Democrats upset in Chicago neighborhood town hall meeting, 2013

Sen. Don Harmon, Rep. Camille Lilly in Galewood, Sept. 12, 2013: Citizens speak out.

Obamacare?

A woman said her health insurance was rising yearly. The premium had doubled.

Lilly: “That’s why ACA [Obamacare] is coming.”

“No, that’s the problem,” the woman said, taking Lilly aback. “I’m getting hit over and over . . .”

Lilly interrupted. “Pain is critical. It can be good.”

Harmon took the mike, commiserating with the questioner. “I feel for you,” he said. Then, picking up on Lilly’s argument, he sounded his own frugal note: “But we can’t afford your free health care for life.”

He had been the sympathizer, feeling others’ pain. Now he was the grim realist, talking about what “we” cannot afford. If he should expand on that, he would find himself before long on the dark (Republican) side.

Taxes:

Turning to the populist, Harmon  noted that he had been chief sponsor of a 67-percent income tax increase — from 3 percent to 5 percent — no longer calling it a 2-percent increase. You want taxes? We got taxes.

“It’s not on the right people!” the populist shot back.

Harmon defended himself further: “I am [also] chief sponsor of a fair income tax.” Progressive.

The state of Illinois:

More frustration. A man in the back asked angrily, “Are you listening? So much is going on in state politics, constantly.” Applause followed. “We’re paying you . . . It’s embarrassing . . . awful.”

Lilly, again taking offense: “I have heard every single word since I have been honored to be a state legislator. God gave me this opportunity. I have learned so much . . .” She advanced, mike held close, raising her voice, intoning mantra-like, “This great state . . .” She was shouting now. Hands were raised all over the room.

Pervasive uneasiness:

“It’s discouraging,” said Harmon, as if to concede the sad state of things, if not his and Lilly’s being accused of not listening. “What have we not heard?” he asked.

The man was possessed of an uneasiness which he seemed unable to identify, possibly from a sense of impotence in the face of the political process — the pervasive Chicago sense that the fix is in, one’s vote does not matter, etc., helped not at all by the seeming insouciance of these two samples of the people’s choice, the one downplaying the “crisis,” the other defending herself stridently.

It’s a “great” state, Lilly kept saying, to people who didn’t think so or thought it beside the point.

General frustration:

“We need fresh blood,” said someone else. Appointed and since then electorally opposed only once, when House Speaker Michael Madigan poured money into her cause, Lilly was a case in point. It was hopeless to complain as she pranced and danced, half the time barely making sense, the other half taking offense and being offensive.

“We suffer while you guys do nothing,” the angry man said.

“What are we not hearing?” Harmon asked again, unwilling to concede the problem lest he concede too much, seeking a concrete point or issue around which he could weave counterpoints and ancillary issues, something he could debate.

But he was being attacked, even condemned as so much a part of the problem, it made no sense to be specific. “There’s so much . . .” the man said, trailing off.

More to come, from Illinois Blues: How the Ruling Party Talks to Voters— available in paperbackepub and Amazon Kindle formats.

Miss Universe item disappointing for Hillary

So much for Miss Piggy:

Clinton was expected to put some space between her and Trump in the polls after what many considered a strong performance in the first presidential debate of the general election, and Trump’s highly criticized remarks about former Miss Universe Alicia Machado, but that has not happened.

Key here is “highly criticized,” it seems to me. Highly criticized by whom? Major media, whose influence not an issue in this case. Consoling that.

Hillary’s newspaper scores one for the Hill

Trump lost big in ’90s, got pass on later Fed taxes, reports the Democrat-Times, Hillary’s campaign is tickled pink.

[Trump’s] campaign vehemently pushed back on the Clinton campaign’s effort to turn the report into an “October surprise” moment, saying Trump has a “fiduciary responsibility” as a businessman to pay no more tax than legally required. It also charged that the report proved that the Times and the “establishment media” are merely an arm of the Clinton campaign.

Brace yourselves, everybody, there’s more to come. Trouble is, the Hillary bombshells have been public for so long, we are used to them. And what a deal for her to have the FBI director part of her extended team through his longtime affiliation with Lockheed Martin.

Stop-frisk = profiling?

Yes, but not the kind that is bruited about.

The argument against stop and frisk most commonly advanced is that it amounts to racial profiling. Actually, it amounts to crime-profiling.

Opponents of stop and frisk have claimed that blacks are more likely to be stopped than whites. This is true, and an unfortunate but inevitable outgrowth of the reality that a disproportionate number of blacks commit crimes.

In a Wall Street Journal column several years ago, Heather Mac Donald cites figures that blacks constituted 78% of shooting suspects and 74% of all shooting victims in New York in 2012, despite African Americans making up less than 23% of the population.

It is also the case that crime-riddled neighborhoods in need of more police patrols tend to be minority neighborhoods.

This is from

“Stop and Frisk: The Inner City’s Best Friend,” in Independent Women’s Forum: All issues are women’s issues.

Which looks quite good.

Illinois Senate endorsements -13 contests

Of the 40 seats up for election this year in the Senate, 13 are contested:

Of 40 a mere 13. An Illinois Blues moment. Really?

As in a Democrat town hall meeting in Oak Park, July 17, 2013, reported in Illinois Blues: How the Ruling Party Talks to Voters.

A Certified Public Accountant shifted tone considerably, urging [Sen. Don] Harmon to “do something about corruption in our very corrupt state.” He specified “gerrymandering” and complained, “The way it’s set up, candidates know they will win,” continuing at length in this vein.

“Each of us is vulnerable in a primary,” Harmon said. When an opponent surfaces, he might have added. [Rep. Camille] Lilly, appointed in 2010, had run unopposed in primary and general elections in 2012 and would do so again in 2014. Harmon had run unopposed in the general every year but one since he was elected in 2002.

Really.

via Illinois Senate endorsements – Chicago Tribune

More about The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism

Presented as a service:

Global warming. Gun rights. Capitalism. War. Immigration.

These are just a few of the hot button issues of this year’s presidential campaign—and next Tuesday, when the vice presidential nominees take the debate stage, liberal Catholic Tim Kaine will be representing the wrong side of many issues. What’s the truth about Catholicism? Do the teachings of the Catholic Church really support the anti-business, pro-abortion positions of the Left?

In The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism, John Zmirak refutes misrepresentations and misconceptions about the Catholic Church and separates rumor from truth when it comes to Catholic traditions, faith, and controversial leaders. No, Zmirak says: the Catholic Church is not the Democratic Party at prayer—in fact, it’s one of the most conservative institutions in the world.

In The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism, you’ll discover:

• Why the Church defends private property as a natural right—and has always condemned socialism

• Why Catholic “social teaching” is more conservative than you think—and is based on limiting the power of the state

• How St. Thomas Aquinas discovered the free market before Adam Smith

• Why Catholics believe both in an inherent right to self-defense and a positive duty to defend others (maybe that’s why there are so many Catholic cops, soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines)

• Why the pope can’t change Catholic Doctrine

The Reverend C. J. McCloskey calls The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism“a funny, readable, and convincing book that marks off faithful Catholicism from political attempts to hijack and distort it.”

What you call an unpaid ad. You’re welcome.

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism

This book has everything for the sensible Catholic. For instance, 

CHAPTER 1 The Church: What It Says about Itself, the World, and What Will Happen to You When You Die

The Roman Catholic Church is like the weather: everybody talks about it, but nobody does anything about it. They can’t, not in the most fundamental sense, any more than they can change earth’s climate.

The truths that the Church teaches about God and man, right and wrong, and the purpose of human history are simply there. You can embrace them enthusiastically as liberating and beautiful. (What the saints do) You can reluctantly admit that they are probable, and obey them to be on the safe side. (What most of us “bad Catholics” do)

Or you can insist that some or all of them are false. (What non-Catholics do) What you can’t do is alter those truths. (What liberal Catholics try to do)

Not even a pope can manage that. Catholics believe that the Holy Spirit would intervene and prevent him, exercising the divine veto power that we call “infallibility.”

Zmirak, John (2016-09-26). The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism (Kindle Locations 267-269). Regnery Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Bring it to your next Tim Kaine rally.

via The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism: John Zmirak: 9781621575863: Amazon.com: Books