Run, Gutierrez, Run; Immigration, Natarus, HDO, Munoz, Flores and the 4th CD

Jeff Berkowitz: Is the indictment of Al Sanchez an indictment of the HDO [Hispanic Democratic Organization, or as some put it—Hispanic Daley Organization], given Sanchez's close relationship to its formation?

Cong. Luis Gutierrez [D-Chicago, 4th CD]: Look, I have always said the HDO was...
*******************************
Pretty soon, people will be saying you can take the buffoon out of the Chicago City Council, but you can’t take the buffoon out of Ald. Natarus [See here].
**********************************
Giving an apparently abbreviated speech to the City Club of Chicago at lunch on Monday, Cong. Gutierrez [D-Chicago, 4th CD] spoke quite a bit about the importance of moving forward with immigration reform that has a well defined path to citizenship. The path he outlined would take, conservatively speaking he said, a minimum of 15 years for an undocumented worker to become a U. S. Citizen.

Cong. Gutierrez said he had to leave the lunch earlier than anticipated to catch a 2:00 pm flight to Los Angeles in order to attend a rally for immigration rights. Apparently due to his early departure, the customary post-speech City Club of Chicago question/answer session with luncheon attendees was omitted, and Cong. Gutierrez was literally running to the airport as he tried to leave the podium.

However, never one to follow rules, 73 year old former Chicago 42nd Ward Alderman Burt Natarus stood up at the end of the speech and shouted out his question to an exiting and running Cong. Gutierrez [Natarus was defeated in February by 35 year old Brendan Reilly, who nominally had been, at one time, Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan’s flak catcher. For more on Reilly as the Phantom of the City Council, see here].
************************************************
Ald. Burt Natarus: One question, what can we do to improve the mail service?

Cong. Luis Gutierrez [D-Chicago]: Danny Davis is on the--

City Club of Chicago moderator Paul Green [smiling amiably and allowing a graceful exit for Gutierrez from the line of sight of Natarus]: Hire more Latinos, thank you very much.
**********************************
Although mail service in the City of Chicago is perhaps even more of a problem lately than is usually the case, there is a time, place and person with whom such should be raised. Clearly, this was the wrong time, place and person with whom such should be raised. Natarus must think if you are a racial minority, you should be answering questions about the mail service: anytime, any place, any minority.

Last summer, Natarus made a similar buffoon of himself at a meeting of the Cook County Democratic Party township committeeman and city ward bosses. [See here]. Isn’t it time for Burt to stop frequenting polite, civil society. Pretty soon, people will be saying you can take the buffoon out of City Council, but you can’t take the buffoon out of Natarus [See here].
*********************************
Stepping out on the sidewalk [the clean, if not mean, streets of Chicago so to speak], Cong. Gutierrez agreed to take a few questions from the media, including yours truly. Standing next to the previous product of former Streets and San Commissioner Al Sanchez, there was really only one question to ask, but the media came up with a few:
******************************
Cong. Gutierrez [in response to a question]: I am not endorsing anybody for the 4th Cong. District. I am still alive and well, there is not even a 2008 primary date [set] yet.
***************************************
In response to another question in Spanish, Cong. Gutierrez responded both in Spanish and English, saying “this,” was not a prelude to a run for Mayor of Chicago in four years.

Cong. Gutierrez has made it clear he is serving his last term in Congress; Chicago Ald. Ricardo Munoz [See here] has started his run in the 4th CD Democratic Primary, and he was at the lunch; Chicago Ald. Danny Solis, Chicago Ald. Manny Flores and Cook County Commissioner Roberto Maldonado are all thought to be likely candidates in the 4th CD Primary, but none of them has said so, officially, yet. However, Ald. Flores, at the lunch, sure sounded like a 4th CD candidate [more on that to follow, and see here].
**************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Is the indictment of Al Sanchez an indictment of the HDO [Hispanic Democratic Organization, or as some put it—Hispanic Daley Organization], given Sanchez's close relationship to its formation?

Cong. Gutierrez: Look, I have always said the HDO was a mistake. I think it is very, very clear that it should have never been created and I know our judicial system will do what is right. [No chance for a follow-up question; by the time he finished his sentence, Cong. Gutierrez was on his way to L. A.; perhaps if Mayor Daley stays too long in the Mayor’s chair, Luis can run in Los Angeles, if that City tires of its first Hispanic Mayor ; The Hispanic base in Los Angeles is a bit more favorable for Hispanic pols than in Chicago, with 50% of the L. A. population being Hispanic, and more importantly, 25% of the registered voters in L.A. being Hispanic]
****************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Better than the Final Four: Peraica v. Quigley, Cable and Streaming

Jeff Berkowitz: ... [County Board President] Todd Stroger [D-Chicago], is he a reformer?

Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley [D-Chicago]: No. Is he going to try to do the right thing...
****************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Is Liz Gorman [R-Orland Park] a reformer, Tony?...
*********************************************************
Cook County Commissioner Tony Peraica [R-Riverside]: There were eleven hundred [job] vacancies in that budget, Mike, you know that.

Mike Quigley: No, as you started-- there aren’t anymore. There aren’t even close [to that]. Now, what happens—
*****************************************************
Mike Quigley: Just let me finish. In the end, that would have been a fifty-one million dollar shortfall [in the Alternative Budget] and when it cut, it would have cut frontline personnel. Here is the great fraud of the Alternative Budget, it would have cut frontline personnel 2.5% and ... Frontline workers. It was the biggest scam and sham you would see in politics.

Jeff Berkowitz: Tony, respond to that. Biggest scam? Frontline workers being taken back?

Mike Quigley: Thirty-six million dollars worth.

Tony Peraica: The biggest scam here is that Todd Stroger’s relatives are doing well on the payroll, getting big promotions and big increases [in salaries] at taxpayers expense. The biggest scam is that his political donors are continuing to do quite well. The biggest scam is that...
*****************************************************************
This Week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," airing in the Chicago metro suburbs, features Cook County Commissioners Tony Peraica [R-Riverside] and Mike Quigley [D-Chicago], discussing and debating whether there was a good resolution of the Cook County Budget issues, who the true reformers are, how much patronage was left in the County Budget at the expense of front-line workers and much, more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz.See, below, for the Public Affairs suburban airing schedule. You may also [Go Here to watch this week's suburban show with Peraica and Quigley, and soon next week's suburban "Public Affairs," show with John Filan, Illinois' Chief Operating Officer as well as other shows with such notables as Obama, McCain, Giuliani, Barrett, Syverson and many others on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows; trouble accessing our cinema page on your computer? Try I-Tunes: the same Public Affairs shows are also available there].
******************************************
Commissioners Quigley [D] and Peraica [R]will be the featured guests on the Monday, April 2, 2007 [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21] City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs."
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," to watch on your computer including this week's suburban show with Peraica and Quigley . The cinema page also will soon have next week's suburban show with John Filan, recent shows with Rep. Fritchey, Ralph Martire, Metropolitan Planning Council President MarySue Barrett, Phantom of the City Council--Brendan Reilly, State Rep. Paul Froehlich, as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Go Here to Watch the Shows on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows].
***************************************************
Cook County Commissioners Mike Quigley [D-Chicago] and Tony Peraica [R-Riverside] debate and discuss with each other and with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz how Mike Quigley and three Republican Commissioners, among others, ended up voting with President Todd Stroger on the 2007 Budget, whether the budget was a victory or defeat for reform, whether President Todd Stroger [D-Chicago] and Republican commissioners Gorman, Silvestri and Goslin are reformers, whether the 2007 budget is a House of Cards, whether the alternative budget had a 50 million dollar hole in it, whether there are still 200 million dollars of patronage in the current Cook County budget, whether independent, court appointed monitors of rigged hiring at Cook County government can be expected to do the job, whether the “We Clean,” company no bid contract stinks and whether that company should not have been hired, whether ten community health care clinics should not have been closed, whether pols have permanent interests or permanent allies, whether Cook County government needs a new Inspector General, whether the Civic Federation got its Cook County budget analysis wrong and whether Hell, having frozen over a few years ago on the Cook County Board, has started to heat up again.
******************************************
Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley [D-Chicago]: …This is where Commissioner Peraica doesn’t want to talk, he can’t explain away this—

Cook County Commissioner Tony Peraica [R-Riverside]: What’s that?

Mike Quigley: When we started doing turnover rates [adjusting the estimated budget cost down to take account of jobs that would not be filled], under President Phelan, it was because we had a tremendous number of vacancies—those vacancies were largely removed in the last three years.

Tony Peraica: Oh, that’s not true.

Mike Quigley: It’s absolutely true and that’s why the Civic Federation is against this [the Alternative Budget of Claypool, Peraica, Suffredin, Schneider, et al]

Tony Peraica: Aren’t there eleven hundred vacancies now?

Mike Quigley: So now, they recognize—

Jeff Berkowitz: Answer that, are there eleven hundred vacancies?

Mike Quigley: No, there are not that many.

Tony Peraica: There were eleven hundred [job] vacancies in that budget, Mike, you know that.

Mike Quigley: No, as you started-- there aren’t anymore. There aren’t even close [to that]. Now, what happens—

Jeff Berkowitz: How many job vacancies are there?

Mike Quigley: I don’t know the exact number, we still have to--

Tony Peraica: There are still at least five-hundred or six-hundred left.

Mike Quigley: Just, let me finish. In the end, that would have been a fifty-one million dollar shortfall [in the Alternative Budget] and when it cut, it would have cut frontline personnel. Here is the great fraud of the Alternative Budget, it would have cut frontline personnel 2.5% and the other part that balanced this budget was they would have adopted thirty-six million dollars of President Stroger’s original cuts. These are the same people-- in other words, with one hand we are going to give you and then on the other hand to balance our budget because we have said yes to everybody, we are going to take thirty-six million dollars back-- of what? Frontline workers. It was the biggest scam and sham you would see in politics.

Jeff Berkowitz: Tony, respond to that. Biggest scam? Frontline workers being taken back?

Mike Quigley: Thirty-six million dollars worth.

Tony Peraica: The biggest scam here is that Todd Stroger’s relatives are doing well on the payroll, getting big promotions and big increases [in salaries] at taxpayers expense. The biggest scam is that his political donors are continuing to do quite well. The biggest scam is that all of the committeemen who help him get elected are making $100,000 plus and doing quite well. That’s the scam. And, the frontline workers, as of last Friday, are unemployed, that’s the scam.
***********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: The two gentlemen [Quigley and Peraica] shaking hands [near the end of the show], what can you say about that. Public Affairs brings peace to people, right?

Mike Quigley: Issue by issue. That’s how we should go forward.

Jeff Berkowitz: You’ve got some influence with Todd Stroger, right? You supported him, right? You endorsed him for President of the Cook County Board.

Mike Quigley: I try to help him do the right thing.

Jeff Berkowitz: Did you give him a call and say, “This We Clean contract stinks,” so to speak, and change it?

Mike Quigley: This all happened late Friday [March 16], I didn’t get a chance to talk to anyone, I just voted no [on a telephone poll, the board voted 9 to 8 to approve the contract, and it apparently was later reversed as one or more yea votes were changed to no votes, See here]

Jeff Berkowitz: But, is your confidence shaken? You supported this guy. You endorsed this guy, your neck’s out there.

Mike Quigley: Look, he is going to make mistakes and when he does, I’ll vote no. When he does the right thing, I’ll be with him, just as I was with his father [John Stroger, who was President of the Cook County Board for twelve years, resigning his Presidency last summer due to a stroke].

Jeff Berkowitz: You were with his father? You were almost never with his father.

Mike Quigley: No, I voted with his father when he was right. And, people said what are you doing? I said, look, he is not always wrong. It is just the facts.

Jeff Berkowitz: All right. So, the Four Horsemen were you two gentlemen, Peraica, Quigley, Claypool and Suffredin. Larry Suffredin told me just a few days ago…the Four Horsemen now…Quigley’s out and Tim Schneider’s in. Come on—

Mike Quigley: I’ll sleep at night.

Jeff Berkowitz: I mean, what do you say to Larry Suffredin?

Mike Quigley: You know what, [I go] issue by issue. And, Larry can be wrong, too. When Larry’s right, I’ll be with him and when Larry’s wrong, I’ll vote against him.

Jeff Berkowitz: So, is it the saying that there’s no permanent allies in politics, only permanent interests?

Tony Peraica: That’s right.

Jeff Berkowitz: Was that Mayor Daley or Machiavelli? Who said that? [Lord Palmerston, sort of- See here].

Tony Peraica: I’m not sure. I like the one—if you want a friend [in politics], get a dog.

Jeff Berkowitz: All right, so that’s what we’re talking about. And your permanent interests, the two of you, are reform? That’s what you want?

Mike Quigley: Making this County better.

Jeff Berkowitz: So, you two agree? The difference here is either you are a reformer or you are not a reformer?

Tony Peraica: Well, there are essentially three blocks on the Cook County Board. You have the progressive Democrats—reform minded Democrats; you have regular Democrats and you have Republicans—where there are also divisions between regulars and progressives—

Jeff Berkowitz: So, you have four [voting] blocks?

Tony Peraica: There are four blocks, yeah.

Jeff Berkowitz: Is Liz Gorman a reformer, Tony? [Liz Gorman is in her second term as Cook County Commissioner and was recently elected Chairman of the Cook County GOP to fill the remaining year on Gary Skoien’s term, who resigned his chairmanship to spend more time with his wife, who is ill].

Tony Peraica: I don’t think so, no.

Jeff Berkowitz: What about Silvestri? Is he a reformer?

Tony Peraica: From time to time, he votes progressively.

Jeff Berkowitz: Goslin, is he a reformer?

Tony Peraica: Same thing applies.

Jeff Berkowitz: Is Todd Stroger a reformer, Mike?

Mike Quigley: First of all, those Republicans [County Commissioners Gorman, Silvestri and Goslin], I think they did a great job [on the budget].

Jeff Berkowitz: Answer Mike, Todd Stroger, is he a reformer?

Mike Quigley: No. Is he going to try to do the right thing. Absolutely. Is he going to move toward reform. I am going to push him every way I can. I have been here eight, nine years. Every which way you can move the pile forward is how you should do it.
*********************************************
Cook County Peraica and Quigley, as they are airing this week on Public Affairs in 35 Chicago Metro suburbs [See below for the suburban airing schedule] and as will be airing on Monday, April 2, 2007 [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on March 18, 2007. You may also[watch the show with Peraica and Quigley here].
***************************************************
In twenty-five North Shore, North and Northwest suburbs, the "Public Affairs," show airs every Tuesday night in the regular weekly Public Affairs slot, 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 or 35, as indicated, below.

In ten North Shore suburbs, the Public Affairs show airs three times each week in its regular slots at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, as indicated, below. ******************************************************
The suburban episode of Public Affairs with guests Cook County Commissioners Peraica and Quigley airs Tonight :

at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, parts of Inverness, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette

And at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 35 in Arlington Heights, Bartlett, Glenview, Golf, Des Plaines, Hanover Park, Mt. Prospect, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Prospect Heights, Schaumburg, Skokie, Streamwood and Wheeling.

and this week on Monday night, Wednesday night and Friday night at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.
***********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Gary MacDougal on Barack Obama and Health Insurance:Cable and Streaming

Jeff Berkowitz: Extremely intelligent? Perhaps [Obama is] one of the most intelligent state senators you encountered? Maybe the most intelligent state senator you encountered in the state of Illinois?

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: In the State of Illinois? I will have to think back a bit. He is definitely intelligent. I remember testifying in front of his committee in Springfield and saying, “Whoa, where did this guy come from?” His questions were articulate, thoughtful—I think he means well. He is naïve, though. Another evidence of Obama's naiveté is—he has done business with ...and [ ] is going to bring down [Governor] Blagojevich.
*********************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Tell us what you would do. I understand you have a criticism of Governor Blagojevich [on health insurance], but what would you do as a Republican to deal with those 1.5 million people in Illinois who are uninsured?
****************************************************
Tonight's City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," features former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal discussing and debating Gov. Blagojevich's approach to spending, taxes and health care; MacDougal's suggestion that the State GOP develop a "Contract with Illinois"; assessments of Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, Bob Kjellander and much, more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz.You may also [Go Here to watch the "Public Affairs," show with Gary MacDougal, this week's suburban "Public Affairs," rumble between Cook County Commissioners Peraica [R] and Quigley [D] as well as other shows with such notables as Schakowsky, Obama, McCain, Giuliani, Barrett, Syverson and many others on your computer; .
******************************************
Go here for more about tonight's show topics and for an additional partial transcript of tonight's show.
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," to watch on your computer , including interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Go Here to Watch the Shows on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows].
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Your knock on Barack Obama is that in your perception, he is too liberal for America

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: He is too liberal—

Jeff Berkowitz: But, you would say the same thing about Hillary Clinton, right?

Gary MacDougal: Yes, Yes.

Jeff Berkowitz: And, perhaps about John Edwards.

Gary MacDougal: I would.

Jeff Berkowitz: Other than that, what do you think of Barack Obama? You would say he is an intelligent guy?

Gary MacDougal: Absolutely, I think he is—

Jeff Berkowitz: Extremely intelligent? Perhaps one of the most intelligent state senators you encountered? Maybe the most intelligent state senator you encountered in the state of Illinois?

Gary MacDougal: In the State of Illinois? I will have to think back a bit. He is definitely intelligent. I remember testifying in front of his committee in Springfield and saying, “Whoa, where did this guy come from?” His questions were articulate, thoughtful—I think he means well. He is naïve, though. Another evidence of his naiveté is—he has done business with [Tony] Rezko on several levels. Rezko is the guy who has already been indicted and is going to bring down [Governor] Blagojevich.

Jeff Berkowitz: Well, almost every [pol] in Illinois has done business with Tony Rezko, with the exception perhaps of—

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: I have never done business with Tony Rezko. I wouldn’t touch—

Jeff Berkowitz: Gary MacDougal. And, we want to thank Gary MacDougal for coming on the show tonight…and we’re going to continue to speak as the credits roll…so you tied Barack Obama to Tony Rezko, but … it’s a pretty weak tie. He [Obama] knew him way back [when], but Tony Rezko has known everybody way back, that’s how he operated, he got to know pols--

Gary MacDougal: But, he [Obama] just bought this house not so long ago, and it’s not evidence that it is a great corrupt incident—

Jeff Berkowitz: Rezko bought [on the same day and from the same seller to Barack Obama] the side lot, adjacent property to a house that Barack Obama bought. There is no indication that there was any corruption, anything wrong there—

Gary MacDougal: Well, it could be that Rezko paid full price for his and Obama got a discount

Jeff Berkowitz: But, Obama said he did that because there was an offer at that price [the price Rezko paid], Rezko had to match it. That was [apparently] not true for the Obama purchase of Obama’s house.

Gary MacDougal: I’m just saying that it isn’t good judgment to have anything to do with a guy like Tony Rezko, who is clearly a shady character.
*****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Tell us what you would do. I understand you have a criticism of Blagojevich [on health insurance], but what would you do as a Republican to deal with those 1.5 million people in Illinois who are uninsured?

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: I think that we have to come up with a market based solution. And, I think the President has a good idea on that. What he is doing is removing the tax deduction that employers get and giving individuals a tax deduction. It is really kind of a variant of a voucher scheme so that there is no miss-match, no second class citizens in terms of those of us who don’t have a corporation that we work for, so we can buy insurance.

Jeff Berkowitz: But, don’t a lot of those folks who are uninsured not pay any [income] tax because they either have no income or a very low income. Most people who earn less than $50,000 don’t pay any federal taxes, do they? And so, giving them a tax deduction, how does that help them?

Gary MacDougal: Let me go to your first point. It is the very poor that do have insurance because it is Medicaid. Medicaid—one of the problems we had in getting people to leave welfare is that they would leave [or lose] Medicaid, so the very—there is a misconception here because the very poorest people do have health insurance and it is the group above that, those that you might call the working poor, that is the issue.

Jeff Berkowitz: And, those people you are saying would benefit from that tax deduction both on the state and federal level—

Gary MacDougal: That’s right.

Jeff Berkowitz: Which they are currently not getting. They then would be persuaded or induced to buy health insurance. So, you’re saying that people voluntarily are not buying health insurance now because it is not economic.

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: You’ve got to improve the economics for individual choice. And, the thing you’ve got to be careful of—the Blagojevich plan will put a mandate on insurance companies which may cause them to leave the state or choose not to insure [those in] the state-- and also [the Blagojevich administration may put a] mandate on employers. Anytime you’re doing an employer mandate, watch out, because employers can move across the state border.
***************************************************
Gary MacDougal, as is airing tonight on Public Affairs [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on March 11, 2007. You may also[watch the show with former State GOP Chairman MacDougal here].
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Barack Obama’s appeal as the Democratic Presidential Nominee

Revised significantly at 12:02 am on Thursday morning.
**********************************
ABC News’ Jake Tapper [Senior National Correspondent] and Jonathan Greenberger [Segmant Producer, This week with George Stephanopoulos]... with some assistance from clips of “Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz," capture, both in words and video [See here for the words and click on a four minute video] the major trait that sets Obama apart from the field...
**************************************************
Game, Set and Match. Well, okay, not quite Match and maybe not Set, but certainly Game-- and Obama is well on his way to the Democratic Nomination. As to the General Election-- now that could be another matter.
***************************************************
****************************************************
Much has been written, spoken and aired about the mystery of U. S. Senator Barack Obama’s appeal in the Democratic Presidential primary. Some who are thought to be national African-American political leaders, like Al Sharpton, have questioned whether Obama has done enough in the Civil Rights movement, for low income people, etc. Aside from the doubtful validity of Sharpton's assertion, his focus is way too narrow to comprehend the Obama mystique.

Barack Obama has said often he is “rooted in the African-American community, but he is not limited by it.” He is a national candidate for President who happens to be African-American. He is not the African-American candidate for President. Indeed, it is precisely because of Obama's broader issue focus than Sharpton's that Obama has a shot at the Democratic nomination, something of which Sharpton could never dream.

Some conservatives, such as Fred Barnes, of the Weekly Standard and Fox News Channel, ask, if Obama is such a uniter, consensus builder, bridger of divides, practitioner of a new kind of politics, what political divide has he bridged? That also misses the point. More important than his ability to find a consensus is the fact that Obama transcends traditional politics and race. He transcends traditional politics because he can appeal to voters of all stripes, relying on his charisma and charm when his positions on issues might not, by themselves, do it. In that respect, Obama resembles both Reagan and JFK. Never underestimate, in politics, the importance of pure likeability. Or, as some put it, would you like to have a beer or a cup of coffee with this politician?

Further, Obama is comfortable working across party lines, as he did in the State Senate on such issues as capital punishment and welfare reform and as he has done on fiscal issues with conservative U. S. Senator Tom Coburn [R-OK]. Perhaps more than ever, this is a trait the 2008 presidential voters are anxious to see in their chosen candidate.

Obama transcends race because he is perhaps the first national African-American candidate whose charisma, message, style and charm are almost entirely unrelated to his race. Whether they are black, white, brown or some other color or ethnicity, American voters are comfortable with Barack Obama. And, as importantly, he is comfortable with them.

However, although his ability to transcend politics and race is important, that discussion still misses the essence of Barack Obama's appeal in the Democratic Presidential primary.

ABC News’ Jake Tapper and Jonathan Greenberger, with some assistance from clips of “Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz,” capture, in words and video [See here for the words and click on a four minute video] the major trait that sets Obama apart from the field, and especially his top tier competitors, Hillary and Edwards. And that trait is the ability and willingness to speak out clearly, forcefully and unambiguously on major issues in a way that connects with the American electorate, and especially on the major issue of the day.

As a “mere state senator,” in the fall of 2002, before the U. S. went into Iraq, Obama took a strong, unequivocal position on the Iraq War, which as of now, is the major issue likely to be on voters minds as they enter polling booths in November, 2008. Moreover, it was a well thought out, well spoken position. Certainly, one could differ with it. But, nobody could accuse the guy of waffling then, during the last five years, or now. That, boys and girls, is a good part of the appeal of Barack Obama to the country. And, of course, to the great majority of the Democratic Primary voters, there is an added bonus: They think he was right from the get go on the War.
********************************************
Barack Obama: “I don’t oppose war in all circumstances… What I do oppose is a dumb War.” Speaking at an anti-Iraq war rally in Chicago on October 2, 2002,. [See here for the words and click on a four minute video: the portion from the Obama speech is the first segment on the video]
********************************
Jeff Berkowitz: How would you have voted a few months ago when they [the Congress] had the vote on the so-called Iraq War Powers Resolution, because the Democratic Party split on that.

Barack Obama: I think there is a division.

Jeff Berkowitz: How would you have voted? Would you have supported that resolution? Voted Yea or Nay?

Barack Obama: If it had come to me in an up or down vote as it came, I think I would have agreed with our senior senator, Dick Durbin and voted 'Nay.' And, the reason is not that I don't think we should have aggressive inspections, what I would have been concerned about was a carte blanche to the Administration for a doctrine of pre-emptive strikes that I'm not sure sets a good precedent.
****************************************************************
Barack Obama, then State Senator and likely candidate for the U.S. Senate in the 2004 Democratic Primary, on “Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz,” November 25, 2002 [See here for the words and click on a four minute video; the above exchange is taken from the second segment on the video]
********************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Let’s go right to the War.

Barack Obama: Sure.

Jeff Berkowitz: You made a big point of that. You said you were there last fall [2002], you were… at the Federal Building?

Barack Obama: Right.

Jeff Berkowitz: And you were speaking out against the War then, right?

Barack Obama: Right.

Jeff Berkowitz: And, you are saying there are seven other candidates in this [Democratic] primary?

Barack Obama: Right.

Jeff Berkowitz: A number of them probably opposed the War in Iraq. Opposed taking military action. But, they weren’t speaking out? Is that your point.

Barack Obama: I can’t tell because they were silent on the issue at the time…The question though is out of the United States Senate and out of the Democratic Party, we have to make tough choices the same way that a President has to make tough choices…and my analysis said that Saddam Hussein was not an imminent threat and that if we acted multilaterally, it would be better for our long term security…and if we ultimately had to overthrow him, we would have built an international coalition that could have moved forward. Now, some people may disagree with me on this, but what absolutely we can’t have out of our United States Senator …is somebody who waffles on the issue and somebody who ducks the issue…
****************************************************
Barack Obama, then State Senator and candidate for the U.S. Senate in the 2004 Democratic Primary, on “Public Affairs with Jeff Berkowitz,” July 18, 2003. [See here for the words and click on a four minute video; the above exchange is taken from the third segment on the video]
********************************************
The Clintons’ response to the pounding Hillary is taking on the issue of her Pro-Iraq War Powers Resolution vote [and follow up votes supporting the War] is consistent with what Hillary’s critics say has worked for the Clintons in the past, the five Ds: Deny, Delay, Distract, Distort and Discredit.

Deny: Well, Hillary voted to authorize the military effort in Iraq, but her vote really contemplated a different set of actions by the President, she would argue. So, this is kind of a non-denial, denial that she voted for the War.

Delay: Don’t really address the War vote, her advisers told her, other than to argue “If I knew then what I know now, I never would have supported the military action.”

Distract: Tell the voters, "Well, there are much more important issues for your choice for President." It is the totality of Hillary and Bill-- and what they have done for the Democratic Party and country that should cause all thinking Democrats to support Hillary.

Distort and Discredit: Team Hillary argues that this guy Obama wasn’t too clear on what he would have done and how he would have voted, if he were actually in the Senate. So, vote for the tried and true: Hillary and Bill. Another two for the price of one.

However, that distort and discredit just won’t wash, here.

As Obama said back on July, 2003, on “Public Affairs,”

Everybody had concerns about the war. The question was, how would you have voted on a specific resolution giving George Bush carte blanche [to take military action in Iraq].

And, as ABC’s Tapper and Greenberger conclude:

For many Democratic voters, that indeed is the question. And it seems fairly clear where Obama was at the time, however much others try to fuzz up the record. [See the last paragraph, p. 3 ]

That, boys and girls, is the major appeal of Obama in the Democratic Primary. More than four years of clear, cogent, intelligent, thoughtful and unequivocal statements on the Iraq War. All presented in a way that voters can understand. From a guy they like and who excites and inspires them. And, the Democratic voters think Obama was and is right.

You would think out of three hundred million people, there would be lots of Obamas from whom to choose. Think again. As he has described himself so often and modestly, "A skinny kid from the South Side of Chicago, with a strange sounding name.” Must be more to it than that. Obama’s wife, Michelle, has referred to “this weird fascination that Barack has for people.” It is a good line, but the appeal is not weird and there is no denying it.

Game, Set and Match. Well, okay, not quite Match and maybe not Set, but certainly Game-- and Obama is well on his way to the Democratic Nomination. As to the General Election-- now that could be another matter.
**************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Gary MacDougal on Obama, Blagojevich, Kjellander and McKenna: Cable and Streaming

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: ... maybe I wish I had recognized him because he [Barack Obama] was helpful in all of that. I consider him a nice guy, an intelligent guy, but extremely liberal and I don’t think that’s what we want in a President.
**********************************
Gary MacDougal: ... I like Andy McKenna [current State GOP Chairman] but he has a full time job other than this. He is a very quiet fellow who is very thoughtful but not an attack dog and we need an attack dog ...
********************************************
Gary MacDougal:... Karl Rove would probably like to see [Patrick Fitzgerald]leave his job because [Rove's] friend, Bob Kjellander, is one of the ones that is likely to be indicted. But, if Patrick Fitzgerald, who is one of my heroes, stays in that [U. S. Attorney, N.D., IL] job, I believe that the odds are overwhelming that Blago will be indicted because Tony Rezko, who is Blagojevich's close confidant, has been indicted and is ...[See here for Fitzgerald's bizarre low ranking by some at the Department of Justice]
***********************************
This Week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," airing in the Chicago metro suburbs, features former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal discussing and debating Gov. Blagojevich's approach to spending, taxes and health care; MacDougal's suggestion that the State GOP develop a "Contract with Illinois"; assessments of Barack Obama, Tony Rezko, Bob Kjellander and much, more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz.See, below, for the Public Affairs suburban airing schedule. You may also [Go Here to watch this week's suburban show with Gary MacDougal, next week's suburban "Public Affairs," rumble between Cook County Commissioners Peraica [R] and Quigley [D] as well as other shows with such notables as Obama, McCain, Giuliani, Barrett, Syverson and many others on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows; trouble accessing our cinema page on your computer? Try I-Tunes: the same Public Affairs shows are also available there].
******************************************
Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal will be the featured guest on the Monday, March 26, 2007 [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21] City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs."
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," to watch on your computer including this week's suburban show with Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal . The cinema page also has Next Week's sparring match with Cook County Commissioners Peraica and Quigley, recent shows with Rep. Fritchey, Ralph Martire, Metropolitan Planning Council President MarySue Barrett, Phantom of the City Council--Brendan Reilly, State Rep. Paul Froehlich, as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Go Here to Watch the Shows on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows].
***************************************************
Gary MacDougal, former State GOP Chairman and currently on the Board of UPS, debates and discusses with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz Governor Rod Blagojevich's proposed "Bold New Budget," Gross Receipts Tax [perhaps the biggest tax boost in Illinois' History], State Subsidized Health Insurance, the lease of the lottery and issuance of bonds to fund the State run pensions; market alternatives to the Governor's Health Insurance proposal and school choice-school vouchers as an alternative to raising taxes for public education; the Governor's failure to disclose subpoenas he has received; a potential indictment by the U. S. attorney of Governor Blagojevich; potential candidates to run against Senator Durbin; expanding the Republican Party; a contract with Illinois from the Republican Party [similar in concept to the Republicans' 1994 Contract with America, the State GOP's need for a Leader who is an attack dog and much, much more.
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …it’s a serious charge to make. You are saying you are confident that Governor Rod Blagojevich is going to be indicted sometime prior to finishing his second term, is that right?

Former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal: To me, that is a good bet to make. Assuming Patrick Fitzgerald stays in his job—now there are a lot of folks who would like him to leave his job-- and I am sure there is a lot of pressure. Karl Rove would probably like to see him leave his job because his friend, Bob Kjellander, is one of the ones that is likely to be indicted. But, if Patrick Fitzgerald, who is one of my heroes, stays in that [U. S. Attorney, N.D., IL] job-- I believe that the odds are overwhelming that Blago will be indicted because Tony Rezko, who is Blagojevich's close confidant, has been indicted and is being squeezed and he would rather not spend time all those extra years in the slammer. [See here for Fitzgerald's relatively low ranking by some at the Department of Justice]

Jeff Berkowitz: …Did you just say that Bob Kjellander would be indicted, too?

Gary MacDougal: I think the chances of him being indicted are quite good. He was mentioned as Individual K using a rake-off on placing pension fund investment money. That’s the game that they have been playing—the bi-partisan sleaze Combine that I used to talk about when I was the [State GOP] Party chairman, and I think they’re finally starting to get them, now.

Jeff Berkowitz: Now, Kjellander is still …the National Republican Committeeman from Illinois, right?

Gary MacDougal: He is. He is one of our three Republican leaders in the State, which is an acute source of embarrassment to those of us who would like Republicans to be above the fray and to have the right credentials in order to attack the corruption the Democrats have, but it’s very hard to attack them when it is bi-partisan.
**********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …Where is the Republican Party in Illinois and elsewhere to present …[issues] in the way that you are?

Gary MacDougal: Missing in action. I like Andy McKenna [State GOP Chairman for more than the last two years] but he has a full time job other than this. He is a very quiet fellow who is very thoughtful but not an attack dog and we need an attack dog out there.
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: You mentioned Barack Obama… how well do you know Barack. Do you know him in the context of what you were doing in the Jim Edgar Administration?

Gary MacDougal: I know him reasonably well. In fact, he tells me he has my book [“Make a Difference”] in his library. When I last saw him, he said, “you know, the one thing about that book, you mention [state senator Steve] Rauschenberger, but you didn’t mention me and I was the guy on the other side of the aisle that helped get that legislation through that created the Department of Human Services.”

Jeff Berkowitz: So, Barack would say he helped “Make a Difference,” as well as Steve Rauschenberger—

Gary MacDougal: He did.

Jeff Berkowitz: Now, why didn’t you--

Gary MacDougal: And, I didn’t recognize him enough—

Jeff Berkowitz: Well, should you have. Were you not balanced in doing that, in recognizing the Republican but not the Democrat?

Gary MacDougal: Well, in hindsight, maybe I wish I had recognized him because he [Obama] was helpful in all of that. I consider him a nice guy, an intelligent guy, but extremely liberal and I don’t think that’s what we want in a President.

Jeff Berkowitz: In what sense, though, I mean is he more liberal than Hillary Clinton? Is he more liberal than John Edwards?

Gary MacDougal: I think the two of them are extreme liberals.

Jeff Berkowitz: The two of them? You mean Hillary?

Gary MacDougal: Hillary and Barack Obama.

Jeff Berkowitz: What about John Edwards? Is he in that category?
***********************************************************
Gary MacDougal, as is airing this week on Public Affairs in 35 Chicago Metro suburbs [See below for the suburban airing schedule] and as will be airing on Monday, March 26, 2007 [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on March 11, 2007. You may also[watch the show with former State GOP Chairman MacDougal here].
***************************************************
In twenty-five North Shore, North and Northwest suburbs, the "Public Affairs," show airs every Tuesday night in the regular weekly Public Affairs slot, 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 or 35, as indicated, below.

In ten North Shore suburbs, the Public Affairs show airs three times each week in its regular slots at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, as indicated, below. ******************************************************
The suburban episode of Public Affairs with guest Gary MacDougal airs Tonight :

at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, parts of Inverness, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette

And at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 35 in Arlington Heights, Bartlett, Glenview, Golf, Des Plaines, Hanover Park, Mt. Prospect, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Prospect Heights, Schaumburg, Skokie, Streamwood and Wheeling.

and this week on Monday night, Wednesday night and Friday night at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.
***********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Rep. Hamos on Blagojevich's Gross Receipts Tax and Mass Transit: Cable and Streaming

State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston]: Well, you know what, if they [law firms] are now charging $300/hour, they might charge their clients $303. One percent [more]. [At the time, it was thought that services would be taxed at 1% under Blagojevich's proposed GRT; it turns out that he proposed 1.8%; Also, partners at large loop law firms are generally billed out at more than $300/hour].

Jeff Berkowitz: Yeah, but they are already raising their rates [or trying to, with many large law firms raising annual salaries for first year associates from $135, 000 to $145,000]. So, now they are going to have to try to raise them more.

Julie Hamos: Well, they might charge $303/hour and blame it on this. But, it’s really one percent, that’s all it is.
*****************************************************
Berkowitz [quoted from the blog post, below]: Remember-- corporations or partnerships don’t pay taxes, people do. Corporations and partnerships simply collect the taxes. And, the cost is borne in part by the shareholders or partners, in part by the employees and in part by the clients.
*******************************************************
Tonight's City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," airing through-out the City at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV], features State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Chicago] discussing Gov. Rod Blagojevich's Gross Receipts Tax, the impact of that tax, Mass Transit and much, more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz. You may also [Go Here to watch tonight's City Edition show with State Rep. Hamos, this week's suburban edition show with former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal, as well as other shows with such notables as Obama, McCain, Giuliani, Barrett, Chico and many others on your computer; Don't let the "Listen," prompt fool you-- you can watch and listen to the show; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only certain portions of the thirty minute shows; trouble accessing our cinema page on your computer? Try I-Tunes: the same Public Affairs shows are also available there].
******************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," to watch on your computer including tonight's City show with Rep. Hamos. The cinema page also has this week's suburban show with former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal and many recent shows. Soon to be posted on the page is a hot show we taped yesterday with Cook County Commissioners Peraica [R] and Quigley [D]. The Peraica-Quigley rumble will air in the suburbs next week. Already posted are interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giulianiand many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Go Here to Watch the Shows on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows].
***************************************************
Go here for more about State Rep. Hamos, tonight's show topics and another partial transcript of the show.
******************************************
Governor Blagojevich’s proposed Gross Receipts Tax, discussed-- among other topics-- with tonight’s featured guest, State Rep. Julie Hamos, on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs [See partial transcript, below], raises a number of interesting tax law, economics and political issues.

First, tonight's show was taped three days before the Governor’s State of the State and State of the Budget speech in which he set out his proposal in somewhat more detail. And, as everyone knows, the devil is in the details.

Second, we have since learned that Blago is not proposing [at least so far] a reduction in the state portion of the sales tax--as a partial offset to his broader base for his gross receipts tax [most services are included].

Third, there is a pyramiding effect to his tax, i.e., intermediate steps in the production process are taxed all along the way. This is not a value added tax.

Fourth, the ultimate seller essentially pays a tax on multiple taxes, as well as a tax on the goods or services being transferred.

Fifth, the Blago proposed services tax is 1.8 %, not 1%, as was reported at the time we taped our show with Rep. Hamos.

Sixth, we discussed, on tonight’s show, the impact of the Gross Receipts Tax on law firms in Illinois. Because much of the impact on law firms will be similar to other corporations or partnerships, we will stick with that example for this analysis. Five of the top one hundred gross revenue firms listed in the May, 2006 American Lawyer are based in Illinois, all in Chicago-- but with additional offices around the country. The top revenue generator is Kirkland & Ellis at almost a billion dollars, as of the 2006 report, and certainly over a billion as of the upcoming May, 2007 report. Will K&E pay Illinois 18 million dollars in the form of a gross receipts tax, or will K&E only pay taxes on the services performed for Illinois headquartered clients, or for services performed by attorneys located in its Illinois offices, or what?

Seventh, if an Illinois based law firm is competing in a national market, can it expect to “pass-on,” most or even much of the cost of its new tax to clients, as suggested by State Rep. Hamos? Probably not--unless the tax is structured so that the great majority of law firms not based in Illinois are taxed by Blago’s tax, as well, and to the same extent as the Illinois based firms. And that’s not likely because the Gross Receipts Tax is not that gross.

Eighth, if an Illinois based law firm is competing in a Illinois [or more localized] market, can it expect to pass on most or even much of the cost of Blagojevich’s Gross Receipts Tax to clients, as suggested by State Rep. Hamos? Some of that tax can be passed on, but almost surely not completely-- as was suggested by State Rep. Julie Hamos. Some of the cost will be born by the partners [or shareholders], some by the clients and some by the employees [associates and non-professional staff]. It all depends on the elasticities of supply and demand. Remember-- corporations or partnerships don’t pay taxes, people do. Corporations and partnerships simply collect them. And, the cost is borne in part by the shareholders or partners, in part by the employees and in part by the clients.

Ninth, Watch the show tonight with Rep. Hamos. It’s a good one. We saved most of the Econ 101 for the blog. Even Berkowitz can’t make the “dismal science,” interesting enough for prime time.
************************************************
State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston]: …in out sales tax, we have a very narrow base…the gross receipts tax would expand that. Everybody would pay a little and what I think is good for [the] consumer, again I haven’t heard the details, just leaks so far, is that I think a portion of the sales tax would be reduced—the state portion, so … right now if we pay 9% sales tax, we would pay 3% or 3.5 %, but these other small taxes might add to the overall cost.

Jeff Berkowitz: Well, of that 9% that we pay now, how much is the state portion?

State Rep. Julie Hamos: I believe it is 6.5%.

Jeff Berkowitz: And, you are saying basically the Governor is going to propose taking out the state tax portion of the sales tax?

Julie Hamos: Again, we don’t have the details, but that’s the early version of this. Yes. It is going to be a benefit for consumers, a benefit for businesses who pay that and consumers who have to pay that. But, then there would be this very small 1% of everyone’s receipts—would go into a fund and that generates a lot of dollars.

Jeff Berkowitz: It does. You know if you are a law firm with revenues of 100 million dollars and we have a few of those around town—

Julie Hamos: Do we?

Jeff Berkowitz: More than a few. [at least a dozen].

Julie Hamos: A hundred million?

Jeff Berkowitz: A hundred million dollars

Julie Hamos: So they would pay a million dollars. Okay.

Jeff Berkowitz: That’s a lot of bread.

Julie Hamos: Well, you know what, if they are now charging $300/hour, they might charge their clients $303. One percent [more]. [At the time, it was thought that services would be taxed at 1% under Blagojevich's proposed GRT; it turns out that he proposed 1.8%].

Jeff Berkowitz: Yeah, but they are already raising their rates [or trying to, with many large law firms raising annual salaries for first year associates from $135, 000 to $145,000]. So, now they are going to have to try to raise them more.

Julie Hamos: Well, they might charge $303/hour and blame it on this. But, it’s really one percent, that’s all it is.

Jeff Berkowitz: And the doctors, they’re also going to have to pay this tax?

Julie Hamos: Again, I don’t know the full details.

Jeff Berkowitz: But, you would expect that. That [medical care] is a service.

Julie Hamos: I think so.

Jeff Berkowitz: And, you get your car repaired, that’s a service.

State Rep. Julie Hamos: And, again, I think almost every state has a broader sales tax than we do and they do put taxes on some services, not all. So, I don’t know if doctors are included. Healthcare is included. I just don’t know how it all fits.

Jeff Berkowitz: But, if all those things were included that I mentioned, that you just mentioned, does this sound like something you would support?

Julie Hamos: I really don’t know.

Jeff Berkowitz: Too early, because you haven’t seen it?

Julie Hamos: Way too early, yeah.

Jeff Berkowitz: You’re not going to commit.

State Rep. Julie Hamos: I would be foolish to say yes without knowing any of the details.
***************************************************
State Rep. Julie Hamos, as is airing tonight [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on March 4, 2007. You may also[watch the show with Julie Hamos here].
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

State Senate War Policy, the GOP and "Blown Coverage"

Chicago Tribune Managing Editor, News, George De Lama said, “You’re right, we missed that one.” [see below]
*************************************
UPDATE at 4:45 pm on Friday: Late in the day, Patty Schuh, Senate Republicans Communications Director, contacted this journalist and said she could speak for Senate Republican Minority Leader Frank Watson, who was unavailable. Schuh said Senator Watson [R-Greenville] opposed the State Senate War Resolution in Committee and he viewed the Resolution [SR-65], “which was adopted on a voice vote, as not a big deal.” She said Watson “chose not to voice his opposition on the Floor because it is a non-binding resolution and it would only spark long and arduous debate that Senator Rickey Hendon [D-Chicago] would just escalate into some mass event.

Schuh said she “did not hear any no votes shouted down from the chandeliers,” but she could not give me a blanket statement that there were no senators who opposed the Resolution. Schuh acknowledged that any senator could have asked for a roll call vote, but none did so. Schuh argued that the Resolution had “tremendous amounts of good words, including support for our troops…and support for the care that we are demanding they receive when they return to the United States.” Schuh disagreed with the view that the Resolution was a repudiation of President Bush’s surge policy in Iraq.
**************************************
Yesterday’s Illinois State Senate resolution regarding the Iraq War is discussed here. However, almost as interesting as the legislation is the coverage of same by the mainstream media, and in particular the two major Chicago newspapers. Also notable is the apparent silence on the matter by the State GOP—Republicans’ pledge dollars at work?

Although AP reported, as carried by the ABC-7 local Chicago news website [See here], that State Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson [R-Greenville] had no comment after the Illinois Senate’s voice vote yesterday that essentially repudiated President Bush’s recent “surge of troops,” policy in Iraq, the Chicago Sun-Times reports otherwise:

Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson (R-Greenville) ridiculed Hendon's nonbinding resolution and said legislators had no business dictating war policy. "I'm sure the Pentagon will be calling Rickey to get his thoughts on how to handle the Iraq war." [See here].

However, there was no explanation given in the media by Senator Watson for his Republican caucus'decision to express no opposition to the resolution before the voice vote and not to call for a roll call vote. The clear implication of that decision is that the Senate Republicans were happy with the impression given to the Public that no Republican opposed the Resolution. Senator Watson was unavailable for comment today on this matter. The State GOP’s Deputy Executive Director and Communications Director were also unavailable for comment today.

The Chicago Tribune carried no mention of yesterday’s Illinois State Senate Iraq War Resolution in the hard copy of today’s paper, but did carry an AP report online [See here]. However, the AP report carried by the Tribune omitted much of the AP report carried on the ABC-7 Chicago local news website, including the somewhat peculiar comments by State Senators Rutherford and Bomke.

When Chicago Tribune Managing Editor, News, George De Lama was asked today by this journalist about the Tribune’s coverage or lack thereof regarding yesterday’s State Senate Iraq War resolution, he said, “You’re right, we missed that one.” But, he noted that the Chicago Tribune did have an AP report on the matter in its online version.

Eric Zorn, Chicago Tribune ace columnist and blogger, often pays attention to matters of War and Peace and the strange ways of state and local politics. However, Zorn apparently was occupied this morning with the top seven reasons given for homosexuality being immoral and Zorn’s responses to same. Fascinating stuff. Right up there with--How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? [See here]. Avogadro’s number, I think the answer is--assuming the angels are very, very small.
**************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Illinois Senate War Powers debate: General Hendon [D] beats General Watson [R] by default

The Illinois State Senate passed a resolution today stating “it is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq, particularly by escalating the United States military force presence in Iraq…” See here for the full text of SR 65.

Perhaps it was no coincidence that one of the resolution's sponsors, State Senator Kwame Raoul [D-Chicago], took the place of then State Senator Barack Obama, after Obama was elected to the U. S. Senate. Obama, of course, took a vigorous and vocal position opposed to the Iraq War, in the fall of 2002.

The Illinois state senate resolution was passed on a voice vote without a single comment or question. The primary sponsor of the resolution, Senator Rickey “Hollywood” Hendon [D-Chicago], who once almost got into fisticuffs with then State Senator Barack Obama on the Illinois Senate floor said he was shocked no Republicans argued against the resolution. [See here for a report of this item, as well as those below] Now, that’s something on which many Republicans might agree with the Democratic State Senator from the west side of Chicago.

In what some Republican voters would no doubt sarcastically characterize as “profiles in courage,” there were the following reports on the role of and comments from Republican state senators on this matter today:

“The main message [of the resolution] –that America should not get more deeply involved [in Iraq]—is hardly controversial.” State Senator Dan Rutherford [R-Chenoa]. Apparently, Rutherford [who took a “thumpin” from Democrat Jesse White in the 2006 Secretary of State race] does not support the President’s surge of troops in Iraq. Or, if he does, he has a funny way of saying so.

Senator Rutherford might find it of interest to learn that on the same day that the Illinois senate passed what Republican Rutherford called a "Hardly controversial," resolution knocking down the President's Iraq surge policy, the Republicans in the U. S. Senate beat back an attempt by the Majority Leaders in the Democrat controlled U. S. Senate to set a March 31, 2008 date for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. [See here].

Sen. Larry Bomke [R-Springfield] was reported to have said he was unfamiliar with the resolution and was off the senate floor when it was discussed.

The AP reported that Senate Republican leader Frank Watson [R-Greenville] wouldn’t comment after the vote. [See here]

Senate Republican Leader Watson had been criticized earlier this year when it transpired that he had gone to Italy for ten days-- a month before the November, 2006 election—when the Republicans lost five state senate seats, making the Senate Democratic majority veto proof. The trip to Italy was to attend a meeting of the National Association of State Legislators. No doubt the American legislators were there to study the Italian approach to State Government. Senator Watson contended that he was able to conduct business from Italy as well as if he had been in downstate Illinois. His critics, after today, might tend to agree with him.

At the time of this posting, today’s State Senate War Powers resolution is not discussed on the State GOP website.

As many pundits commented last November and in November of 2004 and in November of 2002, just when you think the State GOP has hit rock bottom, it seems to find a new bottom. It is doubtful any Republicans in Illinois are looking forward to November, 2008, with their party in danger of being surpassed by the Green Party, which would be yet another new bottom. Indeed, this is one of the few things the State GOP has succeeded on during the last four years: Finding new bottoms.
**************************************************

The Senator Obama Watch: Kass and Gigot fumble their Obama analysis

John Kass and Paul Gigot usually get so much right that it was hard to believe that they could team up to get Obama so wrong on the [Wall Street] Journal Editorial Report this weekend [airing every Saturday night at 10:00 pm (CST) on the FNC, repeating at 5:00 am (CST)on Sunday morning]. As with any candidate for any office, there is much to criticize about Obama. But, erroneous and unsubstantiated critiques only strengthen the Obama Presidential candidacy by feeding the notion that there is no solid basis to criticize the Junior Senator from Illinois.

The Journal Editorial Report segment problems perhaps resulted from having a conservative [Gigot] interview a conservative [Kass] with neither making sufficient effort to be fairandbalanced. They might both have to turn in their Fox union cards. Or, perhaps Gigot and Kass just wanted to caricature liberal broadcast network bias, mutatis mutandis. If so, they did a pretty good job.

Apparently, Kass thinks the most important thing to tell Americans about U. S. Senator and presidential candidate Obama is what Kass characterizes as the disconnect in Senator Obama between Camelot and Chicago politics [For the entire segment transcript, See here]. For some cheerleading of Kass and Gigot from a conservative, DuPage County critic of Obama, See here.

In support of his asserted “Obama disconnect,” Kass tells Gigot that Obama is “back[ed] here in Chicago by the political machine, the Daley machine, which has its own issues with federal grand juries.”

The only problem with that statement of Kass’ is that it is simply not true. Yes, as a candidate for President, Mayor Richard M. Daley is backing Obama. But, which Democrats in Illinois are not backing their native son? Not a great many and certainly not anybody as politically savvy as Mayor Daley.

But Kass tells his story as if Obama is some kind of a Daley creation. He couldn’t be more wrong. Senate President Emil Jones is a long time mentor and Daley is connected to Jones, but there is no indication that Daley was a force, in any sense, for Obama to become and stay a state senator for eight years from the South Side of Chicago.

More importantly, in a tough, seven candidate race for the Democratic nomination for the U. S. Senate in 2004, Mayor Daley gave no support to Barack Obama and the Mayor’s brother, Cook County Board Finance Committee Chairman John Daley, was with the Chicago machine’s candidate-- State Comptroller Dan Hynes [Son of longtime Democratic machine pol—Tom Hynes] .

Kass’ mistake was bad enough, but then Gigot picked up the fumble and ran in the wrong direction, and Kass ran along with him:

Gigot: … when you talk about the Daley machine and say that Obama comes out of that machine, what do you mean, and how does it work? Is it a patronage machine, a typical patronage machine? What does it mean he's a product of that politics?

Kass: Well, he separates himself from it rhetorically, positioning himself as an independent Democrat. But in Illinois, as you know from your time here, the State Senate is basically run by people who tell the other senators what to do, and they generally fall into line.

Kass: He has done some things in terms of ethics that have separated him from the rest of the pack. He has talked about ethics. He has invoked reform in his speeches. But at the same time, the machine in Chicago is about patronage, as we found out recently. Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor in the Libby case, successfully prosecuted top members of the Daley administration for building illegal patronage armies by the thousands. So there's a difference between the Obama message publicly, nationally, and how politics works here. It's all basically very simple here. It's about interests.

Note how Gigot, above, now has Obama “coming out of the Daley machine.” What is that based on? Absolutely nothing. How is that for solid journalism?

Then Kass tells us that all the state senators listen to someone else, someone up high? Who does Kass have in mind? Mayor Daley? Former Republican Senate President Pate Philip [Republicans held the majority in the State Senate for 6 of the 8 years that Obama was a state senator]? Current Democratic Senate President Emil Jones? Who knows? Kass doesn’t say. But whoever it is, Kass has Senator Obama “falling into line.”

So, I guess the racial profiling legislation that Obama passed in the state senate must have been dictated by Daley? Jones? Philip? I don’t think so.

So, I guess the capital punishment reforms that Obama worked on with State Senator Kirk Dillard, Dupage County Republican Chairman, must have been dictated by Mayor Daley? Senate President Jones? I don’t think so.

So, I guess the large number of other legislative bills that Obama passed into law must have been dictated by Mayor Daley? Senate President Jones? I don’t think so. Or maybe it was House Speaker Mike Madigan who was the driving Democratic machine pol behind Obama. I don't think so. It was Speaker Mike who last summer derided Obama as “the Messiah,” because Obama had the temerity to stand up to the Speaker in his choice of candidates for State Treasurer in the March, 2006 Democratic Primary.

Having made the above leaps of faith, then Kass tries to tie Obama to Daley patronage, taking us to the recent conviction of “top members of the Daley administration for building illegal patronage armies by the thousands,” and declaring “So there's a difference between the Obama message publicly, nationally, and how politics works here. It's all basically very simple here. It's about interests.”

Well, actually, it is not so simple. Kass can’t just wave his hands and say Obama is a part of or a beneficiary of the Daley patronage machine. Gigot is supposed to make Kass substantiate the allegation. He didn’t.

After throwing all of that unsubstantiated mud, Kass then throws in one legitimate issue. You have to admire at least the sequence of Kass’ argument.

Kass: …And Mr. Obama got jammed up into an issue that I don't think has gotten a lot of national play. It's his relationship with an indicted influence peddler here named Tony Rezko and the land they purchased for Obama's home, and that'll probably trickle out as the days continue.

Gigot: So those associations, you are arguing, will become a political vulnerability as the campaign moves on?

Kass refers to the land “they purchased for Obama’s home.” Well, actually, Tony Rezko bought the side lot to Obama’s current home for 600K and Obama bought the house for 1.6 million dollars. The transactions both occurred on the same day from the same seller and the properties had previously been transferred in one transaction, not two.

Senator Obama has conceded he paid a discounted price and Rezko paid the full asking price, with the implication made by some that Rezko was subsidizing Obama’s purchase, in expectation of future favors. Obama has said Rezko paid the full price because Rezko was matching another offer made to the seller and Obama paid a discounted price because there was no such other offer at the full asking price for the property Obama purchased.

Obama has conceded that the above transaction was a “a boneheaded move," on his part even though Obama claims (1) he received no benefit from Rezko and (2) Rezko has never asked for or received any favors from Obama. Because Rezko was said to be under investigation, albeit not yet indicted, at the time of the Obama purchase of his house, it was a boneheaded move. And, further probing by national and local media may show otherwise, but as of the moment the Rezko matter hardly rises to the level of a major ethical problem for Senator Obama.

Moreover, many, if not most, influential Republicans and Democrats in Illinois have had some kind of relationship or contact during the last two decades with the now indicted Rezko, and no one, except perhaps John Kass, asserts that all of them have been thereby corrupted by Rezko.

What does Gigot do with the above. He takes the one association, with Rezko, that Kass identifies and turns that into, “those associations will become a political vulnerability…” Nice trick. The singular becomes plural. Perhaps unintentional on Gigot’s part, but still not what you would call good journalism.

Then Kass says: “I don’t know if they’ll get national traction…but it also suggests that perhaps [Obama] is naïve…when you put Obama next to Vladimir Putin…is [Obama] seasoned enough to deal with that kind of pressure?

Notice that Kass has taken his one instance of a problem—associating with Rezko—and followed Gigot in making it into a plural. Kass-Gigot? Quite a tag team are they.

But, the final oddity from the Gigot-Kass segment is that Republican leaning Kass has the audacity to question whether Obama will be too naïve in his dealing with Putin. Wasn’t it President Bush who said, “And the more I get to know President Putin, the more I get to see his heart and soul, and the more I know we can work together in a positive way.” [See here]. And Kass is arguing that Obama will be more naïve than that? Now, that is Chutzpah.
******************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Rep. Hamos on the RTA, Taxes and State Capital projects: Cable and Streaming

State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston]:... I think there will be a big lobbying force against raising taxes. You know, somebody has to pay when we have a tax increase and somebody is hurt by it, or they perceive [themselves] to be hurt by it. So, the lobbying will, I think, just be very strong against some of these plans.
*************************
Rep. Julie Hamos:… Let me just put this in a bigger context. We talk about it as ten billion dollars [for capital projects for five years]. That’s just for the RTA region [Cook, DuPage, Will, Lake, McHenry and Kane counties]. …the capital budget program is a statewide program. It includes transit, roads and bridges and school construction [across the State]…
***********************************
This Week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," airing in the Chicago metro suburbs, features State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston] discussing Governor Blagojevich's proposed new taxes, tax reform, the RTA and mass transit more generally, a state capital budget and much, more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz.See, below, for the Public Affairs suburban airing schedule. You may also [Go Here to watch this week's suburban show with State Rep. Hamos, and [soon to be posted here] next week's suburban show with former State GOP Chairman Gary MacDougal, as well as other shows with such notables as Obama, McCain, Giuliani, Barrett, Chico and many others on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows; trouble accessing our cinema page on your computer? Try I-Tunes: the same Public Affairs shows are also available there].
******************************************
State Rep. Julie Hamos will be the featured guest on the Monday, March 19, 2007 [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21] City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs."
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," to watch on your computer including this week's suburban show with Rep. Hamos . The cinema page also has recent shows with Rep. Fritchey, Ralph Martire, Ald. Berny Stone, Cook County Commissioner Forrest Claypool [D-Chicago], Sen. Syverson [R-Rockford], Metropolitan Planning Council President MarySue Barrett, Phantom of the City Council--Brendan Reilly, State Rep. Paul Froehlich, Gery Chico, as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani and many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Go Here to Watch the Shows on your computer; you can drag the dial on the bottom of the screen to watch only portions of the thirty minute shows].
***************************************************
State Rep. Julie Hamos[D-Evanston], in her 9th year in the State House and currently the Chair of the House Mass Transit Committee debates and discusses with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz Governor Rod Blagojevich's proposed State Subsidized Health Insurance Program for uninsured adults and families in Illinois, Blagojevich's Gross Receipts tax that would generate about a seven billion dollar net increease in Illinois tax revenue, Hamos's prediction that this current legislative sesssion will be a challenge, difficult and tough; the 226 million hole in the current RTA budget; a potential massive increase in state taxes to deal with Health Insurance for the uninsured, education funding, a capital projects budget, pension underfunding and/or mass transit operating expenses and capital projects; Auditor General Bill Holland's finding of waste and inefficiency at RTA and with its "kids," Hamos' proposed Reform of the RTA, Hamos' support for peak load pricing on Illinois' toll roads to reduce congestion; can we "build ourselves out of congestion," with more roads in Illinois-- and much, much more.
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …We’ll find out after the Governor’s [March 7] speech—[if] you are good at making predictions?

State Rep. Julie Hamos: What I am going to predict is that it is going to be a very challenging and difficult [legislative] session. Because there are a lot of competing needs [and] there are a lot of new revenues that are being debated. The legislature doesn’t like new revenues. We don’t like to dabble in this world of taxes and who is offended and who is not offended. So, what I really can predict is that it is going to be a tough session.

Jeff Berkowitz: Because Speaker Mike Madigan and—

State Rep. Julie Hamos: It’s not only the leadership. It’s really again—I think there will be a big lobbying force against raising taxes. You know, somebody has to pay when we have a tax increase and somebody is hurt by it, or they perceive [themselves] to be hurt by it. So, the lobbying will, I think, just be very strong against some of these plans.

Jeff Berkowitz: In a large--

State Rep. Julie Hamos: I am hearing that the business community is gearing up against it. That’s hard not just on the leaders. That’s hard on the legislators. We have to vote for this. We each have a vote and that’s ultimately what passes it.
******************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Okay, so let’s go over to mass transit. You are the Chair, do we say Chair-- of the Mass Transit committee?

State Rep. Julie Hamos: That’s what I call myself.

Jeff Berkowitz: That gives you a lot of power, right?

State Rep. Julie Hamos: [Laughter]: sure

Jeff Berkowitz: I mean, seriously, because you are setting major policy on a major issue—one of the five major issues we are talking about [that the legislature faces now: education funding reform, expanded health insurance availability, funding state pensions, a state capital budget and mass transit funding].

Rep. Julie Hamos: Setting policy is one thing but the other thing is that I really believe that we have a serious funding problem when it comes to just transit…that’s one of five [state funding items] you mentioned, and I consider it really essential to deal with that this year. What people don’t know is that right now the RTA has a big budget hole just for 2007- including 2007. They are currently operating on just a six month budget, so on July 1 [2007], their budget is really going to implode.

Jeff Berkowitz: What’s that budget hole? How much?

Rep. Julie Hamos: 226 million dollars.

Jeff Berkowitz: That’s for the- RTA, tell people what—

Rep. Julie Hamos: That’s the RTA, which includes the CTA budget, Metra [budget] and Pace [budget]. All three of them have a budget hole this year, so I consider this to be an imminent problem.
************************************************
Rep. Julie Hamos: …the RTA just released its big strategic plan and it called for ten billion dollars for a five year program in what are called capital dollars and those are for some of the hard—buying new buses and trains, getting the rails, doing service expansions-- the Starline which is our suburb to suburb program—

Jeff Berkowitz: Is this the RTA?

Rep. Julie Hamos: When we talk about the RTA budget, it includes the three service boards.

Jeff Berkowitz: So when you are saying 10 billion dollars for the next five years for the RTA-

Rep. Julie Hamos: That’s for the three agencies.

Jeff Berkowitz: That’s for, as they call them, the kids, right? CTA, Metra and Pace.

Rep. Julie Hamos: That’s for the kids. That’s not for RTA, right…They have expansion plans, they have maintenance needs. There’s enhancements that everybody would like to see done. So, that’s big and expensive. And, let me just put this in a bigger context. We talk about it as ten billion dollars. That’s just for the RTA region [Cook, DuPage, Will, Lake, McHenry and Kane counties]. But, really, this is all about roads and bridges statewide…the capital budget program is a statewide program. It includes transit, roads and bridges and school construction…

Jeff Berkowitz: The two billion dollars a year [for 5 years] for RTA and its kids, so to speak, is that a part of what people are referring to when they say we need a capital budget?

Rep. Julie Hamos: Yes

Jeff Berkowitz: It is part of it, but it is not all of it. That’s what you are saying.
****************************************************
State Rep. Julie Hamos, as is airing this week on Public Affairs in 35 Chicago Metro suburbs [See below for the suburban airing schedule] and as will be airing on Monday, March 19, 2007 [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on March 4, 2007. You may also[watch the show with Julie Hamos here].
***************************************************
In twenty-five North Shore, North and Northwest suburbs, the "Public Affairs," show airs every Tuesday night in the regular weekly Public Affairs slot, 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 or 35, as indicated, below.

In ten North Shore suburbs, the Public Affairs show airs three times each week in its regular slots at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, as indicated, below. ******************************************************
The suburban episode of Public Affairs with guest State Rep. Julie Hamos airs Tonight :

at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, parts of Inverness, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette

And at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 35 in Arlington Heights, Bartlett, Glenview, Golf, Des Plaines, Hanover Park, Mt. Prospect, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Prospect Heights, Schaumburg, Skokie, Streamwood and Wheeling.

and this week on Monday night, Wednesday night and Friday night at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.
***********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************