Displaying posts published in

July 2017

REFORM IS NEEDED ON THE ILLINOIS ARTS COUNCIL- REPLACE SHIRLEY MADIGAN BY ADAM ANDRZEJEWSKI

Governor Bruce Rauner can term limit the matriarch of Illinois’ most powerful political family to 41 years.

House Speaker Michael Madigan is her husband. (34 YEARS) Attorney General Lisa Madigan is her daughter.(15 YEARS0 It’s an Illinois political dynasty.

In 1976, Shirley Madigan was appointed to the Illinois Arts Council – a state agency “…making art accessible for all.” (41 years)

Madigan became the chairman in 1983. In 2017, she’s still chairman.

On July 1, Shirley Madigan’s term expired and she’s up for reappointment. Governor Bruce Rauner should replace Madigan with a fresh face.

Here’s why reform is needed on the Illinois Arts Council:

grants were conferred without official meetings

rampant conflicts of interest were ignored

millions of taxpayer dollars were funneled to asset-rich arts organizations – including media outlets – which don’t need public money.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2017/07/19/replace-shirley-madigan-on-the-illinois-arts-council/2/#70611d687a8b

The Illinois Arts Council – led by the matriarch of the most powerful political family in Illinois – conferred grants without official meetings, ignored rampant conflicts of interest, and funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to asset-rich organizations – including media outlets – which don’t need public money.

Although Michael Madigan has served as the Illinois House Speaker for 34 years, interrupted for just two years in the 1990s, his wife, Shirley Madigan, has clinched a position on the Illinois Arts Council since 1976. She has servedas the chair of the council since 1983.

Governor Bruce Rauner must move immediately to end Shirley Madigan’s tenure on the Illinois Arts Council. Rauner has an historic opportunity to appoint thirteen fresh faces and take a reform majority on this important council of twenty-one. Two weeks ago, Shirley Madigan’s latest term expired alongside twelve other board members.

Over the past three years, Shirley Madigan’s Arts Council rarely met. Instead of holding tri-annual board meetings – as they’ve pledged to do – the council never met during the entire fiscal year of 2016. Still, without the sunshine of a public meeting, the council paid-out grants, salaries, and operational expenses. Only later did the board ratify the payments.

How does a governmental body confer and distribute millions of dollars in federal and state funding over a two-year period without an official meeting? The Edgar County Watchdogs sued the Illinois Arts Council for violations of the Freedom of Information Act and found no official meetings from August 2014 until October 2016.

Conflicts of interest between board members and affiliated organizations are rampant at the Arts Council. In fiscal year 2015 alone, board members disclosed conflicts causing 40 vote ‘abstentions.’ Loyola University – where Shirley Madigan received her master’s degree – has received $95,100 in grants since 2012. Henry Godinez is the resident artistic associate at the Goodman Theater, and Goodman received $165,650 since 2012.

One of the most conflicted board members is Christina Gidwitz, the wife of prominent Republican scion Ron Gidwitz. Since 2014, Ms. Gidwitz’s self-declared conflicts include The Field Museum of Natural History (theyendowed the Ronald and Christina Gidwitz Hall of Birds), Loyola University (they’re big donors), and the Lyric Opera (Ron serves as a director). These entities received $503,000 in Arts Council grants since 2012.

The Illinois Arts Council’s grants are not only made in the dark and riddled with conflicts, but they’re funding some of the richest arts organizations. Largely, taxpayer funding wasn’t awarded to ‘starving artists,’ but to well-connected entities with political clout.

Ideological Tribalism: Graduating Stepford Students by Linda Goudsmit

Freedom of speech is foundational. Without freedom of speech there are no other freedoms.

In a stunning new guide to colleges that ranks “a diversity of viewpoints and a culture of free and open discussion” New England colleges and universities are exposed as the most close-minded in a comparison of diversity of political and cultural points of view. Considering that the New England colleges and universities are some of the most prestigious in America and that they graduate future leaders and “authorities,” the study results are particularly disturbing.

Report: New England Colleges Worst in Country for ‘Viewpoint Diversity’

The silencing of Conservative voices on campus is a deliberate strategy to expand the widening echo chamber of left-wing liberal tenets of political correctness, moral relativism, and historical revisionism. Parochial schools are very clear in their mission to educate students in the particular tenets, customs, and ceremonies of their chosen religion. Religious schools freely and unapologetically attempt to perpetuate their religions through education. There is informed consent – the parents and students being fully aware of the purpose of their education.

The problem today is in non-parochial schools because parents believe their children are receiving a secular American education not a parochial education. The reality is that American students from pre-school through college are being indoctrinated in left-wing liberalism by their Leftist teachers. Leftism is the new religious orthodoxy of the Democratic Party and the Democrats are busy proselytizing their religion in the classroom. There is no informed consent and no consumer protections. There is only buyer beware.

Slowly parents are beginning to examine the content of the curricula their children are being exposed to and are rightfully alarmed by the anti-American, anti-establishment, anti-democracy lessons being taught. Their children are being propagandized toward anti-American collectivism and socialism every day all day.

Whoever controls the curriculum controls the future. Indoctrination presented as education is an abuse of power.

When liberal professors outnumber their conservative colleagues 28:1 a culture of ideological tribalism is created and freedom of speech ceases to exist. Conservative voices are silenced because the academic and social tyranny of the Left demands conformity. It is an ideological war that demands submission.

Tyranny cannot tolerate freedom of speech because in ideological wars words are the weapons. The Left is engaged in a very undemocratic effort to silence any voices of opposition. The tribal mind focuses on membership in the tribe as the absolute value which explains the malicious shunning and disparaging of anyone who disagrees. To be in the tribe one must demonstrate loyalty to the tribe and adhere to its cultural norms.

Instead of participating in the proud American tradition of open debate the Leftist leadership of the Democratic Party has adopted the tyranny of censorship, intimidation, and intolerance. Instead of encouraging respectful discourse for the merits of ideas to be debated the Left silences its opponents with its tyrannical demand for compliance to its tenets of political correctness, moral relativism, and historical revisionism. The Leftist orthodoxy silences any heterodoxy. The Democratic Party has devolved into ideological tribalism where membership in the group is determined by adherence to its orthodoxy.

CNN: King of Fake News and Queen of Leftist Indoctrination: Linda Goudsmith

CNN is already King of Fake News and now has crowned itself Queen of Leftist Indoctrination.

In a stunning exploitation of American children CNN partnered with PBS and IRC to bring Sesame Street’s Elmo on screen to “educate” the youngest American children on refugees.

Clearly American pre-schoolers are not watching CNN but this shocking interview exposed what they will be watching when they tune into Sesame Street.

Early childhood education is arguably the most powerful influencer and indicator of the direction of society. Palestinian children are being indoctrinated to hate Jews and to destroy Israel. Muslim children are being taught Islamic supremacy and hatred of infidels (all non-Muslims). The purpose of propagandizing Palestinian children is to produce Palestinian adults who will fight to achieve the destruction of Israel. The purpose of propagandizing Muslim children with Islamic hate education is to produce Muslim adults who will fight for re-establishment of the caliphate and imposition of sharia law worldwide.

So what are American children being taught and what is the purpose of their education?

Since the end of World War II, American children have been indoctrinated in left-wing liberal tenets of political correctness, moral relativism, and historical revisionism courtesy of Tavistock Institute and its principles of mass psychology for social engineering. The purpose is to destroy American democracy and replace it with socialism. Socialism, the necessary condition for cradle-to-grave control by the government, will be replaced by an internationalized globalist elite dream of one-world government.

American children are being tutored in passivity and collectivism while Middle Eastern children are being tutored to be warriors. In The Suicide of Reason, Lee Harris’ stunning analysis of the existential threat of Islam to the West describes the conflict between the tribal mind and the enlightened mind. The book jacket provides a concise summary:

“The Suicide of Reason shows how modern liberal societies, whose political theories are born of the Enlightenment are unfamiliar with the nature of mass fanaticism. The West, so accustomed to thinking of history as an inevitable progress toward enlightenment, can only think of fanaticism as a social pathology, a failure to modernize, rather than what it is: a variety of social order that is not only fully viable in the modern world but that possesses weapons to which the West is uniquely vulnerable. A governing philosophy based on reason, tolerance, consensus and deliberation cannot defend itself against a strategy of ruthless violence without being radically transformed – or worse, destroyed.”

Hijab, Female Oppression and the Left by Linda Goudsmit

Only a left-wing liberal living in subjective reality could promote the hijab, the quintessential symbol of feminine oppression, as fashion. The idea is so spectacularly stupid that it defies description. http://www.independentsentinel.com/hijab-female-oppression-left/

This is yet another salvo in the attempt to Islamicize the West by making the unacceptable dictates of sharia law acceptable.

Psychologically speaking, it is well known that familiarity brings acceptance – so the purpose of making the hijab fashionable and familiar is the sinister purpose of making hijabs /oppressive sharia law acceptable.

This is a deliberate strategy of indoctrination and social engineering designed to change public perception of the hijab from a symbol of oppression (objective reality) to a symbol of fashion (subjective reality). Anyone who participates in this idiocy is a useful idiot.

A “Women’s” March organized by Linda Sarsour is another contradiction in terms. Sarsour supports honor killing, female genital mutilation, wife beating, and every other sharia tenet that denies individual freedom to women and the LGBT community.

Is this what these marching women want?? Fascism, racism, misogyny, and xenophobia are the hallmarks of Islamic sharia law. The Women’s March was a March of Dhimmis.

To make sense of the nonsensical willingness of non-Muslim women to participate in a march organized by a Muslim misogynist we can examine the stunning announcement by Nihad Awad Executive Director of CAIR:
REFUSING TO ACCEPT MUSLIM REFUGEES IS THE MORAL EQUIVALENT OF SLAVERY

To understand Nihad Awad’s outrageous statement you must speak the language of CAIR and learn its language of opposites and projection.

Whatever CAIR accuses Donald Trump of doing is actually the OPPOSITE of what Trump is doing but exactly what CAIR is doing.

The same language is spoken by Linda Sarsour, the DNC, the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots, Barack Obama, and of course George Soros and his innumerable front organizations.

Their language, like Doublespeak, is a deliberate strategy designed to create the cognitive dissonance required to manipulate and dupe an unsuspecting public into believing their egregious lies.

Language, borders, and currency are required to have a sovereign country. Doublespeak is a deliberate attack on America’s language and an assault on our ability to understand each other.

The word peace in Islam is understood to mean the time when the world is ruled by sharia law. Americans understand the word peace to mean pluralism, tolerance, and freedom. So, when Nihad Awad claims he wants peace he does not mean peace in the way the American public understands the word.

There is no “right” to come to America. It is a privilege to come to America and LEGAL vetted immigration is what protects all Americans from those who wish us harm. It is cultural suicide to allow mass immigration of any population with cultural norms hostile to our own.

Europeans are finally learning the language of opposites and beginning to understand that they are losing their countries. Sarsour’s defenders are doing more than ignoring her liberal critics – they are being duped by her doublespeak into ignoring her misogyny.

So, why do left-wing liberal apologists prefer their fictional subjective reality to factual objective reality regarding the tyranny of Muslim extremism and oppressive sharia law?

Why do they ignore the xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny, supremacy, and barbaric honor killings, genital mutilation, rape, wife beatings, and overarching desire to conquer the West and impose sharia law worldwide?

MY SAY: A PRAYER FOR SENATOR JOHN McCAIN

John McCain’s service to our nation in war is unequaled. He faces an enormous challenge. Shame on the media that discusses his diagnosis and prognosis. Medical research has many new modalities to treat brain tumors, and hope is critical for outlook.

Mi Sheberakh is a Hebrew prayer for physical cure and healing, offering blessing, compassion, restoration of health and strength.

It is recited by Chaplains, doctors, nurses, and family members.—

“May the One who blessed our ancestors —Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,Matriarchs Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah —bless and heal the one who is ill:

May the Holy Blessed One overflow with compassion upon him.,to restore him, to heal him,to strengthen him,to enliven him.

The One will send him speedily,a complete healing —healing of the soul and healing of the body —along with all the ill, among the people of Israel and all humankind, soon, speedily, without delay.”

Amen

Our Relationship with Saudi Arabia Is an Embarrassment It also has very real strategic and moral costs. By Michael Brendan Dougherty

When he was 17, five years ago, Mujtaba al-Sweikat committed the “crime” of participating in a pro-democracy rally in Saudi Arabia. Instead of attending Western Michigan University, as he had planned to do that fall, he was put in prison. Reports are now leaking out of Saudi Arabia that al-Sweikat will soon be beheaded for his transgression. It’s just the latest reminder that Saudi Arabia is America’s worst best friend.

The U.S. does get something out of its relationship with Saudi Arabia; there is real intelligence sharing, and the Kingdom has used its power over OPEC to drive oil prices down when we want to humiliate Russia or accomplish some other goal. That’s not nothing. Nor will I pretend that a global superpower can do the business of horse-trading only with saints and scholars. But there are real costs to our relationship with the Saudis, and I’m not sure that our policy elites are reckoning with them at all.

A day will come when we need friends with whom we share a real civilizational affinity, and our relationship with the Saudis will hurt us on that day. Saudi-funded mosques and preachers flow into the nations of our friends and allies, preaching hatred and occasionally terror. We often talk about how nationalism is a response to the globalization of commerce. But it’s also a response to the globalization of Saudi Arabia’s favorite forms of Islam. Syrian refugees come to Germany and find Saudi-funded mosques that are far more extreme than anything they knew at home. Saudi-funded clerics are a major engine of extremism, and of the nationalist backlash it produces, from France to India.

Saudi actions in this regard are so embarrassing and brazen that Western nations won’t even let themselves be heard discussing them intelligibly. Last Week, U.K. home secretary Amber Rudd refused to publish her own government’s delayed report on the funding of extremist groups. Even in the press releases, the government was too ashamed to admit the fact that everyone knew to be in them: Saudi Arabia funnels money to the extremist groups that threaten Europe with terrorism.

There is a major strategic cost to our alliance with the Saudis, whether anyone cares to admit it or not. The U.S.–Saudi preference for regime change and demotic movements (no matter how loathsome) has been a gift to extremists everywhere. It’s destabilized several Middle Eastern countries and contributed to a refugee crisis that is reordering the politics and society of Europe, while also visiting terrorism on our historic allies. By contrast, the Russian and Iranian strategy of siding with sovereign states (no matter how loathsome) so long as they represent predictable national interests seems rational.

Deregulation Is the Key to a Successful Infrastructure Policy Eliminating the red tape that hampers so many infrastructure projects would make a world of difference. By Jason Pye

As policymakers in Washington consider infrastructure legislation, regulatory reform that encourages sustained investment and innovation to help rebuild critical public networks should be the first item on the agenda. Targeted infrastructure deregulation like that which has enabled the country’s freight-rail system to thrive should be the model for future policy.

The shameful state of America’s infrastructure is well-documented. Earlier this year, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave the nation’s infrastructure a D+ grade overall. But ASCE did identify one bright spot: Our 40,000-mile freight-rail network, which earned a “B,” the highest of 16 graded categories. This is where federal policymakers can learn the lessons of smart reforms that encourage the sustained investment necessary to create safe and modern infrastructure.

America’s freight-rail system is one of the world’s best examples of privately owned and privately funded infrastructure, but this was not always the case. During the 1970s, our freight-rail industry struggled under the weight of onerous regulations that limited the ability of railroads to effectively manage their own operations. At the time, 21 percent of the freight-rail system was operated by bankrupt rail companies.

In 1980, a law known as the Staggers Act jumpstarted the industry by removing much of the red tape that had been stifling it. Most crucially, it relaxed rate regulations, which allowed railroads to better compete with other transportation modes.

“The history of the U.S. railroad industry during the 30 years since the Staggers Act was signed is a story of enormous success,” say researchers at the Cato Institute. “Productivity growth in the U.S. railroad sector has far outpaced the gains in the U.S. private domestic sector. The factors underlying this performance include pricing flexibility, economies of density achieved through line abandonments, industry consolidation, and the growth of long-haul coal and intermodal traffic.”

More importantly, it helped unlock the ability of railroads to invest in their infrastructure, which led to the creation of one of the world’s safest and most efficient transportation networks. Since 1980, railroads have privately spent more than $630 billion to maintain and modernize infrastructure while investing in safety innovations that have made freight rail the safest way to move goods across the country. In fact, 2016 was the safest year on record for the rail industry.

Putin’s Playthings Putin will do anything to advance Russia’s interests because his country is in terrible shape. By Victor Davis Hanson

About a year ago, Donald Trump Jr. met with a mysterious Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya. Trump Jr. was purportedly eager to receive information that could damage Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Veselnitskaya denies that she was working for the Kremlin to lobby for favorable Russian treatment. But in the past, Veselnitskaya has been connected with a number of Russian-related lobbying groups.

Trump Jr., for his part, proved naïve and foolish to gobble such possible setup bait. The Russians proved eager to confuse, confound, and embarrass everyone involved in the 2016 election.

This latest Trump family imbroglio piggybacks on six months of Russian collusion charges. National Security Adviser Michael Flynn resigned less than a month into his job after being less than candid about his contacts with the Russians. Paul Manafort, Donald Trump’s erstwhile campaign manager, had some questionable Russian business interests and resigned well before the election.

All these stories were luridly headlined in the press.

Yet several intelligence officials from the Obama administration — former CIA director John Brennan, former FBI director James Comey, and former director of national intelligence James Clapper — asserted that they had found no evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign to rig the election.

Former FBI head Robert Mueller is now overseeing the probe into possible Russian meddling as a special counsel. There are also several other Russia-related investigations being conducted by various agencies and congressional committees.

Some members of Congress are asking why Obama-administration officials such as Brennan, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice requested surveillance files on Trump-campaign officials, may have unmasked names, and may have allowed those names to be illegally leaked to the press.

Earlier, some Republican anti-Trump operators (and later some Clinton campaign operatives) hired former British spy and opposition researcher Christopher Steele to compile a dossier on Donald Trump that would include some ludicrous Russia-related allegations. Weirder still, Steele’s firm may have had some contacts with none other than Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.

Senator John McCain, a former target of candidate Trump’s invective, acquired the anti-Trump dossier and made sure that the FBI investigated the phony dirt. Comey did just that.

In no time, the so-called Steele dossier was leaked. The website BuzzFeed admitted it could not verify any of the accusations but published the entire sordid file anyway.

One of the principals of the Clinton campaign, John Podesta, was a board member of a green-energy firm that suddenly saw an infusion of Russian cash — purportedly in an attempt to sway Podesta.

Obama-Era Emails May Point To DHS Coordination On Pro-Amnesty Lawsuit Watchdog obtains documents indicating collusion between DHS appointees and Soros-funded open-borders groups. Ian Smith

DHS emails obtained by an investigative watchdog group reveal possible collusion between Obama-era DHS appointees and a Soros-funded open-borders group involving a series of lawsuits from 2016 that sought to overturn an injunction against the former president’s DAPA amnesty program. The email-communications, going back to May 11th, 2015, took place just days after it was revealed DHS had been mailing out thousands of work-permits to illegal aliens in direct violation of the DAPA-injunction issued by Texas district court judge Andrew Hanen in February of that year.

The emails focus on DHS’s mass recall of the work-permits, a move open-borders attorneys would later claim in a mass lawsuit against the agency was a violation of administrative law. The organization that obtained the emails, the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), says the contact the Soros group made with the Obama-appointees was likely key to the eventual lawsuit. IRLI is calling on Congress and the DHS Inspector General to fully investigate the matter.

IRLI, a non-profit law firm based in Washington, D.C. that’s long been investigating DHS’s violation of the DAPA-injunction, obtained the communications through a public-records request with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the DHS component responsible for issuing work-permits. The emails appear to show top Obama-appointees, USCIS Senior Counsellor Lucas Guttentag and USCIS Chief of Staff Juliet Choi, in direct communication with officials from United We Dream (UWD), a pro-amnesty and open-borders advocacy organization funded by George Soros’s Open Society Institute. Prior to his appointment in 2014, Guttentag was a well-known figure in open-borders circles, having founded and led the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project since the 1980s.

Both appointees can be seen communicating with UWD’s Lorella Praeli, a one-time illegal alien (later naturalized through marriage) who led Hispanic outreach efforts for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and is now director of immigration policy at the ACLU. The emails show Praeli reaching out to Guttentag and Choi, just four days after news of DHS’s admission that they violated the Hanen-order requesting inside information about the agency’s announcement. She asks whether or not the erroneously-issued work-permits will be retracted and “If so,…how many folks are impacted…?” Guttentag and Choi immediately decided to take the discussion offline, arranging to communicate with Praeli over the phone instead.

According to federal regulations, work-permits can only be revoked under a specific process, which arguably was not followed by the agency in this case, according to IRLI attorneys. They say that any information about how many potential plaintiffs were impacted and how they could be located would be crucial for mounting a legal challenge against the revocation. “Just receiving general information about where potential plaintiffs reside would be helpful to these groups, given the resources they have and the number of allies they partner with around the country,” says IRLI’s Executive Director and General Counsel, Dale Wilcox.

Jihad Horror in Austria Latest “victory” for Islamic Caliphate sees married pensioners slaughtered in their home. Stephen Brown

It is not a club that anyone would willingly want to join, and Austria certainly didn’t apply for membership.

However the Danube state, which had been spared until now, recently joined the growing fraternity of European countries to experience a murderous jihad attack, whose depth of savagery and hatred has left the country deeply shaken.

The latest “victory” for the establishment of the worldwide caliphate took place June 30 in Linz, the country’s third largest city. Besides being Austria’s first such killings, the double murder stood out for its incredible cruelty, the victims’ age, and possible political motivation.

The jihadist-killer, a 54-year-old Tunisian immigrant identified only as Mohamed H., a resident of Austria since 1989, first slit the throat of Hildegard Sch., 85, and then stabbed and beat her husband, Siegfried, 87, to death in their home.

Before leaving, the “holy warrior” then burned the dead couple’s residence down over them. Firemen discovered the murder victims’ bodies when extinguishing the blaze.

“This man caused a bloodbath in the apartment – this was obviously a proxy war,” said the couple’s son, who was not identified.

After the killings, Mohamed H. told police he considered drowning himself in the Danube but decided to give himself up instead. He then went to the police station where he said he waited his turn to report the double murder.

Mohamed H. gained entrance to the old couple’s home because he regularly delivered groceries there from his wife’s vegetable store.

The Tunisian was so well known to the elderly Austrians, and relations so friendly, that the couple had given Mohamed’s daughter, and only child, $225 as a high school graduation present.

But on the day of their deaths, the couple’s friendly deliveryman arrived not only with their groceries, but also with “a belt, a wooden stick, a knife, as well as a can of gas” hidden under his apron. Police called the murders “carefully planned.”

Tragically, what the elderly couple did not know was that behind Mohamed M.’s familiar, amiable smile now lurked a jihadist killer who had sworn loyalty to the Islamic State (IS) and its leader, al-Baghdadi. The Tunisian had “praised… diverse IS horrors” on social media, exhibiting a radicalization trend “right up to the last entry,” although there is no evidence he ever fought for the terrorist entity.

One newspaper report states residents in his neighborhood remember him wearing a head covering, kaftan and beard before he went back to Tunisia in 2014, where, authorities believe, he was radicalized. He returned in 2015, clean-shaven and wearing Western clothes but noticeably more “difficult and aggressive.”

Several reasons have been offered as to why Mohamed M. chose the elderly couple as his target in Europe’s latest jihad attack.