Progress Illinois recorded the conversation for posterity and noted that Rep. Kirk was infopimping the already debunked "China is drilling off the coast of Cuba" lie that was all the conservative-partisans' rage last week as the cons tried to push for drilling off the coast of the tourist-dependent Sunshine State. (They ought to talk to the president's younger brother about why he, smartly, wouldn't let the rigs drill off his state's sun-filled shores).

This Cuba lie was so easily and so quickly debunked that even Vice President and former Big Oil CEO Dick Cheney had to eat his words within days. Apparently, Congressman Kirk didn't get the memo to stop lying.

Now, why a guy who claims to believe in a clean environment and went to town for photo op after photo op when BP Amoco wanted to dump poison in our Lake Michigan drinking water would be advocating for drilling off Florida's beaches is unclear and not the least bit hypocritical. If he can work to find Federal dollars for solar panels at schools, he ought to also be able to work for alternative fuels instead of mimicking the drill-drill-drill lemmings.

A bit later in that same radio program, Progress Illinois also noted that Mark Kirk repeated the oft-heard 'mistake' that seems to plague conservative-partisans: swapping the names of "Osama" and "Obama".

Rep. Kirk did rightly apologize publicly and to Sen. Obama as soon as the 'error' was pointed out, but even worse is the fact that he was bald-faced lying while talking about Obama's stated positions on Osama bin Laden. To wit (via PI):

DON WADE: In fact, yesterday in a conference call, Barack Obama's advisers were asked, "If Osama bin Laden were caught, should he get to challenge his detention in U.S. courts?" And the advisers said that -- should that right to challenge detention that they get at Gitmo based on the Supreme Court ruling, should that be applied to bin Laden? -- and Obama's advisers said, "Yes."

KIRK: Yeah, and I would much rather have a policy where if we see Obama there's a shoot-on-sight order.

That, unfortunately, was only half of what the Obama camp has discussed regarding bin Laden.

The rest of the story actually comes pretty close to precisely what Kirk was advocating. From Nedra Pickler of the AP:

"First of all, I think there is an executive order out on Osama bin Laden's head," the Illinois senator said at a news conference. "And if I'm president, and we have the opportunity to capture him, we may not be able to capture him alive."

Obama's campaign said he was referring to a classified Memorandum of Notification that President Clinton approved in 1998 - revealed in the 9/11 Commission report - that would allow the CIA to kill bin Laden if capture weren't feasible.

Obama said he wouldn't discuss what approach he would take to bring bin Laden to justice if he were apprehended. But he said the Nuremberg trials for the prosecution of Nazi leaders are an inspiration because the victors acted to advance universal principles and set a tone for the creation of an international order.

"What would be important would be for us to do it in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he's engaged in and not to make him into a martyr, and to assure that the United States government is abiding by basic conventions that would strengthen our hand in the broader battle against terrorism," Obama said.

It's unfortunate that the WLS hosts were so ill-informed but hopefully this is clear enough for Rep. Kirk and he'll stop repeating his fibs and half-truths.

Or does Mark Kirk not believe in Truth, Justice and the American Way?

Bottom line, Rep. Kirk (and his chief, minority leader John Boehner) are claiming that somebody could subvert the intent of this legislation to try and collect unemployment checks after only working for two weeks. While technically that's possible, as Adam explains such a person would also have to subsist for nearly 9 months on "income" far below the poverty level.

In other words, they'd have to work at not working, and live off literally a few dollars a month to do it. Yet this is Rep. Kirk's excuse for voting against unemployed Americans. That's not what I call being a moderate or standing up for Main Street.

--

Full disclosure: I've met Rep. Kirk on occasion. He's a nice enough fellow but I clearly disagree with several of his positions and his record in Congress. I have volunteered for his challenger Dan Seals in the past and may do so again in the future.

It would have been funny to show Dan Seals filling up a car with gas; as it is, it's only mildly annoying (and half-clever) for the North Shore congressional candidate to pop-up on his website and walk across your screen pointing out all its features.

Incumbent Mark Kirk, on the other hand, doesn't walk - nor does his site fill my browser window. But he does talk.

First, for those who enjoy Inside Baseball, Prairie State Blue blogger 'bored now' notes the manner in which the Kirk campaign went "ballistic" over Dan Seals' overly successful gas station PR event and analyzes why this may be so (O-b-a-m-a...). It's as good a breakdown of the raw numbers as any to date.

Second, in an irony of ironies, the Lincolnshire police chief tells the Pioneer Press that the last car to pull up for the discounted gas during the Seals event was full of (drumroll please) ... Mark Kirk staffers.

Obviously this means that not all Kirk supporters thought it was a "stupid" idea or were so concerned about this legal activity being somehow portrayed as "illegal" (some of the more tame epithets Kirk's partisans have used to smear Dan Seals).

No word on whether or not they were in a clown car.

...Couldn't resist. ;)

Two points while TA and Co try to come up with more hollow rants opposing Seals..

- First, despite TA's willful, partisan-induced ignorance, Mark Kirk also "gives away" things of value and material benefit to voters. There are plenty of Kirk for Congress shirts and caps on parade routes, and folks who go to his events are treated to free goodies like cookies, pop, etc.

All politicians give away items of value.

All.

- Second, a Republican in neighboring Indiana gave away gas for free -- yes, for free -- just last month.

Republican Luke Puckett, also a challenger just like Dan Seals, pumped free gas a month ago in South Bend while bending drivers' ears about his plans to drill for oil in pristine natural areas of California and Alaska. (Wouldn't weening our nation off what Pres. Bush calls an "addiction" to oil be smarter in the long run? Even if we destroyed God's Creation to get at a few more barrels of oil, even those rigs will eventually run dry -- and then what?)

While perhaps Dan Seals' fuel pump promotion was too successful (he caused a traffic jam), Mark Kirk was seemingly aware of it in advance as denizens of the 10th received a Congressional email yesterday (paid for by taxpayers) promoting Rep. Kirk's ideas on conservation, alternative fuels, and protecting our environment (apparently from the likes of his Hoosier GOP colleague, Luke Puckett).

I've met Mark Kirk a few times and I believe he's a decent fellow. "Rooster" has certainly given his all to our country through his service. Unfortunately, as a Congressman Rep. Kirk has had a history of voting and speaking one way on bills before voting the opposite way after they hit the floor. This double-take pattern may leave an incumbent with wiggle room on the campaign trail but it doesn't leave voters with the strongest sense of trust that he'll push to do the right thing, even if he knows how to describe the right thing. (What was the term the Republicans used in 2004...? Flip-flop?)

Indeed, I like hearing what Rep. Kirk has to say on the topic of oil/gas and I agree with the long-term strategic thinking behind it.

But he's been in Congress since 2000, he's in his caucus leadership, and his party had held the trifecta (House, Senate and Oval Office) for most of the time he's been in Washington. Why hasn't he pushed harder for these ideas and gotten them implemented? That would be the sign of a true independent (or "maverick" ... take your pick).

In fact, it's that sort of independent leadership that led then-freshman Sen. Barack Obama to team up with conservative Sen. Tom Coburn on the so-called "google for government" database which details government spending -- something Pres. Bush signed into law and which conservatives across the country quietly praised.

I suppose just as long as unbending partisans like Team America are out there to unquestioningly rail against those who raise such points, perhaps IOKIYAR.

--

UPDATE: TA has also been gleefully linking to an online Tribune article that claims the Seals PR move "backfired" (since when did the editorial pages move up?)...

Curiously, the reporter quotes an upset "businessman" who apparently emailed in his quote (emailed the Trib or emailed the Kirk campaign which forwarded it to the Trib? the article doesn't specify)...

Many bargain-hunting motorists were similarly upset when they realized they'd wasted their time—and gasoline—for nothing.

"This was a very disappointing experience, and we will remember it come election time," businessman Rick Hirschhaut complained in an e-mail. "Mr. Seals just demonstrated that he is a typical politician. What he says and what he does are not the same thing—just a lot of over-promising."

Now, Richard Hirschhaut is a fairly unique name (like my own), so I Googled his name + mark kirk just to see what might pop up.

One of the first links was to a press release from ... Congressman Mark Steven Kirk. Go figure.

It also turns out that Mr. Hirschhaut works as Executive Director of the Illinois Holocaust Museum ... in Skokie ... Not exactly convenient to Lincolnshire. (Though, conceivably, he may have heard of the Seals fuel promotion and headed northwest... Or he may have been in the area already for one reason or another [lots of nice plant nurseries near Lincolnshire and it is planting time].)

Regardless, Mr. Hirschhaut knows Rep. Kirk and the two have worked together closely in the recent past. How close the two are only they and their associates can say.

Clearly, either Tribune reporter Susan Kuczka just got played or she's sympathetic to Rep. Kirk and was willing to accept a quote via email from a friend of the campaign. (That, or there are two Richard Hirschhauts living and/or working in the northern metro area...)

Such is life.

FYI, the effort Rep. Kirk and Mr. Hirschhaut worked on together, as noted in that House press release, is in fact a very noble and necessary project. Here's are passages from the press release (April 19, 2007):

Northbrook, Ill. – U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk and Richard Hirschhaut, Director of the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center, today asked all Midwest Holocaust survivors and their immediate family members to join an international effort to open the Holocaust archives in Bad Arolsen, Germany. [...]

Kirk and Hirschhaut are asking all Holocaust survivors or immediate family members in the Midwest to sign a letter to the ambassadors of the remaining European nations—France, Belgium, Italy and Greece. Kirk will deliver the letters to each ambassador in Washington.

“At a time when so many survivors face the deadlines of restitution applications, having access to the archive’s materials will aid survivors in gathering the materials they need for their appeals,” Hirschhaut said. “With access to millions of original Nazi files, the archive will act as a tracing service for survivors and their family members, hopefully providing a small measure of closure with regard to those loved ones lost during one of history’s darkest chapters.”

Hirschhaut said the opening of the archive will show Germany's continued action toward reconciliation, responsibility and accountability. He also said the records will allow for the continued pursuit of justice against Nazi War Criminals who are currently unknown.

We can all stand to learn more about the Illinois Holocaust Museum, the Anti-Defamation League and more lest we forget the atrocities committed against so many innocent souls.

Donate: Illinois Holocaust Museum
Donate: Anti-Defamation League

--

UPDATE 2: Kirk supporter Louis G. Atsaves posted a knee-slapper in comments at CapFax...

This time, Kirk clearly isn’t let[ting] Seals play fast and loose with the law or the facts.

How odd that Mr. Atsaves would write such spin since nothing Seals has said or done was either illegal or even outright false, either in 2006 or in this cycle.

Perhaps Mr. Atsaves doesn't realize that just because Kirk supporters infopimp some twisted and half-baked baloney about Seals doesn't mean that Seals is at fault.

If, as Mr. Atsaves claims, Kirk isn't letting Seals "play fast and loose" ... it would be nice if he'd have the same courtesy with his own spinning-dizzy supporters.

--

Update 3: Rich Miller finds a few more instances of spinful media stories pushing a Kirk-friendly negative version of yesterday's PR event... Chalk up another notch on the myth of "liberal" media belt. ;)

Says he:

There was obviously a huge pushback from Kirk’s office. The Daily Herald’s story was originally entitled “Political gas giveaway works,” but was then changed to “Political gas giveaway jams traffic, raises questions.” (links original)

--

Update 4: The Illinois GOP's chair tried to manufacture yet another "controversy" about Dan Seals apparently overly successful PR event... From Rich Miller:

Illinois Republican Party Chairman Andy McKenna today called on Tenth Congressional District Democrat Candidate Dan Seals to reimburse local police departments for the cost of providing traffic management [...]

The problem with Mr. McKenna's statement is that the Seals Campaign did talk to the local police department ahead of time, despite the half-baked and ill-informed spin from the Kirk partisans. The blog just received an email from the Seals team:

Feel free to let folks know we are picking up the cost.  We've already been in touch with the dept today to get the final amount and we talked to them in advance of the event regarding the cost as well.

The Daily Herald article (whose headline was mysteriously changed to turn it more negative on Seals) also alludes to this fact as do the press photos clearly showing a mobile traffic alert sign directing drivers -- those things take time to put in place.

The only thing no one was expecting -- the Seals campaign, the police departments, the Kirk team -- was just how popular and successful this event would be.

I do realize that your campaign managers likely felt that taking a stance against a relatively new, exciting, immersive technology that allows for experiential learning and gives children the opportunity to explore and experience learning in new, creative, and engaging ways was a good idea to aid your re-election campaign. It's good, sometimes, to be the person standing up and defending our children - pointing out the evils of technology and keeping them safe from all of the bad people on the internet. I would imagine that in your view, places of learning like schools and libraries would definitely not want to use these sorts of things. For all we know, children might learn to work together and solve problems and goodness knows we don't want that, do we Representative Kirk.

I'm sure that all of the children who have used Second Life in libraries and schools would be really pleased to know that you no longer want that to be available to them. I'm sure that the children involved in programs all over the United States that are interacting with other students would agree that this is a terrible, scary place and they've just been waiting for a hero like you to come along and slam those doors of opportunity shut.

I am also intrigued by your comment that we should "take action to warn parents of the similar dangers and sexually explicit content found on Second Life.". I'm not sure if you're aware of this, Representative Kirk so you may want to have a seat... there is sexually explicit content all over the internet. If you don't want to see it, you don't look at it. Shocking, I know. Maybe it's best if we just cut off our children from the internet completely. We wouldn't want them to see anything inappropriate and God forbid they might receive a spam email from someone rife with these aforementioned 'dangers'.

In conclusion, Mark (I can call you Mark, I hope) while I can definitely appreciate the fact that you're under a lot of stress and pressure in your re-election campaign and I'm SURE that you're  proposing this legislation  out of the goodness of your heart and your inherent need to stand up and protect our children, but.... you're way off base here.

I would be more than happy to meet you in Second Life and show you some of this explicit 'dangerous' content that you're so focused on, but I'd also very much appreciate the time and opportunity to show you the incredible, amazing things being done in Second Life - many of which are from libraries and schools all over the world.

Sincerely,
Shannon

P.S. You should really not make such a big deal about this sort of legislation, you kind of look like a dork.

We've already learned that, if one practices her comrade Team America's "logic", no one is allowed to actually describe themselves by their job or other commonly accepted descriptors. This means that TA is no longer allowed to call himself a "lawyer". It also clearly implies that the guy he and Ms. Leary support for reelection to Congress is not supposed to call himself "Representative" because of this new rule they've made up.

Now we find out that, based on what passes for Ms. Leary's own version of "logic", alumni of a given school are supposed to call their alma mater to attack anyone who is associated with that school but has fallen out of favor with some random gaggle of partisans.

In other words: Alumni of Harvard and the University of Chicago... call your alumni office. There's a partisan whiner using your good name to promote her propaganda...

Sound ridiculous? No more ridiculous than the bizarre catfight GOP partisans are trying to info-pimp over Dan Seals' position as an adjunct professor at Northwestern University.

For some reason, Ms. Leary and her friend TA think it's a lie to tell people that you are an adjunct professor when, in fact, you actually are an adjunct professor.

You would think that, by their own descriptions of themselves, these would be smart people. TA is a lawyer. Ms. Leary is an Ivy League grad with experience in the banking industry.

Yet, when it comes to partisanship, they throw all logic out the window in their efforts to be base and petty. Refusing to acknowledge that a professorship is actually a professorship they instead attack the candidate (because he dares to oppose 'their guy') and anyone who points out little things like "facts" and "reality".

Mark Kirk is a nice enough fellow and clearly very bright. Why he tolerates having a bunch of weak-kneed Tanya Harding imitators who rely on fibs and twisted tales as 'supporters' is unclear.

For the record, Ms. Leary thought she was calling me and others out in one of her posts by declaring that the Repub partisans' whining about their own manufactured controversy is "damaging" to Prof. Dan Seals and that any efforts to point out those partisans' own lack of logic are somehow ad hominem attacks.

Since she at times has an affinity for the delete key, I'll repeat my reply here:

How is pointing out the Republican partisans' fallacies about Prof. Dan Seals "damaging" to him?

While you're at it, Ms. Leary, you may wish to look up the definition of "ad hominem" as it fits your own "hysterical ranting" much better than any of the other actual posts discussing this topic (right or left) to date.

Unlike Ms. Leary, TA usually has the decency to acknowledge his errors. (Except, quite obviously, in this ongoing embarrassment to himself.)

Given how regularly Ms. Leary decries theocratic fascism and its harsh punishments (and often rightly so), one would think she would oppose such partisan-based 'rhetorical stoning' of her fellow Americans. One would be wrong.

Apparently, in Ms. Leary's backyard and TA's version of America, they (and only they) get to declare what is kosher for everyone else to say and they (and only they) can decide what is "true" or not, even if their partisan decrees are clearly false in and of themselves.

Update: Ms. Leary attempts to respond. It's unclear what she still doesn't understand but in her response she "sqeals" about that Dan Seals...

Ms. Leary: "Hey, I earned my degrees fair and square."

That's nice. Nobody said she didn't.

Rather, I pointed out (above) that her fellow members of the Crimson and Maroon nations might disagree with her "sqeals" and "hysterical rantings" and want to call their respective alumni offices to complain that she lists Harvard and the University of Chicago in her blog's bio. That is, after all, what she wants Northwestern alumni to do with regards to Dan Seals.

Ms. Leary: "Nobody's paying me to teach some part-time class"

I'm sure if Ms. Leary wanted to teach a class and was accepted by whatever institution she applied at (or was recruited by) they would, in fact, pay her.

Or, in her partisan zealotry, is she suggesting professors and teachers are not supposed to be paid?

Ms. Leary: "I'm not using some phony title"

Who is? Dan Seals, whether Ms. Leary and her colleagues like it or not, is a Visiting Lecturer at Northwestern University. Another commonly accepted word for "visiting lecturer" is ... "professor." Nothing phony there -- but there sure is a lot of made-up outrage coming from one side of the political aisle.

Ms. Leary: "To try to get a real job"

No one else involved in this discussion, including the candidates, is doing that either.

Ms. Leary: "I don't mindlessly recite Dem talking points to desperately try to change the subject"

Nor do I.

It is rather obvious though, that Ms. Leary, tends to recite conservative talking points to desperately distort a given subject.

Besides, who's changing "the subject"? The subject is the conserv-o-partisan Kirk supporters' manufactured and info-pimped non-story about Dan Seals job as a visiting lecturer at Northwestern University. Is that not the topic of this blogpost?

Or is pointing out that this non-controversy is, in and of itself, a transparent effort to avoid actually discussing issues that matter. (Apparently simply mentioning words like economy, health care, or, gasp, Iraq is now defined as "hysterical ranting" per the most recent Dictionary of Standard English, Anne Leary Hyperpartisan Edition.)

And finally, Ms. Leary concludes her prose with some "hysterical ranting" about Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. ;) (Yes, that's a joke friends.)

...And Senators John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama must stop referring to themselves by their job titles. (And [can't-say-Senator] Obama and the news media reporting on his campaign must stop referring to his role as a professor at the University of Chicago or his position as president of the Harvard Law Review.)

Team America's latest myopic, illogical rant about [can't-say-Rep.] Kirk's opponent Dan Seals highlights a political stunt done by partisan students at Northwestern University to complain that Adjunct Professor Dan Seals is calling himself an Adjunct Professor. It's fine for conservative Wildcats to bemoan the fact that Seals is a professor at their school, just as I'm sure some Stanford students aren't happy with cracker-jack historian Victor David Hanson being associated with their university.

But this hollow, purple-faced whining over Prof. Seals calling himself by his title is based on a lack of reason and rationality that is just sad. Kindergarteners could make better arguments.

Are Republican partisans really this lathered up over the fact that Dan Seals is referring to his job (whether they like the fact he has a job or not), or are they simply recognizing the very real threat that Northwestern University Adjunct Professor Dan Seals poses as he makes his second run to return Democratic leadership to the 10th District?

Apparently, even a cornered elephant will lash out in whatever way it can when cornered -- logical or not.

But hey, at least we're not talking about the looming recession, the housing collapse, the health care crisis, the quagmire in Iraq, the lack of progress in finding Osama bin Forgotten, or anything of any actual importance to the 10th district and America.

After 12 years of obscure gibberish from Chairman Greenspan and two years of happy-talk by Chairman Bernanke, listen closely and you can hear a faint note of reality from our leaders about the US economy.  This is progress in tiny steps, but a change in direction from a government addicted to lies.

Chairman Ben S. Bernanke's Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the Congress  (27 February 2008):

Chairman Frank, Ranking Member Bachus, and other members of the Committee, I am pleased to present the Federal Reserve's Monetary Policy Report to the Congress.  In my testimony this morning I will briefly review the economic situation and outlook, beginning with developments in real activity and inflation, then turn to monetary policy.  I will conclude with a quick update on the Federal Reserve's recent actions to help protect consumers in their financial dealings.

The economic situation has become distinctly less favorable since the time of our July report. ...

As understatements go, this is far from the record set by Emperor Hirohito of Japan in his first radio broadcast (15 August 1945), with " the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage."  But this economic downturn has just begun, and we might yet hear Bernanke or our President say that we have worked hard, that unexpected and undeserved events have occurred, and therefore shocking and extraordinary measures must be taken.

While few are aware of the cataracts ahead, they are clearly visible.  Already major figures are calling for reactivating Depression-era measures, such as large-scale government purchases of home mortgages.  What will they be advocating in 2009?

• Senator Chris Dodd advocates creation of a Federal Homeownership Preservation Corporation as part of a large economic stimulus package (22 January 2008)
• "Reestablish the Home Owners' Loan Corporation", Representative Mark Kirk (R- IL), Press Release (23 January 2008)
• "From the New Deal, a Way Out of a Mess", Alan S. Blinder, New York Times (24 February 2008)
• Others, like the Office of Thrift Supervision and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, advocate radical changes to our home finance and bankruptcy laws.

Hedge fund manager Bill Fleckenstein goes to the heart of matters when describing our situation (27 February 2008):

In any case, the determination to suppress the destructive downside of capitalism and insure permanent prosperity will not work. Permanent prosperity, after all, is what socialism was supposed to be about, and we've all learned that that doesn't work. I continue to find it a sad irony that Wall Street -- the alleged bastion of capitalism -- would cling so dearly to the hope of socialism.

Of course, that's exactly what the Fed is all about. Its central planners think they can pick the right interest rate with which to run the world, even as the evidence indicates that what their efforts over the last 20 years have produced are two epic bubbles. This story would strike any sane person as the stuff of nightmare. Sadly, it's our waking reality.

A full analysis of our situation is beyond the scope of this little note, but here some highlights.

• Politicos will describe the bubble in home prices (and consequent over-building) - like that of commercial real estate in the late 1980's and stock in the late 1990's - as resulting from insufficient government regulation.  This is clearly false.  In all three cases there were large regulatory organizations (many!), with adequate power. 
• The regulators failed to act because too much money was being made by politically powerful groups.  The regulators were "captured" by their subjects.  Anyone familiar with the Department of Defense and its contractors knows how this works.
• This fits nicely into a Marxist analysis (as so many things do, if one throws away Marx's theory and "cures").  In a society run by capitalists (a plutocracy, in classic terms), it does not help to give capitalists' minions governmental power in addition to their economic power (no help, that is, to the wider society).
• There are solutions to this problem, but they are not the kind of policy changes and programs so loved by technocrats.  This is speculative, but I effective reform requires changing the relationship of citizens to the regime.  That is, changes in how we think and act, seeing ourselves as citizens, not consumers.
• Not only might technocratic fixes not work, they might exacerbate the underlying problem.  For I suspect we are sliding in the other direction - from citizens to subjects.  For a look at where that might go, I recommend Christian Meier's "Caesar".  He describes how by late Republic times the Roman people had lost the will to govern themselves.  As always, volunteers appeared to take on the job.

A look at the past in order to see a possible future for America

To our good and loyal subjects:

After pondering deeply on the general trend of the world and the actual conditions pertaining to our Empire today, we have decided to effect a settlement of the present situation by resorting to an extraordinary measure.  

Although the best has been done by everyone -- the gallant fighting of the military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of our servants of the state, and the devoted service of our hundred million people -- the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interests.

Emperor Hirohito of Japan speaking to his people for the first time  (15 August 1945)

Please share your comments by posting below (brief and relevant, please), or email me at fabmaximus at hotmail dot com (note the spam-protected spelling). 

For more information about this subject

1. A brief note on the US Dollar. Is this like August 1914?  (8 November 2007) — How the current situation is as unstable financially as was Europe geopolitically in early 1914.
2. The post-WWII geopolitical regime is dying. Chapter One   (21 November 2007) — Why the current geopolitical order is unstable, describing the policy choices that brought us here.
3. We have been warned. Death of the post-WWII geopolitical regime, Chapter II  (28 November 2007) — A long list of the warnings we have ignored, from individual experts and major financial institutions (links included).
4. Death of the post-WWII geopolitical regime, III - death by debt  (8 January 2008) – Origins of the long economic expansion from 1982 to 2006; why the down cycle will be so severe.
5. Geopolitical implications of the current economic downturn  (24 January 2008) – How will this recession end?  With re-balancing of the global economy, so that the US goods and services are again competitive.  No more trade deficit, and we can pay out debts.
6. A happy ending to the current economic recession (12 February 2008) – The political actions which might end this downturn, and their long-term implications.
7. What will America look like after this recession?  (18 March 208)  — More forecasts.  The recession might change so many things, from the distribution of wealth within the US to the ranking of global powers.
8. The most important story in this week’s newspapers   (22 May 2008) — How solvent is the US government? They report the facts to us every year.

To see the all posts on this subject, go to the archive for The End of the Post-WWII Geopolitical Regime.

"What's Going On?" The Lake County Motorist Calendar, listing events that may be of interest to motorists and commuters, has been added to the blog. Check it out in the sidebar. Clicking an event opens the corresponding Google Calendar entry, allowing you to view details and add the event to your own Google Calendar if you wish.

A Route 120 bypass meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, February 13 at the Round Lake Police and Public Works facility. Visit 120now.com for details.

A bipartisan Suburban Transportation Commission Open House is scheduled for Monday, February 11 at Lake Zurich High School. Representatives Melissa Bean and Mark Kirk will be on hand to listen to residents' feedback on the proposed CN acquisition of the EJ&E line. More details are available at FightRailCongestion.com.

It's Auto Show time! Your friends at the Tollway Authority will be there to provide I-PASS assistance and answer any questions.

Illinois DOT construction update report. No updates since last week.

Here's the Lake County DOT roadwork update report. Work as usual.

Chicago has one, and Highland Park does too: it's an online pothole reporting form. It's only to be used for reporting potholes found in the city of Highland Park. I wish more municipalities would set up something like this.

Illinois Tollway construction update: Ongoing work is....ongoing. The daily and ongoing lane closure report lists the details.

Interstate 94 weather report. Only minor snowfalls are expected this week, which is good because we need a break!

And finally, here's a Wisconsin blogger's February 6 snowstorm experience: She slept at the office that night.

Got a road tip? Click here to send it (opens in a new window).

Beck allowed Sheldon to explain his opposition. Sheldon gave the usual crap about it criminalizing Christianity by prosecuting Christians who read parts of the Bible condemning homosexuality. Problem is, the bill defines hate crimes as physically violent acts such as assault or murder, which is a pretty far cry from quoting a book. Did I forget to mention the language in the bill reaffirming that speech is constitutionally protected?

Mr. Kirk politely pointed out to Sheldon that any first year law student would tell him that the statute in the bill specifically applies to acts of physical violence, such as assault (weapon or without), or murder. Speech is neither. Yeah, I'm not even a law student. I feel smart.

But anyway, Sheldon would have none of it. He threw his arms up in the air and started rambling about some incident in Pennsylvania where people were arrested and charged with hate crimes for reading Bible passages and playing a bullhorn.

Update: CNN has a transcript.

KIRK: Americans now see across places like the Middle East sectarian violence that tears their whole country apart. And we think that the American people should be protected against that.

Our country stands for freedom and democracy, but also tolerance. And if the federal government can offer assistance to a local police department to make sure that a crime is rapidly followed up and that criminals are put in jail and that a national television spectacle doesn`t lead to riots in other places, then the American people are better protected.

BECK: I mean, I`ve got to tell you, I don`t agree with either of you guys.

(CROSSTALK)

BECK: Reverend, Reverend, Reverend, hang on. Isn`t the problem here that we`re trying to make different crimes mean different things? Look, I don`t care if you`re taking hormones to grow breasts or you have breasts naturally. I mean, I got big breasts, and I ain`t taking hormones, man. You beat me up because of my views, you beat me up because I`m taking hormones, you beat me up for whatever reason, you just want to beat somebody up today, you should get the same penalty, no matter what your intent was or your reason. Reason doesn`t make any difference to me. How is that not common sense?

SHELDON: Well, then you agree with me. Then you agree. That`s what I`m saying. You should not put these in special categories of special protected rights. And, furthermore, the lady was right on the phone when you had that call, that this will put a chilling effect. It lays the fundamental legal groundwork for there to be investigations, prosecution, and then persecution of those people that say in sermons or written out or radio or television about what the Bible says and what their religion believes concerning homosexuality.

BECK: Congressman, does it lay the groundwork?

KIRK: No. Any first-year law student would tell you that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and the First Amendment gives the American people an unqualified right to free speech. What this bill simply does is it says that the state can request local backup from federal law enforcement if a crime is threatening to go out of control.

(CROSSTALK)

SHELDON: Until we use the White House, those 10 people in Philadelphia were arrested for a hate crime because they had a bullhorn that read the Bible about the book of Romans.

yet mark kirk acts worried!

you can understand why.  there are numerous indicators out there that suggest that kirk is in trouble.  many of these are inter-related.  kirk's biggest problem is that this upcoming election will be, for many voters, about george bush.  as stuart rothenberg puts it, "<a href="http://rothenbergpoliticalreport.blogspot.com/">what is developing is a classic political wave of voter dissatisfaction about the direction of the nation and the performance of the president. Congressional candidates from the president’s party are about to bear the brunt of voter dissatisfaction, because President Bush isn’t on the ballot. Republican incumbents are in trouble not because they are incumbents, but because they are Republicans.</a>"

of course, mark kirk has always hid from the fact that he's a republican, and voters have let him get away with it.  but this time could be different. voters won't forgive george bush for his reckless actions, and mark kirk is the only person they can take it out on.  as bloomberg points out, "<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=anXdN2hm7YHY&refer=us">Thirty-six percent of those polled said the congressional elections on Nov. 7 will be an opportunity cast a symbolic vote against the president, up from 15 percent before the last mid- term election in 2002, according to the survey by the Washington-base Pew Center</a>." no wonder kirk looked so scared at the buffalo grove parade!

there's another reality that haunts kirk: illinois is turning a darker shade of blue.  "<a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-0609130173sep13,1,7327469,print.story?coll=chi-politics-topheadlines">The percentage of Illinois voters who call themselves Democrats is at its highest pre-election level in more than a decade, posing a problem for Republicans trying to win the governor's mansion and key congressional seats, a Tribune/WGN-TV poll shows</a>."

admittedly, "In the collar counties, 31 percent of voters aligned themselves with Republicans while 29 percent identified with Democrats."  but the problem here is that there are not enough republicans for kirk to win based on his record of loyalty to the republican party and president bush's positions.  kirk either needs to win a majority of independent voters or suppress the vote.  he's won the former in the past.  that may not help him in november.

kirk's biggest problem is keeping voters from viewing seals as a winner.  his tactic in the last two races was to basically dismiss his challengers.  his apologists have tried that again, this time.  but with obama's support (and the inevitable commercials making that clear), kirk has a problem.  obama's 2-0, with one victory against the illinois machine.  kirk's may be his next scalp!

this week, mark kirk will vote to support president bush's attempt to redefine the geneva conventions more to his liking -- but against every thought of common sense known to man (and woman).

the dispute between the moderates and the extremists is over <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/washington/17detain.html?pagewanted=print">common article 3 of the geneva conventions</a>, which prohibits inhumane treatment of combatants seized in wartime. the problem is that bush has declared this a war, the supreme court has ruled against bush's extremist positions, and the republican moderates (colin powell, john mccain, john warner and lindsey graham) lead the charge against bush's extreme position on detainee policy.

mark kirk stands with the extremists, and against the moderates in his party.

the problem is that this is not about getting republicans elected. this is about protecting americans in uniform and what could happen to them if they are captured by the enemy -- as happened to john mccain. if america reinterprets the geneva conventions to fit its ideological preferences, there is nothing to prevent our enemies from doing the same, eliminating protections for our troops seized in future confrontations. senior judge advocates general have already publicly disputed numerous aspects of the administration's position, but especially any reinterpreting of the geneva conventions. the geneva accords have long been the cornerstone of international law, and america has been the leading defender of the conventions -- until bush and kirk were elected.

kirk's blind loyalty to bush, and his utter disregard for our american troops, has lead to his voting with bush -- and against the mainstream political opinion in the country. moreover, this misguided loyalty sets back our efforts in the global war on terrorism. as senators mccain, warner and graham point out, the bush position signals to the world that america has abandoned its commitment to human rights and justice in the world.

kirk's extreme position sets him apart from the real veterans of the uniformed services in congress, who argue that the president’s proposal guts the geneva conventions, sending a stark signal to the rest of the world and leaving our military without adequate protection against torture and mistreatment. it sets him apart from colin powell and numerous retired military officers who wrote letters supporting the moderate's position. and it sets him apart from the political mainstream and centrists in this country. mark kirk is no moderate -- he's one of bush's lackeys in the house. the american military is the real loser here...