One proposal would allow school districts to discipline students who make threats against school officials, teachers or other students on social networking Web sites such as MySpace or Facebook, or on instant messaging programs such as AOL Instant Messenger.

School administrators would have this authority even if the student made the threat from a home computer or after school hours.

House Minority Leader Tom Cross said the proposal came after a student in Cross' hometown of Oswego recently posted a death threat against his school's principal on a social networking site.

The school wanted to suspend the student, Cross said, but administrators were unclear about whether they were allowed to do that.

Clarifiying that authority gives educators "another tool" to address such problems, he said.

However, Ed Yohnka, a spokesman for the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, said the proposal "seems redundant," as "students who made threats, whether online or in person, already can be disciplined by schools."

Yohnka also voiced concern that, if the legislation is passed, school administrators would punish students not just for posting death threats online, but also for legitimate speech, such as criticism or satire of school officials.

Acknowledging there "could be" First Amendment issues with the proposal, Rep. Bob Biggins, R-Elmhurst, said, "With this new technology comes new crimes, and new ways to commit them. Maybe there'll be different ways to interpret our laws as well."

Another GOP proposal would prohibit adults from discussing sex acts with a minor online.

Currently, it's legal for an adult to hold a sexually explicit conversation with a child and even arrange a meeting - as long as no substantial steps are taken to actually meet the child, said Rep. Sandra Pihos, R-Glen Ellyn.

During hearings held last year by the House Republican Internet Safety Task Force, law enforcement officials posing as children demonstrated how easy it was for sex predators to pounce.

"At every one of those demonstrations, sometimes within minutes or within seconds of entering into a chat room, the officer posing as the child was solicited for conversations by an adult," Pihos said. "In many cases the adult wanted to have sexually explicit conversations."

"It was really very alarming," she added.

A third GOP proposal would ease state eavesdropping laws so law enforcement officials can intercept child pornography transmissions.

Currently, police officials looking to intercept such transmissions must first get permission from both parties - a rule, Biggins said, that makes it almost impossible to catch the swapping of child pornography.

The proposal would allow law enforcement, after winning court approval, to intercept transmissions of child pornography without the offender's knowledge.

Other proposals would increase the penalties for Internet death threats to a Class 3 felony and force those convicted of distributing harmful material to minors to register as sex offenders.

Biggins said the legislation would be "a top priority" for Republican lawmakers this spring.

The bills are HB37, HB38, HB39, HB40, and HB41.

Doctors are not supermen and superwomen, elevated above the great mass of mankind and freed from the immoral and selfish interests and forces against which we all struggle and to which many of us frequently succumb. No 'healer' and no school of 'healing' should be regarded as any more than it is -- a tradesperson and a tradeschool, exploiting the sick for profit.

Why one cult should be woven into the warp and woof of our government, exalted -- by law -- to the position of deity, and permitted to use the advantages thus gained, to crush out all other cults and all anti-medical movements, is difficult to understand. Why in choosing the cult to thus enthrone, was the most destructive and deadly of all the cults selected?

This cult has been permitted to use public funds to carry on its propaganda and to employ the police power to force its schemes and methods upon the indifferent or even antagonistic public. It has gradually worked its way into the public schools, the army and navy, and among the elderly, and has gained complete control of these. State medicine is the result.

All of this has been done, of course, under the pretense of 'protecting the public health.' But their real motives are both apparent and transparent.

The Allopathic Cult has no more interest in the public health than any of the other cults; and none of them are bent on preserving public health, since this would ruin their incomes! The Physician does not secure his fees from the well, but from the sick. He is, therefore, interested in the sick -- not in the well!

Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain formed an “exploratory” committee for his likely 2008 presidential campaign back in mid-November of 2006. That move gave McCain a jump on the bevy of candidates in both parties who, since the first of the year, have entered or started officially exploring White House bids.

And, with McCain’s year-end campaign finance report filed to the Federal Election Commission by the deadline Wednesday, political analysts and potential opponents have a window on how much money McCain is raising — and from whom.

McCain’s presidential campaign reported receipts of $1.7 million in late 2006, according to a CQPolitics.com analysis of the report. Reported expenditures amounted to $1.2 million, leaving the committee with $472,000 cash on hand as the new year began. The committee also reported $335,000 in debts and obligations.

The total receipts reported by McCain’s committee do not mean he has already received that big a surge of fresh cash. In fact, most of the total — $1.05 million — came in the form of transfers from his Senate campaign committee, Friends of John McCain.

Federal campaign finance law allows members who run for the White House to transfer money from their House or Senate campaign committees to their presidential committees. McCain ended up with a sizable surplus following a 2004 campaign in which McCain coasted to a fourth Senate term by an overwhelming margin.

McCain’s presidential campaign did, however, take in about $650,000 from individual donors and $10,000 from political committees.

The following are brief sketches of some notable individuals who donated to McCain’s exploratory campaign late last year. The donors are listed alphabetically by last name.

Unless otherwise noted, the donors gave $2,100 — the maximum then in effect that an individual donor could give to a candidate in a single election (campaign finance law considers a primary election and a general election to be two separate contests). The Federal Election Commission announced last week that the limit has been raised to $2,300 per candidate per election, under provisions of the campaign finance law that allows for inflation-related adjustments.

McCain donors include:

• Jonathan E. Colby, managing director of The Carlyle Group, a global private equity firm.

• Edward F. Cox Jr., a partner at the law firm of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler. Cox, a son-in-law to the late President Richard M. Nixon, in 2005 launched a challenge to New York Democratic Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the next year’s election, but withdrew after then-Republican Gov. George E. Pataki stated a preference for another candidate.

Patricia Nixon Cox, Ed Cox’s wife and the former president’s daughter, also donated to McCain’s campaign.

• Arthur B. Culvahouse, attorney and chairman of the firm O’Melveny & Myers. Culvahouse served as White House counsel to President Ronald Reagan from 1987 to 1989.

• Becki Donatelli, president of Campaign Solutions Inc. Donatelli’s biography describes her as the “lead Internet consultant” to McCain’s 2000 campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, and his 2008 exploratory campaign is a Donatelli client.

• Roger J. Enrico, chairman of DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc.

• Carly Fiorina, former CEO and chairman of the board of the Hewlett-Packard technology company.

• Peter G. Fitzgerald, chairman of Chain Bridge Bancorp Inc. and former U.S. senator of Illinois. Fitzgerald was elected in 1998 but retired after just one term, with Democrat Barack Obama winning his open seat in 2004. Like McCain, Fitzgerald developed a reputation as a “maverick” within the ranks of Senate Republicans.

• Phil Gramm, an investment banker at UBS who, as a U.S. senator of Texas from 1985 to 2002, was a longtime McCain colleague. McCain chaired Gramm’s ultimately short-lived campaign for the 1996 Republican presidential nomination. Gramm’s wife Wendy, an economist, also donated to McCain’s exploratory effort.

• Douglas J. Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). Holtz-Eakin is the economic policy chairman for McCain’s bid.

• Henry A. Kissinger, the U.S. secretary of State under Presidents Nixon and Gerald R. Ford, who is president of the consulting firm Kissinger and Associates.

• John F. Lehman, chairman of J.F. Lehman & Company, an investment firm that specializes in defense-related industries. Lehman served as a Navy secretary under President Ronald Reagan and more recently served as a member of the federal commission that investigated the Sept. 11, terrorist attacks.

• Mark McKinnon, vice chairman of Public Strategies Inc. ($500 donation). McKinnon is advising McCain’s presidential campaign and directed advertising for George W. Bush’s successful presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2004.

• Bob Perry, homebuilder ($4,200 donation). A prominent donor to Republican committees and candidates and conservative-leaning “527” political organizations, Perry was a major financial backer of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the organization that assailed the military credentials of 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry. Perry’s contribution was included among the $1.05 million that McCain transferred from his Senate campaign committee.

• Theodore Roosevelt IV, a managing director at the investment brokerage Lehman Brothers. McCain has long considered himself as a “Teddy Roosevelt Republican,” so it should come as no surprise that the great-grandson and namesake of the late Republican president is backing McCain.

• Orson Swindle, consultant for Orson Swindle Associates LLC ($1,000 donation). Like McCain, Swindle is a former Vietnam prisoner of war. Swindle ran respectable but losing House campaigns in Hawaii’s 1st Congressional District in 1994 and 1996, falling to Democratic incumbent Neil Abercrombie. He later served as a member of the Federal Trade Commission.

• John W. Timmons, founding partner of The Cormac Group, a consulting and lobbying firm. Timmons is a former legislative director to McCain.

Republicans probably were rescued for the moment. But Gingrich's issue-driven philosophy, which brought the Republicans to power for the first time in 40 years, was and remains the right way to go. I mention all of this because Gingrich, while not running for President, is pushing various issues and issue clusters, which are right on.

I don't know how Gingrich would perform if he were elected to the highest office in the land but these days he is responsible in that each time I read one of his policy initiatives I want to stand up and cheer.

His latest initiative is to push for English as the official language of the United States. A well respected radio talk show host in Washington, Chris Core, suggested last week that the immigration issue well might be at least partially solved if English were the official language. He is absolutely correct. Much of his audience agreed with him and so do I. When my father came to the United States in 1923 he was here for only a few weeks when he began attending night school at the Stephen Bull Elementary Public Facility in Racine, Wisconsin. Although he still spoke with an accent, which bothered him to the day he died, he nevertheless developed a superb understanding and command of the English language. He could explain the most complex ideas in ways that easily could be understood. He developed a great sense of humor. He taught me how to tell jokes. He also taught me my politics and our faith, which was mostly by example.

My relatives and others who knew him told me that he was super anxious to find a school in which he could learn English. He wanted to start a few days after he came here was disappointed that he had to wait a matter of weeks to enroll.

While he never achieved great economic status, he did have a first-class engineer's license. He bought and paid for a home in seven years. Moreover, he spoke out at Racine City Council hearings and saw his views adopted. When he came to America his family in Germany was in a state of poverty. Sound familiar? Post-World War I inflation had wiped out the savings of his father and mother as well as those of a wealthier aunt. He didn't think he was entitled to documents in German. By the time he became a citizen six years after immigrating he didn't expect to vote with a German ballot either. We lived in a neighborhood filled with ethnic folks: Slovaks, Hungarians, Ukrainians, Italians and so on. There was only one other German family in the neighborhood. He did not seek to live in an enclave of people who came from the same country as he did. In fact, my father was known as being so anxious to be seen as an American, family lore has it that when he brought his two sisters to America in 1935 as my aunt began to speak of the ordeal of their trip he exclaimed, "Speak English."

That is the precise point Gingrich is making very eloquently. People who wish to assimilate will want to learn English. They will be required to do so if all governmental documents are in English. American citizens are apprehensive of those who come to this country and want to continue to speak and read their language. Many openly talk of "taking back" parts of the United States to form their own country. This is dangerous, as everyone understands. If the various Hispanic organizations would endorse the concept of official English things would turn around in a short while. My concern is not to deny workers money to send home. My concern is with those who defiantly refuse to adopt the language of this nation. And certain liberal leaders are encouraging them in that stance because they don't want them to move ahead. If they live in an enclave and all speak Spanish liberals will be able to control them politically. It is the worst kind of racism imaginable.

When I was advising parliamentary leaders in the Baltic states they presented me with this problem. There were so many Russians living in these small countries that they could overcome the Baltic leadership if they put their minds to it. Despite Soviet control, life was vastly better in the Baltic states than in the Soviet Union itself. These Russians didn't want to go back. I suggested to them that they adopt as part of their constitution that Estonian or Latvian or Lithuanian, as applicable, be the official language. Those who wanted to learn it could stay and become genuine citizens of those small nations. Those who refused to learn the language of the nation state would be obliged to leave. So far as I understand it, some of the Baltic states have taken initiatives along those lines. When I last discussed this with a prominent official in Estonia he told me that the suggestion was working and that the situation where there were as many or more Russians as Estonians has been partially rectified.

The United States welcomed with open arms all of the different ethnic groups which began coming here in the 19th Century or even before. Of course, some of them encountered roadblocks and prejudice. We have yet to be able to repeal human nature. As late as the years following the Viet Nam defeat thousands of Vietnamese came here. We did not object. Why? Because they showed clear signs of wanting to assimilate. What is different now? Do we hate Spanish-speaking people? I suppose a few do. But the vast majority of Americans want to welcome them if they choose to assimilate.

They will learn English at adult schools. They will send their children to schools where there is no bilingual nonsense. They will be taught in English after a reasonable time to learn it.

Gingrich says it correctly when he opines, "If you are pro-immigration to America, you should be pro-assimilation into English as the common language because in fact your children and grandchildren will have a dramatically better future if they are part of the common commercial civilization." Gingrich recommends shifting funding for bilingual education to English immersion programs. Bilingual education has trapped people in what he termed "linguistic ghettos."

Here is a proposition which has the support of more than 80% of Americans. It will not see the light of day. Why? Because the leftist special-interest groups are against official English. The Democratic Party is beholden to these groups. Especially with both Houses of Congress in liberal hands, this very important program never will be enacted. Gingrich has said that this early autumn he will decide whether to run for the Presidency. If he doesn't run one can only hope he will obtain a commitment of support from another candidate who will raise the issue.

WHEATON LEADER

DIERSEN HEADLINE: Wheaton Leader promotes Henry who promotes Gresk

http://www.chicagosuburbannews.com/story.php?pub=2&sid=80547

Mayoral candidate endorsed by county treasurer - Jessica Young

It may be a little disconcerting to picture the bearded Wheaton mayoral candidate Mike Gresk as a pompom-adorned "Rah rah, sis boom bah" chanter wearing the requisite short, pleated skirt. But DuPage County Treasurer Gwen Henry often conjures up the image anyway.

Well, at least metaphorically.

"I always refer to him as Wheaton's cheerleader," said Henry, who recently endorsed Gresk in the crowded race to succeed retiring 14-year veteran James Carr. "He's very much in tune with all facets of the community and has great vision, so I think he's the best qualified for the job.

"This is a critical election since leadership will be changing hands for the first time in many years, and I want to make sure it stays in competent hands," she added. "(Gresk) is eternally positive, a good listener, available, experienced, independent and doesn't always give people the answer they want to hear, which is a crucial skill."

Henry, who served as mayor in Wheaton before Carr's reign, said her familiarity with the office allows her to use a measuring stick on the contenders. Gresk, a branch manager at First Choice Bank in Wheaton and former city councilman, agreed.

"With her breadth of experience, she obviously surveyed the scene and knows the players, so her support is even more meaningful," he said.

The two have been acquainted for more than 20 years; politically, professionally and socially. Henry is even Gresk's personal accountant.

Working as the county's financial top dog also gives Henry ample insight when evaluating Gresk's business and budgeting credentials and policies, she said. Henry believes he will diligently safeguard the city's money.

"Mike understands that Wheaton's business community is the economic engine that keeps Wheaton a vibrant place where our residents live, raise their families and retire," she said. "He will ... keep Wheaton's business environment strong and economically viable."

Henry does not think that Gresk's hiatus from the City Council would work against him.

"It's a positive thing to have a neutral person coming in from the outside to lead," she said. "I don't believe that he has a personal agenda, and that makes him ideal."

Gresk's public service has included stints as a Wheaton Park District commissioner, president of the Wheaton Chamber of Commerce and president of the Downtown Wheaton Association.

During the Tuesday, Feb. 27, primary election, Gresk will face off with City Councilmen Tom Mouhelis, Alan Bolds and Phil Suess for two ballot slots on the municipal ballot for the Tuesday, April 17, consolidated election.

Although ultimately only Wheaton residents will be able to vote in the mayoral election, Gresk is casting a wide net. He believes Henry's position as a county official will help get his name out to neighboring municipalities.

"Practically without fail, everyone I talk to has some connection to Wheaton, so I just tell them to pass it on," Gresk said. "I was in Springfield chatting with the parking guy taking my $3 and found out he has a mother who lives in Wheaton, so I gave him a packet. The city really has a positive image that extends beyond its borders, and I'd like to be the one to maintain it."

DIERSEN HEADLINE: Steven O'Malley of Wheaton blasts "elitists" 

http://www.chicagosuburbannews.com/story.php?sid=80534&pub=

Elitists want Hubble to remain in Wheaton - Steven O'Malley, Wheaton  

I am the father of three boys -- one went to Hubble; one is at Hubble; and one will go to Hubble in two years. I have watched with disgust the debate over the new Hubble site.

Now a third study has been released showing that the site is clean. Of course everyone knew that would be the case, but a small group is still not satisfied.

The reason is that they will never be satisfied because the whole BP "controversy" and now historic site push are false issues raised for only one reason. They want the school to remain in Wheaton.

The School Board, elected by the people, is unanimously in favor of the BP site, as is our excellent superintendent. However, this group, who have no children at Hubble, has used lies and distortions and wasted untold time and money to block the board's efforts.

Even their lawyer's office is close to the BP site -- unbelievable. Unfortunately, the press refuses to cover the true story here: A shameless bunch of elitists who do not want the school to move.

I want the school to move to the BP site and allow the site be developed commercially. It is time to let the people decide, have a vote and move forward.