dollars knowing full well we didn’t have that kind of money to spend?

REID: It was George Bush’s fault.

US: The Capitol Police are coming down the aisle to take you to Andrews Air Force Base for a flight to Syria where you will be undergo further – let’s call it – questioning.

US: And is it true, Congressman Rangel, that you – and the other bozos that somehow keep getting elected – have spent this country so far into a hole that we may never get out?

RANGEL: Are you asking me that because I’m black?

US: No, we’re asking you that because you were the head of the powerful Ways and Means committee until you resigned under pressure because of your tax problems.

RANGEL: It’s George Bush’s fault.

US: Senator Boxer, How in the world could you get us $12 trillion dollars in debt and make us so dependent on the Chinese government to buy our bonds in order to finance your reckless spending?

BOXER: It was George Bush’s fault.

US: Two words, Senator:  Carly Fiorina.

US: Congressman Frank, would you resign here and now to make amends for your role in the financial meltdown – a meltdown that almost plunged this nation into a second Great Depression?

FRANK: It was Bill O’Reilly’s fault.

I don’t care if Bill O’Reilly grills these pinheads or if Chris Wallace or David Gregory or Candy Crowley subjects them to tough questions.  I just can’t take it when the very people who have left us on the brink of financial disaster thanks to their reckless spending, go on national TV and pretend to be holier than everybody else.

Sorry,  but I like the guy who runs BP more than I like any of the clowns who knocked him around the ring for six hours  — even though  I don’t care if he gets fired for what his company did.  I just hope the voters come to their senses this November and fire the mob that is demanding his head.

 
 
 

Incompetence Abounds

Amidst all the political jockeying over the BP catastrophe, the main players are missing what is really uppermost on America’s mind: It’s the spill rate, stupid. It’s jobs, stupid. It’s the economy, stupid. And none of it is happening.

All eyes in Washington, Wall Street, and Main Street were turned this week to the congressional show trial featuring beleaguered BP CEO Tony Hayward. Hayward was a disaster. He played dumb. He stonewalled. And he never got honest about the colossal failure of human judgment at BP that caused this catastrophe.

But folks, seriously, what did you expect? Before this thing is said and done, Hayward and others at BP may very well be criminally indicted by the Justice Department. Hayward could eventually do hard time for all I know. So, of course, he stonewalled. Thank Eric Holder.

What Hayward should at least have done is talk about the progress being made in capping the spill rate, which is gradually going down. To most Americans, and especially those in the Gulf, it’s the spill rate of capture that matters most. Hayward also should have talked about the new BP relief well, which could be up and running in less than a month, to end this disaster. That would be great news for America, and her economy and stock market. Plus, he could have mentioned that BP is hiring thousands of workers to fill new jobs in the cleanup effort.

BP CEO Tony Hayward

But Hayward was lawyered to the gills, which doesn’t make anyone happy, including me. And that’s precisely why these congressional show trials leave me bored, tired, and depressed.

And oh, by the way, what’s the role of Congress in this catastrophe? What exactly is it doing besides presiding over these show trials? Doesn’t it have oversight authority when it comes to the Minerals Management Service that utterly failed to regulate the safety of BP’s deep-water drilling operations? Why aren’t more people talking about this?

And why in the world hasn’t Congress suspended the Jones Act, thereby allowing foreign-flag tankers into the Gulf area? What is it waiting for? We’re basically two months into this never-ending disaster. The Gulf cleanup could have been greatly aided by at least 15 foreign countries that were instead spurned after offering their tankers and other equipment. Why aren’t we accepting these offers of help?

And where, really, is the president in all this? Speaking to the nation from the Oval Office earlier in the week, he failed to declare a Jones Act waiver, and he made no call for a task force of hands-on oilmen from the likes of ExxonMobil and other big oil sisters who actually know what they are doing.

Another problem with Obama’s address was his arrogant announcement that he would inform BP’s CEO “that he is to set aside” an asset amount ($20 billion) for the government-run escrow fund to pay for the spill damages. Trouble is, there are no laws to permit our government to force such financial retribution. Not even a new TARP, at least not yet. Did someone say nationalization?

The government has no right interfering with the financial decisions of a private, shareholder-owned corporation. This sounds like GM and Chrysler all over again. Or maybe health insurers, pharmaceuticals, private investment funds, and multinational corporations. And it could end up having a serious and chilling effect on corporate investment.

Look, at least BP already agreed to pony up. Why should the government control this? Isn’t this another case of the Obama administration bullying, taxing, and regulating business as part of a social agenda to redistribute income and power from private enterprise to government? It’s a war on profits and capital.

Consider this: American companies are sitting on an astonishing pile of $1.5 trillion in unused cash. Why aren’t they investing to create new jobs? Well, it’s because massive tax and regulatory threats coming out of Washington have created a tall barrier of disincentives and uncertainty that is blocking the normal efficiency of the free-market capitalist system.

The instincts of our free economy are to promote growth. But when government blunts these instincts, the system ceases to work efficiently.

Americans do not want a cap-and-trade system. What they do want is a full-throated and comprehensive energy plan conducted on all fronts — carbon and non-carbon — that would unleash energy entrepreneurs and existing businesses to create more power and more jobs and more economic growth. Besides stopping the spill, this is the key point that Obama misses.

So, if BP is dirty, and if BP is incompetent, then so is Congress. And so is the White House, as far as I’m concerned.

The BP story is a total outrage. Once again America is not getting what it needs.

 
 
 

Hock Flock

‘Pawn Stars’ is newest Vegas tourist attraction

LAS VEGAS — Sudden fame is starting to take a toll on the “Pawn Stars.”

“I can’t stop at a gas station without someone wanting to take my picture,” says Corey “Big Hoss” Harrison, the 27-year-old general manager of Gold & Silver Pawn Shop, where the History Channel’s overnight sensation is almost constantly being filmed.

In less than a year, Corey, his father Rick, grandfather Richard and best friend Chumlee have gone from being everyday Las Vegas pawnbrokers to four of the most improbable TV stars in America.

Last week’s show was seen by nearly 6 million people. By way of comparison, the “Real Housewives” series — over which oceans of ink have been spilled — calls it a good week when 2 million are watching.

“A year ago,” Harrison tells The Post, “we had a staff of 13. Today, we employ 43.”

Since “Pawn Stars” debuted last July, business at Gold & Silver Pawn Shop has tripled, says Corey.

The pawn shop is in an uninviting area of downtown Las Vegas, just a couple blocks north of Main Street and Charleston Boulevard. It’s in a seedy neighborhood dotted with adult bookstores and bail bond businesses.

That hasn’t stopped the show’s faithful from coming by the busloads every day to visit the pawn shop, which is open until 8 p.m. — and has a 24-hour window for late-night business.

“We took The Deuce [a double-decker tour bus] here to the pawn shop from our hotel,” said 30-year-old Josh Jones who, with his wife Kristin, traveled from New Washington, Ohio to visit Gold & Silver. “We wouldn’t miss coming here for anything.

“I’ve seen all the shows,” Josh says. “It’s wonderful being here and seeing all this great stuff, but I’d really like to see Chumlee. Some people think he’s dumb, but I think he’s neat — and I just want to give him a hug.”

Cory’s father Rick believes it’s the bartering that is the key to the “Beverly Hillbillies-meets-Let’s-Make-a-Deal” appeal of “Pawn Stars.”

Viewers like to root for the guy hoping he will get top dollar for that vintage grandfather clock.

“Sometimes it’s difficult to say no when I’m negotiating,” Rick says. “I want people to be happy. But this is a business, and some of the stuff people try to sell us — you wouldn’t believe.”

Dave Walker, 49, of Kokomo, Ind., stopped by Gold & Silver while vacationing in Las Vegas to try to sell an antique original key to Room 630 of the Waldorf Astoria.

“They offered me only $50 for my Waldorf Astoria key,” Walker says. “That’s not enough. I saw one just like it on eBay for $150.”

Rick is fighting exhaustion after arriving back in Vegas on an early-morning flight from New York, where he’d appeared on “The Early Show” with Harry Smith — and then been bumped by a late guest from a scheduled appearance on David Letterman’s show.

“It was a lot of fun,” Rick said, as a staff member interrupts to show Rick a 1934 $1,000 bill that a customer wants to sell.

“How much does he want for it?” Rick asks.

“Fourteen-hundred dollars.”

“I don’t know,” Rick says with a grimace. “Offer him $1,300 for it.”

 
 
 

» archives