FOR TEXT, SCROLL DOWN
"I do think we've come a long way in overcoming stereotypes, role stereotypes about African-Americans. I will say race is still a factor. When a person walks into a room, I still think people still see race," Rice said.
"But it's less and less of a barrier to believing that that person can be your doctor or your lawyer or a professor in your university or the CEO of a company. And it will not be long, I think, before it's no longer a barrier to being president of the United States," Rice said.
Rice, a Republican, has said repeatedly she will not run for president despite high popularity ratings and measurable support in opinion polls.
She noted that if she were to continue as secretary of state through the end of President Bush's term in January 2009, "we will not have had a white male secretary of state for 12 years -- a white woman, black man and a black woman. That says something about how far our country has come, even though we can't deceive ourselves. Race is still a factor in this country."
Her most recent predecessors at the State Department were Colin Powell and Madeleine Albright. Powell was secretary of state from 2001 to 2005; Albright from 1997 to 2001.
Rice discussed race in the United States when asked about Obama's candidacy. Obama, a first-term senator, is considered among the early front-runners for the Democratic nomination with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and 2004 vice presidential nominee John Edwards.
Rice noted that Obama is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where the secretary often testifies.
"I think he's very appealing and a great person. He's on my committee. And we've always had good exchanges. I think he's an extraordinary person," she said.
Rice declined to say whether she thought he had enough experience, especially in foreign policy, to be president.
"Oh, I'm not going to make that choice. The American people are going to make that choice," she said.
Rice was interviewed on "Fox News Sunday."
Both Kevin J.P. O'Hara, the chief administrative officer at the Chicago futures exchange, and Steve Greenberg, the wholesale executive, would seem to have the ability to write a check to cover some or all of the costs of a campaign.
State GOP leaders consider that important in finding an opponent for Durbin, given the political dynamics in play. Whoever runs against Durbin already is getting a late start, a situation made worse by a Democratic plan to move up Illinois' 2008 primary to Feb. 5 - six weeks earlier than normal.
The practical effect on the political machinery is that candidates could need to file for office as early as mid-October. That means campaign season could start July 4 instead of the traditional Labor Day kickoff. And given federal campaign fundraising limits, candidates already should have started the money sweepstakes.
To that end, Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna Jr. said he's talked to individuals who could self-fund about challenging Durbin, who's No. 2 in Senate Democratic leadership.
"A number of people have reached out to us who do have some resources," McKenna said. "Voters are interested in non-politicians from time to time, and this might be a good time for it."
McKenna remained tight-lipped about names, but O'Hara and Greenberg each told the Daily Herald they're exploring a run for Senate.
O'Hara, 45, made his money while serving as general counsel and chief administrative officer at Archipelago, a Chicago electronic stock-trading network that grew so successful at opening up the market it eventually merged with the New York Stock Exchange. Before that, he helped set up the emerging economies in Lithuania and Romania, where he met his wife. O'Hara also served as senior counsel in the enforcement division of the Securities and Exchange Commission and is a former assistant U.S. attorney who prosecuted street crime.
"You really do get tired of these guys on the left and on the right with the 'gotcha' politics. To folks trying to run businesses, it just doesn't matter," said O'Hara, who received a law degree from Georgetown University after graduating from the University of Chicago. He said he expects to make a final decision by summer.
Greenberg, who turns 36 next month, was an executive with Promotions Unlimited, a Racine, Wis., supplier of merchandise and promotional sale ads to independent drug stores. His father, Ira, founded the company in 1973 in Rosemont and eventually acquired the Ben Franklin variety and craft store franchise rights.
Steve Greenberg, who now invests in turn-around companies, served on the Illinois GOP's finance committee. He's also a former minor league hockey player with the Washington Capitals organization.
"At this point, it's kind of a family discussion of the merits and what it would take," said Greenberg, who has young children.
Other Republicans are pushing Illinois Supreme Court Justice Robert R. Thomas, a Wheaton attorney and former Bears kicker, to run. Thomas could not be reached for comment. Republican U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk of Highland Park, once touted as a potential Durbin challenger, already has ruled out a run.
Several familiar names have been floated in what remains of state GOP circles, candidates who've run and lost, some of them more than once: Sugar Grove dairy magnate Jim Oberweis, DuPage County State's Attorney Joe Birkett, Wauconda attorney Kathy Salvi and Bloomington state Sen. Bill Brady.
Oberweis is more likely to run to succeed former Speaker Dennis Hastert should he retire; Birkett might be eyeing a 2010 attorney general run if Democrat Lisa Madigan steps up to run for governor; Salvi might opt instead to try to unseat Democratic U.S. Rep. Melissa Bean of Barrington; and Brady's state Senate seat is up next year.
Some in the party's brain trust think recruiting a candidate isn't the best way to go. Anointing such a person sets expectations unfairly high, the argument goes, and it also doesn't guarantee a contentious and costly primary will be avoided.
The lack of a candidate stands in contrast to 2004, when Republican U.S. Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, then of Inverness, passed on a try for a second term. In the end, seven Democrats and eight Republicans ran in a drama-filled race eventually won by Obama.
Durbin's public-approval rating stands at 52 percent, according to a SurveyUSA poll last November. The state's junior senator, Barack Obama, was at 71 percent.
Next year's contest is not for an open seat, however, and Obama could be on the fall ballot for president or vice president. Durbin won re-election in 2002 with 60 percent of the vote against Republican state Rep. Jim Durkin of Westchester, who didn't get much national fundraising support.
Durbin isn't resting on that victory, however. "We're raising money right now like we're going to need $30 million," said Durbin chief of staff Mike Daly. "He's not independently wealthy, so we have to raise it all, and you have to raise it in small chunks."
The senator's GOP foe next year probably will endure that same lack of national party aid - Republicans have more Senate seats to defend than the Democrats and will devote money there, with only the best chances for picking up Democratic seats getting significant attention.
Hence the Illinois GOP's search for a self-funding hopeful. Given the lack of a farm team, that's become the natural option.
"Solid candidates with both electability and experience. There aren't many of those people around," said Paul Green, political science professor at Roosevelt University. "There isn't anyone on the horizon, so it's got to be someone from the outside."
Water oversight must be regional — not local - Editorial
http://www.dailyherald.com/opinion/index.asp
You might be tempted to turn the page when you see words like “water authority,” “aquifers,” “Kishwaukee Valley” and “watershed” bandied about in print.
Don’t.
Although the terms may make for dry reading, they’re the makings of a brewing battle that could one day determine whether you can get a drink of water, take a bath or cook your pasta. Without action, some experts fear the southeastern corner of McHenry County will literally run out of water. Even those who consider that threat an unlikely doomsday scenario note the situation will be dire if nothing is done to protect dwindling water supplies in northern Illinois.
And there’s the rub: How do you best protect those valuable water supplies? McHenry, DeKalb and Boone county voters will face an April referendum asking them to approve the Kishwaukee Valley Water Authority and a tax to support it. McHenry County officials say that’s not the best way, pushing instead for a county water authority.
It’s early yet and we all need to learn far more about the proposals before we say yea or nay, but it seems another option should also be carefully considered. Given the essential necessity of water, it seems water oversight might best belong under a regional oversight group such as the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning — formerly the Northeastern Illinois Plan Commission and Chicago Area Transportation Study. CMAP is already charged with oversight of what’s called facility planning areas for the six Chicago collar counties, determining water and sewer capacity by each municipality’s capacity.
Water is a limited resource, one that comes from deep aquifers underground, watersheds that follow no county or political lines. Northern Illinois has the Kishwaukee, the Fox and the Des Plaines watersheds overlapping the six collar, Boone and DeKalb counties.
To have individual counties or towns or political groups battling over those limited water resources does not seem the best way to guard this essential supply. Nor does it seem beneficial to pit rural vs. urban areas against one another. And it would seem essential to include — not exclude as the current proposal does — the highly populated municipalities that are the primary users of those water supplies no matter what oversight group.
Often towns and counties are loathe to give up power to another group. Fortunately, years ago many saw the benefits of an objective oversight body to determine water and sewer access. Increasingly disparate groups have also seen the pluses that come from regional transportation planning. It’s time to apply that same logic to water, a dwindling, but essential resource.
FAMILY TAXPAYERS NETWORK
Ex-convict Medrano not good enough to be Chicago Alderman – but still okay as Republican Party Official - Doug Ibendahlhttp://www.familytaxpayers.net/article.asp?id=1224
Romney condemns polygamy, but it's in his roots GOP candidate's great-granddad had 5 wives - Jennifer Dobner and Glen Johnson
http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/religion/272430,CST-NWS-rom25.article
Polygamy was not just a historical footnote but a prominent element in the family tree of the former Massachusetts governor now seeking to become the first Mormon president.
Romney's great-grandfather, Miles Park Romney, married his fifth wife in 1897. That was more than six years after Mormon leaders banned polygamy and more than three decades after federal law barred the practice.
Romney's great-grandmother, Hannah Hood Hill, was the daughter of polygamists. She wrote about how she "used to walk the floor and shed tears of sorrow" over her husband's multiple marriages.
Romney's great-great grandfather, Parley Pratt, an apostle in the church, had 12 wives. In an 1852 sermon, Parley Pratt's brother and fellow apostle, Orson Pratt, became the first church official to publicly proclaim and defend polygamy as a direct revelation from God.
Romney's father, former Michigan Gov. George Romney, was born in Chihuahua, Mexico, where Mormons fled in the 1800s to escape religious persecution and U.S. laws forbidding polygamy. He and his family did not return to the United States until 1912, more than two decades after the church issued ''the Manifesto'' banning polygamy.
''When you read the family's history, you realize how important polygamy was to them,'' said Todd Compton, a Mormon and historian who wrote a book about the polygamous life of the church's founder, Joseph Smith.
Other Mormons have run for the White House, including Romney's father in 1968 and Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in 2000. Mitt Romney's stature as a leading '08 contender has renewed questions on his faith and its doctrines.
Romney has joked about polygamy, saying that to him, ''marriage is between a man and a woman ... and a woman and a woman.'' In serious moments he has called the practice ''bizarre'' and noted his church excommunicates those who engage in it.
An introductory film played at his fund-raisers and campaign appearances features wife Ann talking about their 37-year marriage. This month, Ann Romney took a lighthearted jab at her husband's main Republican competitors, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, as she introduced Romney at a Missouri GOP dinner.
The biggest difference between her husband and the other candidates, Ann Romney said, is that ''he's had only one wife.''
McCain has been married twice; Giuliani three times.
The Romney campaign had no comment for this story.
My daughter won't get HPV vaccine - Betsy Hart
http://www.suntimes.com/news/hart/271631,CST-EDT-hart25.article
So when I heard initial reports that many states were considering mandating that a new vaccine that protects against a sexually transmitted disease be given to girls ages 11 and 12, I really didn't believe it. The vaccine, Gardasil, protects against human papilloma virus, which can lead to cervical cancer.
Then, a friend animatedly told me a pharmaceutical company was secretly pushing the mandates because it stood to make billions from the required vaccines. And I thought, ''Oh, good grief, here we go again.''
But sometimes, conspiracy theories really are true. In Illinois, the Legislature really is considering requiring that Gardasil be administered to all rising sixth-grade girls. Those not vaccinated would be barred from school, even though HPV is communicable only through sexual contact.
Yes, religious or medical exemptions would be allowed. But talk about being made to feel like a pariah.
Oh, guess what? Gardasil's maker, Merck, which has a monopoly on the vaccine, really was ''quietly funding the campaign, via a third party, to require 11- and 12-year-old girls to get the three-dose vaccine in order to attend school'' in 20 states, Chicago's Fox News Channel reported.
At $360 to vaccinate each child, it's no wonder. Merck was ''channeling money for its state-mandate campaign through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators across the country,'' as the Associated Press revealed and Fox reported.
I'd love to know more about that connection. But, in the wake of the controversy, Merck announced that it has suspended its lobbying efforts.
Well, I have a rising sixth-grade daughter, and whatever the state of Illinois ends up deciding, she won't be getting the vaccine. Here's why:
That same daughter recently came home talking about the anti-smoking campaign in her school. No cigarettes. Ever. I'm all for it.
So then, if a vaccine were invented that could largely protect children from getting one or two of the many serious diseases and chronic conditions caused by smoking cigarettes, would we say, ''So many kids are going to smoke whether we like it or not, let's mandate this vaccine for every child''?
Not an exact analogy, but imagine if Big Tobacco were secretly behind the move to mandate the vaccine so that it could ''safely'' sell lots more cigarettes. Somehow, I don't suppose the same people who advocate mandating the Gardasil vaccine would be for such a thing. I think most people would say that it's fine the vaccine is out there, and if some parents want their kids to get it, OK.
But for the government to mandate the expensive vaccine for children would be for Big Brother to reach past the parents and into the home, and seek to ''protect'' children -- in a way that doesn't really protect them at all.
Apparently, a lot of parents get that, even if our elites don't. And that's why I have a feeling that the uproar over mandating Gardasil is not going to die down until the state legislatures back down on mandating it.
DAILY SOUTHTOWN
Blago ready to fight opposition to rumored new business taxhttp://www.dailysouthtown.com/news/miller/272914,261MLR1.article
Two articles in recent days have shed a little more light on the as-yet unconfirmed plan by Gov. Rod Blagojevich to propose a gross receipts tax on Illinois business. The tax would affect all corporate revenues, regardless of profitability or existing tax exemptions and loopholes.
Crain's Chicago Business reported that the governor is looking at scrapping the corporate income tax in favor of a 1 percent gross receipts tax. A (Springfield) State Journal-Register columnist claimed a poll several weeks ago, which appeared to be sponsored by the governor, was testing the idea of exempting the first million dollars of revenue from the tax.
According to Crain's, 37 of the Fortune 100 companies didn't pay any income tax in 2004, "despite average Illinois sales that year of $1.2 billion." Also according to the article, "the corporate share of total income tax collections deposited into the state's operating fund has dropped 5 percentage points to 15 percent since 1980."
The corporate tax situation long has been an issue for Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn, and sources say the governor has jumped on the bandwagon in a big way, griping to Senate Democrats in private meetings about huge corporations, including some prominent Illinois businesses, that don't pay state taxes. The governor's aides have been harping about specific Illinois corporations that don't pay taxes in their talks with Senate Democratic budget people, according to sources, and they're some of the biggest, most well-known companies in the state.
Another major target of the gross receipts tax, according to Crain's, would be law firms, medical practices and other professional service firms, which pass through profits to partners, who pay only individual income taxes. A separate article in the magazine quoted an official with mega Chicago law firm (and Statehouse lobbying outfit) Hinshaw & Culbertson claiming that a 1 percent gross receipts tax would cost the firm $1.6 million a year based on its most recent revenues.
You probably can imagine the size, intensity and ferocity of the lobbying effort if the state's largest corporations and its most powerful law firms and medical practices teamed up to fight this tax. A trial lawyer who earned hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees by winning a case would have to pay gross receipts taxes on all of that, even if the lawyer spent a fortune to move the case along over several years. Medical practices that invested a significant portion of their profits in new equipment or technology would receive no deductions. Giant corporations, which can move headquarters and plants at the drop of a hat, would see their tax bills rise in a big way.
Combine that with large businesses that traditionally operate at extremely low profit margins or whose razor-thin margins are tied to unpredictable commodity prices (like supermarkets, airlines and farmers), add in giant publishing companies with ever-growing fixed costs and declining ad sales (like the Tribune Co.), toss in companies that regularly invest large amounts of their annual revenues into infrastructure and technology (like utilities and hospitals), and that's pretty much everybody with a lobbyist in Springfield.
Small businesses might be exempted from the tax, according to a State Journal-Register columnist, who reported about a poll several weeks ago that asked people about the gross receipts tax. The columnist claimed the poll mentioned that the tax might exempt the first million dollars of corporate revenue.
Exempting the smallest of businesses probably won't lessen the Statehouse lobbying effort because the groups that work on their behalf in Springfield also have plenty of big business members. The Retail Merchants Association represents the mom and pop stores on Main Street as well as the big chains like Wal-Mart. The Press Association advocates for tiny newspapers in small towns all over Illinois along with the Tribune. The same goes for the Illinois State Chamber of Commerce, the Illinois Pharmacists Association and pretty much every other business group you can name.
Meanwhile, the governor's office reportedly is putting the arm on tax-eater groups to back his gross receipts tax idea.
The process is pretty simple and straightforward. The groups are being asked to support the tax increase, and then it's pointed out to them all the money they or their members receive from the state and the new spending they want. Support it or suffer, is the essential gist.
It's a common Statehouse tactic, but it shows the gov is dead serious about rounding up as much support as possible and isn't afraid of using a bit of muscle.
Elections 101: Eliminate the competition - Stephanie Gehring
http://www.dailysouthtown.com/news/271410,253NWS2.article
The nominating petitions of candidates for boards in school districts, park districts, libraries, villages and townships now are under scrutiny by their opponents -- many of whom will challenge those petitions in an attempt to eliminate the competition before the campaigning even begins.
The individual who files the objection often targets the number of signatures, the candidate's name, or the way the forms were filled out.
A local electoral board -- made up of elected officials who often are politically allied with one faction or another involved in the challenge -- then rules on the challenge. Whoever loses at the local level can appeal to the courts.
County election officials have no control over the process -- or even an idea of how many challenges are lodged.
Cook County Clerk David Orr has in the past asked the state Legislature to consolidate challenges at the county level. Recently, he said centralizing hearings isn't necessary as long as the state requires local electoral boards to complete their work sooner.
"My biggest concern is the speed. We always have a distinct minority who sometimes play a game. We're really worried about that. It's caused a lot of problems in the past," Orr said. "If they're being too political, not having hearings as quickly as they should -- just giving their opponents a hard time -- not only is that bad for candidates, particularly with new equipment, (but) it could jeopardize the integrity of the election."
The race for school board in Bremen Community High School District 228 is a good example of the difficulties with local electoral boards.
When the board met Monday to consider the challenges to petitions from seven of 15 candidates, members found the designated meeting room was too small. So the hearing was postponed two days while the school district's attorney petitioned a court to allow a change of venue to a larger room.
In the end, none of the candidates was removed from the ballot.
And the district's teachers union representative, John Kane, said he has concerns about the inevitable partisanship of local boards.
"The analogy used around here is, it's like the Republicans deciding which Democrats are going to run against them," Kane said. "There are factions on boards, and I don't think personally it bodes very well. You can't have people on a board deciding who can run for a board."
In school districts, the electoral board is made up of the president, the senior board member and the secretary.
In municipalities, the electoral board is made up of the mayor, the clerk and the senior trustee.
If any electoral board members are running for office, they are disqualified. The next senior board member fills in. But if more than one electoral board member is disqualified, a Cook County judge appoints a public member. The judge chooses the public members from a list of election law attorneys.
Mat Delort, a local election attorney who also represents a Justice political party, agreed that centralizing the challenge process at the county level would reduce costs and remove politicking
"We are aware that in many local towns they get knocked off the ballot for no apparent reason and have to go to court to get the decision reversed," Delort said. "The cases would go to the county electoral board, which is at least composed of people who would not be sensitive to local political issues and have a large number of cases and be consistent in their rulings."
Will County Clerk Nancy Schultz Voots said consolidating challenge hearings at the county level would increase her workload, but she felt it had merit.
"I think that would be easier," she said. "That way I would have more control over objections."
With the current system, counties don't know how many petition challenges were filed this year. Most election experts agree the number's on the rise.
"In my experience, we are getting more and more of these (objections)," Delort said. "I think more information is available on the Internet in terms of how you should do your petition and how to object to a petition. A lot of these that we see are filed by people who don't have an attorney."
Schultz Voots said electoral board members must put their allegiances aside when deciding objections.
"One thing you have to remember when you are in office: You have to do what is right," she said. "The first thing I do is make sure I'm doing the right thing and (being) fair to everyone. When I make my determination, the party has no factor at all."
KANE CRONICLE CHRONICLE
The annual Harry S. Truman Dinner, sponsored by the Kane County Democrats, brought out a number of officials, but the most conversation went to the two newcomers that were recently elected to the state Senate, Michael Nolan and Linda Holmes.
Nolan and Holmes were the night's featured speakers along with Beth Penesis, state central committeewoman; Terry Link, senator chairman; and Mark Guethle, chairman of the Kane County Democrats. Another recent election victor, Sheriff Pat Perez, arrived just as the podium was getting warmed up by Guethle, who thanked everyone for their hard work and efforts to help get the party's candidates elected.
Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn was scheduled as a guest speaker, but his arrival was delayed. While silverware was starting to clink, Penesis warmed up the crowd with thoughts of champagne toasts.
"It has been a phenomenal year. I wish I had enough money for three champagne bottles on every table," she said as she listed some of the party's many successes during the last election.
Perez received a round of applause after Penesis emphasized that he is the first Democrat to take the office in more than 20 years.
"He is kinda popular, I see," she laughed.
Before taking her seat, Penesis was sure to thank the union representatives and workers attending the dinner.
"Organized labor ... is the backbone of our party," she said.
"We are bringing home the results," she added, which brought Guethle to the podium and diners to their feet.
Link followed Guethle with a few inside jokes about the financial contributions he pinned himself to during the last Truman Dinner. He also thanked the crowd for the last election's victories.
"You sent me two great senators - Linda and Mike. I wish, Frank (Craig), that you would have been that third one. I really, really mean that," he quipped, referring to Craig's loss to incumbent Chris Lauzen.
"Give me another congressman and senator, and mission accomplished."
The evening also honored former Aurora Mayor David L. Pierce (and before that Kane County clerk), who was presented the Democrat of the Year Award.
The Chairman's Award was delivered to Larry Quick for outstanding volunteer service.
The Governor's Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes has not met since February 2006, shortly before some Jewish panelists began resigning rather than serve with a top Nation of Islam official. They complained Sister Claudette Marie Muhammad did not denounce anti-Semitic and anti-gay comments made by Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan.
Black lawmakers came to Muhammad's defense, saying she did not make the remarks. Blagojevich agreed and pledged to begin a "meaningful dialogue" on racial and social divisions.
The governor's broad-based, volunteer commission still exists on a state Web site (www.state.il.us/cdhc) that lists 20 members, including Muhammad. But some panelists said that for several months they have wondered about the commission's fate.
"Members are anxious," panelist Rick Garcia, political director for Equality Illinois, a gay-rights organization in Chicago, said last week. "There's serious work to be done. I think everybody's up for meeting, but I guess there are some political difficulties."
He added: "I do get the distinct impression that the administration just wishes this thing would go away."
Rocco Clapps, director of the state Department of Human Rights that includes the commission, insisted the advisory panel remains intact. But Clapps - who is a commission member - could not say when it would meet next.
"That is not my decision to make," he said. "These people serve at the governor's appointment. I do not have an indication of whether he wants this to continue or not continue."
Blagojevich spokeswoman Abby Ottenhoff said the governor's office hasn't decided whether the full panel will reconvene.
Clapps said the commission's $94,000-a-year executive director, Kimberly M. White, and a second staff member are pursuing goals identified by commissioners several months ago - primarily the completion of a subcommittee report on school bullying. Clapps said White has other duties with his agency such as overseeing the training of new investigators.
"You can get into the drama of the commission and what did and didn't happen, but the work continues," Clapps said. "There are people across Illinois who continue to be discriminated against. This department has been very active at outreaches and letting them know what their rights are under the law."
Still, some consider the commission's inactivity baffling. Blagojevich's lieutenant governor, Pat Quinn, said maybe the panel should be reconstituted with new members to get around the impasse.
"I really feel there is a need to have a group that can bridge differences, but the people on the commission have to be individuals who are bridge-builders," Quinn said. "Maybe we should be starting with a new effort, a new commission and new members."
State Sen. Carol Ronen, a Blagojevich ally who sits on the panel, said she doesn't think the full commission needs to meet again, given that staff members are following through on the panel's earlier directions. And, the Chicago Democrat said, individual commission members continue to talk with staff.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it," Ronen said.
The Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes dates back to the 1999-2003 administration of Republican Gov. George Ryan.
In August 2005, Democrat Blagojevich created a similar panel of between 20 and 30 people that was supposed to do a variety of tasks such as recommend new policies to lawmakers.
The revamped group had met only twice when controversy erupted last year. Some Jewish panel members said they were offended when Muhammad invited commissioners to hear the provocative Farrakhan speak Feb. 26, 2006, at the Nation of Islam's annual Saviours Day event.
During the speech, Farrakhan was widely quoted as saying that "false" and "wicked" Jews promote "the filth of Hollywood," including homosexual lifestyles. Muhammad, the Nation of Islam's chief of protocol, did not repudiate the comments, prompting Jewish commission members to resign.
Blagojevich said he was not aware his administration had appointed Muhammad to the anti-discrimination panel, but he refused to ask for her resignation. Last March, he blasted his political opponents and the media for focusing on the story and promised to kick-start a "meaningful dialogue" among black, gay and Jewish leaders.
"They're going to give us suggestions and recommendations and ideas on how we can bring people together and bring communities together," Blagojevich was quoted as saying by CBS2, a Chicago television station. "I'm personally gonna be involved."
Representatives from two Jewish organizations, the Anti-Defamation League's regional chapter in Chicago and the Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago, said they were not aware of any steps Blagojevich has taken. Neither was Garcia, the gay-rights lobbyist.
But Ottenhoff, the Blagojevich spokeswoman, said the governor has fulfilled his pledge by having "meetings and discussions with community leaders and groups from a variety of backgrounds." Ronen, the state senator, said Blagojevich has purposely kept the meetings "below the radar screen." She is Jewish and said she approves of the way he handled last year's controversy.
A representative of the Nation of Islam said a spokesman for Muhammad would not be available to speak in time for this article. The organization was in the process of finalizing details of Farrakhan's major appearance in Detroit over the weekend, the representative said.
Muhammad previously said she advocates tolerance for all groups.
NEW YORK TIMES
Brownback, Huckabee, and Hunter: Christian Right Labors to Find ’08 Candidate - David Kirkpatrik
WASHINGTON, Feb. 24 — A group of influential Christian conservatives and their allies emerged from a private meeting at a Florida resort this month dissatisfied with the Republican presidential field and uncertain where to turn.
The event was a meeting of the Council for National Policy, a secretive club whose few hundred members include Dr. James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family, the Rev. Jerry Falwell of Liberty University and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform. Although little known outside the conservative movement, the council has become a pivotal stop for Republican presidential primary hopefuls, including George W. Bush on the eve of his 1999 primary campaign.
But in a stark shift from the group’s influence under President Bush, the group risks relegation to the margins. Many of the conservatives who attended the event, held at the beginning of the month at the Ritz-Carlton on Amelia Island, Fla., said they were dismayed at the absence of a champion to carry their banner in the next election.
Many conservatives have already declared their hostility to Senator John McCain of Arizona, despite his efforts to make amends for having once denounced Christian conservative leaders as “agents of intolerance,” and to former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani of New York, because of his liberal views on abortion and gay rights and his three marriages.
Many were also suspicious of former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts; members have used the council as a conduit to distribute a dossier prepared by a Massachusetts conservative group about liberal elements of his record on abortion, stem cell research and gay rights. (Mr. Romney has worked to convince conservatives that his views have changed.)
And some members of the council have raised doubts about lesser known candidates — Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and Representative Duncan Hunter of California, who were invited to Amelia Island to address an elite audience of about 60 of its members, and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas, who spoke to the full council at its previous meeting, in October in Grand Rapids, Mich.
Although each of the three had supporters, many conservatives expressed concerns about whether any of the candidates could unify their movement or raise enough money to overtake the front-runners, several participants in the meetings said.
Finally, in a measure of their dissatisfaction, a delegation of prominent conservatives at Amelia Island tried to enlist as a candidate Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, a guest speaker at the event. A charismatic politician with a clear conservative record, Mr. Sanford is almost unknown outside his home state and has done nothing to prepare for a presidential run. He firmly declined the group’s entreaties, people involved in the recruiting effort said. A spokesman for Mr. Sanford said he would not comment.
“There is great anxiety,” said Paul Weyrich, chairman of the Free Congress Foundation. “There is no outstanding conservative, and they are all looking for that.”
Mr. Weyrich, a longtime member of the council, declined to discuss the group or its meetings. The council’s bylaws forbid members from publicly disclosing its membership or activities, and participants agreed to discuss the Amelia Island meeting only on the condition of anonymity.
For eight years and four elections, President Bush forged a singular alliance with Christian conservatives — including dispatching administration officials and even cabinet members to address council meetings — that put them at the center of the Republican Party.
But in the aftermath of the stinging defeats in the midterm elections, and with discontent over the Iraq war weighing heavily on the public, some Christian conservatives worry that they may find themselves on the sidelines of the presidential race.
Both Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney have worked hard to pitch themselves to Christian conservatives — Mr. McCain by delivering speeches at venues like Mr. Falwell’s Liberty University or a recent abstinence-promotion event, Mr. Romney by leading the charge for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. But neither has won over many of the movement’s leaders.
The conservative concern may also be an ominous sign for the Republican Party about the morale of a core element of its political base. Conservatives warn that the 2008 election could shape up like 1996, when conservatives faced a lesser-of-two evils choice between a Republican they distrusted, former Senator Bob Dole, and a Democrat they disdained, President Bill Clinton. Dr. Dobson of Focus on the Family later said in a speech to the council that he voted for a conservative third-party candidate that year rather than pull a lever for Mr. Dole.
The Council for National Policy was founded 25 years ago by the Rev. Tim LaHaye as a forum for conservative Christians to strategize about turning the country to the right. Its secrecy was intended to insulate the group from what its members considered the liberal bias of the news media. In recent years the group has brought together a cross-section of the right from Edwin J. Feulner to Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association.
In addition to doubts about their ability to generate enough money and momentum, each candidate who addressed the group also faces initial skepticism from one faction or another on issues like immigration, trade, taxes and foreign affairs.
“Right now there is still a vacuum among conservative Republicans,” said Gary Bauer, a Christian conservative who was a Republican primary candidate in 2000. Conservatives, he said, “want a more provable conservative who also is demonstrating that they can put together the resources necessary to prevail.” He declined to comment on the Amelia Island meeting.
A spokesman for Mr. Brownback said he would not comment on the senator’s presentation to the council, citing its rules about strict confidentiality. Several others who attended his speech said he received heavy applause for his emphasis on restricting abortion and amending the Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. But foes of illegal immigration objected to his support for a temporary guest worker program, and some faulted him for touching only briefly on the threat of Islamic terrorists, an increasingly central focus of the council and many social conservative groups since the Sept. 11 attacks.
(People who attended the Amelia Island event said Rick Santorum, the former senator from Pennsylvania, delivered a well-received address to the council about what he called the gathering threat of radical Islam.)
In an interview, Mr. Hunter, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee and a supporter of Mr. Bush’s plan to send more troops to Iraq, said the need for a strong national defense was the centerpiece of his speech. That defense, he argued, should include cracking down on illegal immigration, building a wall along the Mexican border and renegotiating foreign trade deals to protect American manufacturing. “We are losing the arsenal of the democracy,” he said.
But several people at the council meeting said his stance on trade alienated the business wing of the Republican Party, compounding his substantial fund-raising challenges.
Mr. Huckabee, a Southern Baptist minister who was the head of the Arkansas Baptist convention before becoming governor, has the advantage of strong personal ties to many council members. Many prominent evangelical Christians consider him a friend, and he has appeared several times as a guest on Dr. Dobson’s popular Christian radio program.
In an interview, Mr. Huckabee said he believed his roots in the evangelical world helped set him apart from his rivals. “I am not going to them,” he said. “I am coming from them.” He said he did not remember speaking about his opposition to abortion or same-sex marriage, “although I am sure that I must have.” He said he emphasized education, among other issues, and talked about a continuing war “with a radical form of Islamic fascism,” which he called “a bastardization of religion.”
But many conservatives, including several participants in the Amelia Island meeting, said Mr. Huckabee faced resistance from the limited-government, antitax wing of their movement. Some antitax activists fault Mr. Huckabee for presiding over tax and spending increases. (He says the only tax increase resulted from a public referendum.)
In the interview, though, Mr. Huckabee said he was now leaning toward signing a pledge not to raise income taxes that is presented to all the candidates by Mr. Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform.
Mr. Norquist said he remained open to any of the three candidates who spoke to the council or to Mr. Romney. He argued that with the right promises, any of the four could redeem themselves in the eyes of the conservative movement despite their past records, just as some high school students take abstinence pledges even after having had sex.
“It’s called secondary virginity,” Mr. Norquist said. “It is a big movement in high school and also available for politicians.”
U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT
Where's the Beef.com? - Michael Barone
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070225/5barone.htm
(FROM THE ARTICLE: John Cox, a Chicago-area accountant who ran for the Senate in 2004, wants lower spending, calls global warming "overblown," and stresses his opposition to abortion.)
Presidential candidates have the opportunity to set the national agenda by bringing forward new proposals and innovative policies. Some do this: Bill Clinton in 1992, George W. Bush in 2000. Others don't. Like most or all of the 2008 candidates. Click through their websites, and what you find is pretty thin gruel.
Especially so from the two leading in the polls. Hillary Rodham Clinton's home page links to her recent Senate speech on Iran, but not her 2002 speech backing the Iraq war resolution. She calls for putting "some of the oil industry's windfall profits into a fund that would help develop practical new sources of renewable energy," but with no details. You might find out more by clicking on her "Let the Conversation Begin" webcasts. Rudy Giuliani tells you even less. His exploratory committee website has an account of his work as mayor of New York. But I could find nothing on what he would do as president.
John McCain's website makes some interesting points. As president he would "use the veto pen" on pork and earmarks. The section on "human dignity and the sanctity of life" mentions his opposition to abortion for many years and to funding embryonic stem cell research: a reminder to cultural conservatives that he's been on their side, though he has seldom talked about it. For Iraq he wants a "more robust counterinsurgency strategy"-which seems to be under way now. Barack Obama's issue positions seem to be taken more or less intact from his senatorial website. He cites his work with various Republican senators on important issues. He wants government to assume domestic autoworkers' healthcare costs if they invest half in fuel-efficient technology, and he promises more "resources" to teachers: something for the United Auto Workers and the teachers unions.
John Edwards provides more detail. He wants withdrawal from Iraq "within 12-18 months," plus direct talks with Iran and Syria and a regional peace conference. Would Israel be invited? Variety reported (and Edwards denied) that he told a Hollywood crowd an attack by Israel on Iran was the greatest threat to world peace. He calls for universal health insurance through requiring employer coverage, expanding Medicaid, "reform[ing] insurance," and restricting drug ads. Eliminating poverty, his trademark theme in 2004, gets one paragraph. Mitt Romney has an Issue Watch tab, with single-paragraph discussions of eight issues and multiple recent Romney quotes. He calls for "address[ing] entitlement programs" and universal health insurance "through market reforms."
Rest of the pack. Single-digit candidates' websites vary. Mike Huckabee has a four-word slogan and a YouTube link. Duncan Hunter discusses border security, trade, and the war on terrorism. Joe Biden has a few paragraphs on 10 issues (with Afghanistan and Darfur treated as one issue). Chris Dodd identifies six issues but has single paragraphs on only four so far. Jim Gilmore reports on his record as governor of Virginia. John Cox, a Chicago-area accountant who ran for the Senate in 2004, wants lower spending, calls global warming "overblown," and stresses his opposition to abortion.
Some offer more. Bill Richardson invites you to sign a petition for diplomacy with Iran and has one-paragraph takes on seven issues. Dennis Kucinich's front page is mostly about Iraq but has links to long comments on 10 issues from healthcare to the Patriot Act. Mike Gravel highlights his opposition to the Iraq war and his proposals for national initiative elections. Sam Brownback mentions issues he's taken the lead on (human rights, Darfur) and calls for a $5,000 tax credit for rural first-time home buyers. Tom Tancredo starts with immigration, his signature issue, but provides some detail on 10 others (he's for a flat tax or national sales tax).
Yes, it's early yet. The candidates haven't had time to get issue shops up and running. Clinton and Bush got started much later in the 1992 and 2000 cycles. But so far, candidates have told us very little about where they think the world is headed and what we should do about it. And they've shown us little to indicate that they've thought seriously about governance and long-term problems like Social Security and Medicare. Let's hope they do better as they make their way through Iowa's 99 counties and New Hampshire's 234 cities and towns.
This story appears in the March 5, 2007 print edition of U.S. News & World Report.
NORTHERN STAR
DIERSEN HEASLINE: Kenneth Lowe glorifies Obama and demonizes Keyes and everyone who voted for him
http://www.star.niu.edu/articles/?id=35572
The Obama we know - Kenneth Lowe
I was not present in Springfield on the sub-zero windchill morning that Barack Obama announced his presidential candidacy. I had intended to attend, but things fell through and I laid in a prone position on my couch in DeKalb, watching it on CNN instead. I watched as a crowd of several thousand people cheered him as he made the bold statements I have come to expect from him. Here, I thought, is a politician who has become so beloved by his constituency that they practically forced his hat into the ring.
I could go on about where I stand with Obama's policies, but most people already know that. The entire point lies in that morning as I lay spread out on the couch with a blanket, space heater and a cup of coffee, watching him on CNN. I am a person who is interested in policy but hates politicians ? this is true of most people. Nearly any student you ask at NIU will tell you what they think about Iraq, or the Middle East, or health care, or social security, or global warming, or rights for homosexuals, or abortions. What they can't tell you is which politicians support or oppose what, and who we're trusting to hold the reins of this nation.
Obama is known to us. He ran in 2004 against Alan Keyes ? a man who embodied every ugly, conservative stereotype and alienated all but the most zealous Republican voters. Illinois voters got the message pretty clearly. The message was: We have the choice between standing beside the sort of people who would actually vote for Alan Keyes, or siding with whoever opposes those sort of people. Our choice that came in the form of Obama ? a charismatic young man with the idealism to change things and the influence to carry those changes out ? has altered politics in this state forever.
Obama is known to us, and he is now known to the nation. The eyes of millions watched him when he stepped up to the podium in Springfield and declared his candidacy. Those same millions will remember that moment. Those same millions will also view him as I will in the coming years. Should he take the Oath of Office in January 2009, those same people will keep an interest in him. They will chide him if he strays from their expectations. They will praise him when he does things they agree with. And they will feel outrage if he ever does something they find unacceptable.
We don't do that to politicians now. We don't watch them. We don't know them. We don't reward them for doing right and don't punish them for doing wrong. Obama's support of universal health care, rejection of the war in Iraq and other campaign points notwithstanding, he is somebody that we do know. We need that in our politicians if we are ever to move these last two generations out of apathy and into self-governance.
Paid for by David John Diersen