Chicago ..... Murder Capital

Chicago police boss' 1st year saw major rise in violent crime

But Jody Weis says city's 2008 murder total will be among the lowest in decades

By Angela Rozas |Tribune reporter

December 21, 2008

Brought to Chicago from the FBI to improve the image of a scandal-plagued Chicago Police Department, Jody Weis instead saw his first year as superintendent dominated by a substantial rise in violent crime.

Since being hired in February, Weis spent much of the year fighting to improve officer morale, battling with aldermen who disapproved of his rapid overhaul of the department's command staff, and trying to develop new strategies—or revive old ones—to fight rising crime.

When arrest numbers went down, Weis ordered officers to be more aggressive. He created a Mobile Strike Force to fight gangs, promising tight oversight of the unit since a corruption scandal had shut down the similar Special Operations Section before his arrival. He also recently promoted a former commander of SOS to be head of patrol.

Still, the city is approaching 500 homicides for the year, a number the city has not reached since 2003.

In an interview, Weis acknowledged being disappointed in this year's rise in violence, admitted he made mistakes, but said he has never taken his eye off crime.

"We're certainly not pleased . . . and we're going to do whatever we can to bring those numbers down," Weis said.

Chicago is on track to end the year with a 16 to 17 percent increase in homicides and an overall increase in violent crime of about 3 percent. It's also in a tight race with New York City for the most homicides in the country. By Dec. 14, New York had 492 homicides, the same as Chicago's tally on Friday.

Still, Weis said Chicago's murder total for 2008 will be among the lowest in decades—the fifth lowest since 1965. He called the number 500 an "arbitrary bar" to which the department did not hold itself accountable.

"We didn't fit it as a goal when we ended this year," Weis said. "The goal is zero homicides."

Weis points to the usual suspects in rising crime: gangs, guns and drugs. Deputy Supt. Steve Peterson, the head of investigative services, said the dismantling of larger gangs may have contributed to more violence.

"Perhaps some of the violence has spiked because we've been successful at bringing down some of the leadership of the gangs, and now we've created infighting," he said.

In response, Weis has reorganized the gang units. Previously focused on districts, they now are based on larger areas so officers can respond to gang crimes that cross district lines.

He said he's also working on a "three-phase" approach: working with the community, denying gangs access to communities by aggressively stopping them, and making patrol and gang units work better together.

Weis said he hoped the shuffling of staff and jobs would bring reductions in crime in the new year.

"2008 was a year of transition, and 2009 is a year of results," he said. "There's no excuse next year for not knowing how your job works."

To deal with the department's image problem, Weis established an Office of Professional Standards to work on officer conduct and training, and brought in an FBI agent to lead it. Weis frequently says his standard for good conduct is that officers don't have to be right all the time, but they must be reasonable in their decision-making. Those who are, will have the department's support, he said.

Weis dumped nearly the entire district command staff within weeks of starting, then shifted commanders as the year wore on, and crime increased. Most recently he promoted Daniel Dugan, who worked as a deputy chief, to head of patrol. Dugan had been a commander of the Special Operations Section in at least part of the mid-2000s, when some wrongdoing is alleged to have taken place.

Weis said Dugan is a hard-working, dedicated leader, one of hundreds of SOS members who continue to work honorably as Chicago police.

"Dan Dugan is a solid leader; he has served this department for 26 years and, since becoming superintendent, I have seen his hard work and dedication to the men and women of this department," Weis said.

Dugan defended his time with SOS, saying only a handful of officers were accused of wrongdoing. He would not say whether he handled the complaints against those officers, citing their ongoing criminal trials.

"I've done a lot of soul searching. Was there something different or better I could do?" Dugan said. "I believe I made the best decisions I could at the time."

Dugan said a previous lack of oversight has been corrected, citing a new performance evaluation system that will "red-flag" officers with numerous complaints of abuse.

Weis declined to grade his first year in Chicago as the city's highest paid superintendent with a salary of $300,000.

He said his mistakes include not meeting enough police officers and not going out into the community more. He also said he had hoped to start a multicultural advisory committee, but it never got off the ground.

Plans for 2009 include working with the city to have patrol officers answer fewer non-emergency calls so they can focus on crime calls. Weis said he is pushing for more accountability in his new gang-fighting units, such as the Mobile Strike Force.

From Crime file news

Friday, November 14, 2008

Cop Killing Weathermen Enjoying New Notoriety

Chicago, Il—I remember the Days of Rage and the enemies of freedom, The Weather Underground who were using force and violence to overthrow our government and way of life.

I remember the murdered and severely injured cops. I remember the bombings and the hate for freedom spread like a vile disease by founding members and unrepentant terrorists, William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.

William Ayers is about to go on a book signing tour with his republished memoirs.

I can’t imagine there are any book stores that would dare place their employees and customers in real jeopardy of being targeted by revenge seeking relatives and partners of those murdered or injured by Ayers, Dohrn and their comrades. Somebody may well use the same kind of weapons favored by Ayers and Dohrn on them.

Anyone seeking revenge should not resort to injuring innocent people in public places.

Well wishers should send their greetings, cards and letters where they live:
WILLIAM C AYERS and BERNADINE R DOHRN
1329 50TH ST CHICAGO, IL 60615 (773) 924-8058

Posted by Crimefile at 11/14/2008 12:02:00 PM

Dear Senator Obama, Could you help me please find these things, sir?

Dear Senator Obama, Could you help me please find these things, sir?

1. Occidental College records -- Not released
2. Columbia College records -- Not released
3. Columbia Thesis paper -- not available, locked down by faculty
4. Harvard College records -- Not released, locked down by faculty
5. Selective Service Registration -- Not released
6. Medical records -- Not released
7. Illinois State Senate schedule -- 'not available'
8. Law practice client list -- Not released
9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate - - Not released
10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth -- Not released
11. Harvard Law Review articles published -- None
12. University of Chicago scholarly articles -- None
13. Your Record of baptism-- Not released or 'not available'
14. Your Illinois State Senate records--'not available'

You couldn't get a job at McDonalds and become district manager after
143 days of experience.

You couldn't become chief of surgery after 143 days of experience of
being a surgeon.

You couldn't get a job as a teacher and be the superintendent after 143
days of experience.

You couldn't join the military and become a colonel after 143 days of
experience.

You couldn't get a job as a reporter and become the nightly news anchor
after 143 days of experience.

BUT....
'From the time Barack Obama was sworn in as a United State Senator, to
the time he announced he was forming a Presidential exploratory
committee, he logged 143 days of experience in the Senate. That's
how many days the Senate was actually in session and working.Â
After 143 days of work experience, Obama believed he was ready to
be Commander In Chief, Leader of the Free World .... 143
days.

We all have to start somewhere. The senate is a good start, but after
143 days, that's all it is - a start.

AND, strangely, a large sector of the American public is okay with this
and campaigning for him. We wouldn't accept this in our own line of
work, yet some are okay with this for the President of the United
States of America ?

Come on folks, we are not voting for the next American Idol!

Sarah Palin responds to wardrope flap

By Jill Zuckman |Tribune staff reporter

October 24, 2008

Sarah and Todd Palin sit with their son Trig during an interview with Jill Zuckman of the Chicago Tribune. (Photo for the Tribune by Jeff Swensen / October 23, 2008)

PITTSBURGH - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin insisted in an interview with the Tribune on Thursday that she did not accept $150,000 worth of designer clothes from the Republican Party and "that is not who we are."

"That whole thing is just, bad!" she said. "Oh, if people only knew how frugal we are.

"It's kind of painful to be criticized for something when all the facts are not out there and are not reported," said Palin, saying the clothes are not worth $150,000 and were bought for the Republican National Convention. Still, she has been wearing pricey clothes at campaign events this fall. She said they will be given back, auctioned off or sent to charity. Most of them, she said, haven't even left the belly of her campaign plane.

Thrust into the national spotlight as John McCain's running mate in late August from relative obscurity as governor of Alaska, Palin has found herself under the microscope ever since, accused of being inexperienced, a drag on the ticket and, most recently, the recipient of racks of expensive clothes.
Less than two weeks before Election Day, she will deliver her first major policy speech Friday, calling for full funding of special education, a subject that has suddenly become extremely personal. And that's not just because of the arrival of Trig, her 6-month-old son with Down syndrome. It's because families with children who have disabilities have been flocking to her campaign stops, looking to Palin and her family for inspiration.

Palin on Thursday granted one of her first newspaper interviews since becoming McCain's vice presidential nominee. She was joined by her husband, Todd, who cradled Trig, noticeably plumper since he was first introduced to the world two months ago.

Palin called the disabilities issues "a joyful challenge." Todd Palin showed off photos of people with Down syndrome who have come to campaign events, and the candidate said one advocacy group sent her a bumper sticker that said "My kid has more chromosomes than your kid."

"These children are not a problem, they are a priority," Palin said.

"We're on this journey with other families," she said. "We'll learn a lot from those other families, as they can count on us in the White House doing all that we can for them also. It's going to be a nice team effort here."

Still, much of the media attention Palin has received--on the issue of the clothes, for example--has decidedly not been about public policy issues. She points to that as evidence of a bias against women candidates.

"I think Hillary Clinton was held to a different standard in her primary race," Palin said. "Do you remember the conversations that took place about her, say superficial things that they don't talk about with men, her wardrobe and her hairstyles, all of that? That's a bit of that double standard."

Palin said she would rather talk about the Republican campaign's mission to reform government, get the economy back on track and bring opportunities to families, especially those with special needs.

I'm not going to complain about it, I'm not going to whine about it, I'm going to plow through that, because we are embarking on something greater than that, than allowing that double standard to adversely affect us," she said.

But polls suggest that McCain is in trouble, partly because of Palin, who has been criticized as lacking the experience to become president. This week's NBC/Wall Street Journal poll suggested more people now think that Palin is hurting McCain's chances of becoming president than President George W. Bush, whose national approval ratings are in the 20s.

Palin disputed such conclusions.

"I think that those reporters asking those questions should come to some of our rallies and ask some of those in the crowd why it is they are enthused," she said, adding that the crowds see her as representing "hardworking, everyday American families."

In her speech Friday, Palin will lay out the campaign's plans to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, boost funding for special-needs children from birth to age 3 and allow parents to choose whether federal money for their child is used in a public, private, religious or secular school without navigating a cumbersome administrative process.

The federal government originally committed in 1975 to paying 40 percent of the cost of educating children with special needs, with the states paying the rest. But that has never happened; full funding would require approximately $26 billion a year, and the federal government currently shells out $10.9 billion.

The McCain campaign plans to phase in that money with an extra $3 billion a year over five years. McCain has called for a domestic discretionary spending freeze, but programs for disabled people would be exempt.

"It's not all about the money, it's not all about budgets," Palin said, adding vaguely that the money could come from "re-prioritizing" the budget. "It's about that spirit of acceptance and embracing that diversity that is in the world with children who are special, a little bit different from the norm."

Palin's eyes well up as she talks about her sister's son, Karcher, who has autism.

"My sister and I have talked a lot about this. It makes me cry thinking about it," Palin said. "She asked with tears in her eyes, she says, 'What happens when Kurt and I, though, are elderly, then what happens to Karcher?' "

Palin calls that the story of millions of Americans. Her hope is to strengthen the National Institutes of Health "to make sure we're researching everything about autism and make sure we find out what causes it."

jzuckman@tribune.com

From Detective Shavedlongcock

If your white and not voting for Barack Obama you must be a racist or redneck!

Democratic Rep. John Murtha said Monday some of his constituents in western Pennsylvania are "rednecks" and the entire region just five to 10 years ago was "really redneck."

The comments come one week after he called his own constituents "racist" in an interview with his local newspaper.

"What I said, that indicted everybody, that's not what I meant at all. What I mean is there's still folks that have a problem voting for someone because they are black," Murtha said.

Murtha said the history of southwestern Pennsylvania is teeming with racism. "This whole area, years ago, was really redneck," he told WTAE-TV Pittsburgh.

Murtha, a Democrat, apologized last week for calling the area "racist," but challenger Bill Russell said it was a reckless insult to the people in his district and the "cheapest of cheap shots."

Russell, an Iraq war veteran, swiftly put out a 30-second Web video on Murtha's quote and plastered his Web site with references to it, using it as a fundraising pitch with 19 days to go until the Nov. 4 election.

"It shows once again how much he has lost touch with our constituents," Russell told FOXNews.com on Thursday. "A lot of people are ticked off. It's just one more issue that is ticking off a lot of our constituents and why so many of them feel it is time for a change."

Murtha has held his seat for 17 terms, and Democrats outnumber Republicans by two-to-one in the state's 12th District -- but Russell, a first-time candidate, said the latest development should give him a boost.

Russell, a 28-year Army veteran who recently retired, has been railing against Murtha, also a veteran, for calling for the withdrawal of troops in Iraq and for voting for the financial bailout package.

"We're very much running a race and it may or may not have occurred to him yet," Russell said.

Russell's been almost keeping pace with Murtha on fundraising. The latest finance reports showed Murtha raised $2.1 million for the race. A Russell spokesman said the GOP campaign pulled in $1.6 million in that period.

Murtha touched off the latest firestorm when he offered the possibility that his home base could reduce Barack Obama's margin in Pennsylvania by a few points, though he still expects the Democrat to win the state.

"There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area," he told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, accounting for potential Election Day poll numbers.

On Thursday, Murtha said he was sorry.

"I apologize for making the comment that 'Western Pennsylvania is a racist area,'" he said in a statement.

"While we cannot deny that race is a factor in this election, I believe we've been able to look beyond race these past few months, and that voters today are concerned with the policy differences of our two candidates and their vision for the future of our great country," he said.

Russell said some voters will always hold "racist attitudes," but that voters in western Pennsylvania who break with Obama will mostly do so over his views on issues like abortion and gun control.

"To take that and apply that to the entire population itself in western Pennsylvania, as he did, is absolutely wrong," Russell said.

But Murtha's campaign chided Russell, who only recently moved to western Pennsylvania, for calling the Democratic veteran out of touch.

"Someone who has lived in Pennsylvania for less than three months can't possibly be an expert on the views and needs of Pennsylvanians," spokesman Matthew Mazonkey said in a statement to FOXNews.com.

_______________________________

How the hell do people like this get elected to federal positions?

What would be the outcry if a Republican Congressman said, Many blacks are racist and have a hard time voting for a white candidate?

Why is all of this going unnoticed by the media????

FORWARD TO ALL YOU CAN

Why is all of this going unnoticed by the media???? They send 1000 reporters to Alaska to dig up something on Sarah palin and they have this right in front of their eyes! From Dreams of My Father:'I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.' From Dreams of My Father : 'I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race.' From Dreams of My Father:'There was something about him that made me wary, a little too sure of himself, maybe. And white.' From Dreams of My Father: 'It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.' From Dreams of My Father:'I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa , that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself , the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.' And FINALLY the Most Damning one of ALL of them!!! From Audacity of Hope:'I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.' * If you have never forwarded an e-mail, now is the time to Do so!!! We CANNOT have someone with this type of mentality running our GREAT nation!! I don't care whether you a Democrat or a Conservative. We CANNOT turn ourselves over to this type of character in a President. PLEASE help spread the word

Secret Service Intimidates Private Citizen for Obama

Secret Service Intimidates Private Citizen for Obama (Updated)

Posted by Jessica Hughes on Friday, October 17, 2008 2:12:51 PM

On Wednesday, the 1st of October, I received a call on my cell while in the car with my husband. It was a woman who identified herself as calling from the Obama Campaign. The phone # she called from was 903-798-6020 which I later discovered lists as "Obama Volunteers of Texarkana" (Texas).

She did not give her name that I can recall but identified herself as calling on behalf of the campaign and questioned “Will you be supporting Senator Obama on November fourth?”

I had just spent several hours in the Emergency Room with my son who had a mild concussion and the call was on my cell phone so I was doubly annoyed. I know for a fact that I have never given out my cell number to any organization that could remotely be construed as supporting Barack Obama’s campaign. As those who know me can testify I am quick with my words and I responded curtly:

"No, I don't support him, your guy is a socialist who voted four times in the State Senate to let little babies die in hospital closets; I think you should find something better to do with your time." I hung up. There was no argument or exchange of words. I simply stated my two biggest problems with the candidate this stranger was asking me to support and ended the call. Both my sons who are 6 and 9 and my husband heard the call.

We stopped soon after at a diner we frequent and I related the exchange to a few members of the staff including the owner’s son, who later told me that when he saw the story in the paper he recalled me as saying exactly what I stated above. In all honesty, I was proud that I had been able to give a quick and clear reason for not supporting her candidate. I half hoped it would give her pause and maybe she would think long enough to look into the economic policies and moral quandaries of Senator Obama. Often times we have a confrontation and think, “I wish I had said…” but in this case, I had said exactly what I wanted to and I recall the words quite clearly.

Thursday, October 2, I answered the front door to two suited individuals, a man and a woman. The woman flipped open a badge at about waist level. My husband later said he saw that it had the words “Secret Service” on it but I didn’t get a good look at it. They identified themselves verbally as being from the United States Secret Service. Immediately I thought of the call and was furious that apparently you are not allowed to call Obama a Socialist without the Secret Service coming to investigate. This was my thought pattern because in that instant it never occurred to me that someone may have lied about my statement. They confirmed that I had received a call from the Obama Campaign the previous day. I expected, frankly, to see them off my steps promptly as I had done nothing wrong. I was shocked when they asked me about the following comment, relayed by the Obama Volunteer of Texarkana who called me, unsolicited on my cell phone:

"I will never support Obama and he will wind up dead on a hospital floor."

My husband, who had come out the door with me sort of laughed, the whole thing being so unbelievable, and told them “No, she called him a socialist but she never said a word about him dying.” I gave them my actual quote and informed them that both my husband and my two sons had heard me take the call.

At this point I believe the female Secret Service Agent (later identified as D. Morris) began to overstep her bounds. She asked me in what I considered an accusing way, “Oh really? Well, why would she make that up? What would she have to gain?” As if it was so obvious that the caller was telling the truth and I ought to just admit it.

I replied that I supposed she wasn’t happy about my opinion of her candidate and the Agent said “That’s right, you were rude!” This is a ridiculous statement for a Law Enforcement Officer to make. The last time I checked being rude wasn’t a crime in America. Indeed, her phraseology suggests that she believed me in my statement of what I had said, and additional evidence to support this idea arose throughout the questioning.

I noticed that the female Agent was holding a file with my name outward and I commented on it, asking them if there was anything in my history to indicate I was some loon who would make a death threat.

They said no. At this point they are accusing me of a death threat in what could be at best described as a she-said/she-said situation. Indeed, I have on my side the presumption of innocence (or so I thought), two children, and my spouse, all of whom heard what I said. I expect them to leave. What more can they ask me than what I said? What my husband heard? I invited them to ask my kids what I said.

Instead, the male agent got out a pad and asked me what I thought of Obama, how I felt about him.

That was my limit. I told the Agent in no uncertain terms, “My thoughts are not pertinent to your investigation. This is America and the last time I checked I am allowed to think whatever I want without being questioned by the Secret Service.” I also stated that in fact, even if I had said what she claimed, that isn't a threat. She didn’t claim I said I would kill him. She claimed I said he would ‘wind up dead on a hospital floor.’ What kind of stilted, ridiculous threat is that? Some people have claimed that she perhaps misinterpreted what I said through a bad cell connection. Well I can state unequivocally that she did NOT repeat exactly what she heard since I never used the words ‘wind’, ‘up’, ‘dead’ or ‘floor’. At the very least she took a lousy connection and exaggerated and lied about what she did in fact hear.

The male agent attempted to disarm me so I would talk about my thoughts saying, “Hey, haven’t you ever been in a car accident? Didn’t the police officer ask you if you had been drinking or on your cell phone?” He wanted to compare those questions to his questioning my thoughts and feelings about a candidate. I replied, “Yes, he would, because those are questions pertinent to the event. He would not ask me what I think of red Chevies, or how I feel about speeding. He would ask me about facts, and I gave you the facts. I told you what was actually said; my husband told you what was actually said. That is pertinent. Not my thoughts.”

At this point, I started to think there must be a tape of the call that these agents simply had not bothered to listen to. In retrospect, it is unlikely since the Obama Campaign would have not made the call if they had proof of its illegitimacy. I now assume that if there was a tape it is long gone. In the moment however, I thought that of course the campaign must have at least claimed they had some evidence or else this interrogation would not be happening at all. I asked the agents, “Where is the tape of this call? Just listen to it and you’ll know I never said any such thing!” They told me that there is no tape. At this point the flimsy nature of the allegation which brought them to my home really started to sink in and I was completely outraged.

I said, "So on the word of a ticked off Obama supporter you are on my porch with no other evidence and you want to question me about my thoughts!?"

The female agent actually said “You have no evidence that the complainant is an Obama supporter.” This is insane. The woman called me from an Obama Volunteer center and this is not evidence that she is an Obama supporter, while the unsubstantiated word of a partisan is apparently enough evidence that I am a danger to Barack Obama to get me interrogated at my home in America.

The male agent tried to say they were trying to help me out and he alluded to the fact that they came to me first instead of asking all of my neighbors and family embarrassing questions. I take that as a not very veiled threat to humiliate me.

I told them to be my guest and talk to whomever they wanted but they weren’t going to investigate my thoughts on my porch.

I think it was at this point I went inside and got a notepad. As I said earlier, I had not actually seen their identification. I let that slide when I believed they were there about my actual statement, but now I felt the female agent was behaving very inappropriately and the man was making threats to humiliate me if I would not comply with answering questions about my thoughts. I came back out and said, “Okay, now I want to see your I.D. and I want your badge numbers or a card.” Both refused to show me their badges. The female agent rolled her eyes, shook her head and said, “You’re not going to get a card.” She laughed. The male Agent gave me a card and told me I could contact the Houston office with any questions.

I also said that I wanted to file a counter complaint against this person who had filed a false report, I have witnesses to what I actually said. This woman falsified a very serious charge against me but the Secret Service agents told me I can’t since I don’t know who the complainant is.

At this point I asked, “Don’t I have the right to face my accuser in America?” The male agent, I think trying to scare me said that we were not in a court of law and that’s a good thing. He asked me to agree with him saying, “Right?” I said no its not. I’ll go to court, I want to go to court. I have rights there. My accuser has to get up on a stand and take an oath before she lies about me, not just remain anonymous and send the thought police to my door.

The male agent was trying to be ‘good cop’ and said “Look, even my partner said on the way up here that this is a wasted trip.” He alluded again to the fact that they were well aware that I was no threat and this was a bogus complaint.

Finally they told me that the next time a volunteer calls I should say, “’Yeah Yeah I love him, count me in’, and hang up.” This way they don’t have to drive up from Houston again. I said, "Look, someone calls me unsolicited on my cell phone to ask me to support their candidate and I can't tell them why I don't?" I said I was sorry they made a wasted trip but if they had a problem with some made up lie they needed to go talk to her about it because it wasn't my fault they had to drive from Houston for nothing.

Later it occurred to me that if they had driven straight to me from Houston as they said, that means they never even spoke to this girl face to face. They had no idea whether she was a credible person, yet here they were, harassing me at my home.

The fact that the volunteer lied, the fact that the Secret Service came to my house to question me about my thoughts and feelings and threaten to embarrass me to my neighbors and go to court if I didn’t cooperate is not really the tragedy here. Because I don’t believe for one minute that girl on the phone has the pull to send the Secret Service to my home on her own. Someone higher in the ranks of a campaign working for a man who may be the next President of the United States of America felt comfortable bringing the force of the Federal Government to bear on a private citizen on nothing but the word of a partisan volunteer. The rude behavior of the female agent combined with their allusion to having known all along that this was a wasted trip leads me to two possibilities. Maybe she was an Obama supporter who knew I was innocent but didn’t like my views and welcomed the opportunity of an officially sanctioned harassment of me for them, or maybe they make many of these bogus trips and they’re sick of it. This whole episode has led me to question how many of the ‘death threats’ the Obama Campaign is publicizing are the sort of lies that this one was.

These things must be known. I want to file a counter complaint that false charges were made, that a false report was given to a peace officer. The Secret Service told me I cannot because they will protect the identity of the complainant. I have also heard from a friend that on the Federal level there is no charge to bring against this girl on my own behalf. Is this to say that anyone can sit around making up stories to the Secret Service to get the people they don’t like investigated and put on a watch list?

The reporter for the LDN said that when she called the head of the Texas Obama campaign, he had just replaced whoever was there last week when this happened. I don’t know if that has to do with this but I wouldn’t be surprised. Also, he told the reporter that the incident is still under investigation and he can’t comment which is disgusting. At this point, he ought to be saying, “I’m sorry, it was a misunderstanding”. The Secret Service is also still considering my case “Under Investigation.” What on earth is there to investigate?

I want this entire issue brought to court in order to expose it to the light of day. I want everyone: from the volunteer who took my call, the person who reported me, the agents themselves, everyone to have to account for the procedures followed. I want to know if they went by the book. Anywhere they did not, I want the violator to suffer repercussions for their fascist and un-American violation of my rights as a law-abiding citizen. If this is by the books, if this is how America runs today, then the book needs to be rewritten to comply with the Constitutionally guaranteed rights of the citizens of the United States of America.

Furthermore, if this campaign or any campaign wants to make unsolicited calls to citizens and reserve the right to bring government force to bear against those citizens as a result of their calls then they need to have a better documentation than some partisan campaign volunteer, they need to have a tape or a monitor on the other line, to ensure that these incidents to not occur.

From Det. Shavedlongcock

A Det. Shavedlongcock editorial:

Not a real shocker at all, Chicago Tribune & Chicago Sun-Times endorse Barack Hussein Obama for the office of US President.


Both of these newspapers are in financial trouble. Both have laid off tons of employees as their sales drop daily. The Internet and cable TV news have basically replaced the old fashion way of learning the daily news.

As a young boy I delivered newspapers in Chicago. In the morning I delivered the Chicago Sun-Times and the Chicago Tribune. Right after school I then delivered the Chicago Daily News and the Chicago Today. During those delivery years I would read all four newspapers I delivered 7 days a week. During the early 1970's the newspapers were full of truth. It didn't make a difference how powerful you were or how "Chicago Connected" you were, everybody was fair game. The newspapers had real investigative reporters with confidential informants and insiders at City Hall. The newspapers sold more newspapers not by pandering to any persons or groups but by revealing real news and taking down big powerful people. Many of the customers on my paper route were waiting at the door to get their hands on the hot news of the day.

Well times have changed. Newspapers today are nothing more than a piece of paper with words and pictures that gentle report the news. The news editors censor and omit anything that may offend a gay, lesbian, black, Hispanic, animal rights activist, abortion rights activist, Democrat, Muslim, Jew and any other person or group connect to the left side of society. But the people of the right side, Christians, Catholics, whites and any other person or group connected to anything right of center is still fair game. It is all is based on the left willingness to boycott and protest if you are not on their side or you offend their quests. Where the right side usually just says, what do you expect... and keeps buying whatever they are hawking.

THE DECISION FOR BOTH MAJOR NEWSPAPERS TO ENDORSE BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
I have fun on this blog and anybody who reads it all at knows full well that I am a person who believes in the conservative side of life. Where personal responsibilities go hand in hand with what one can expect to accomplish in their lifetime. I have voted for just as many Democrats as I have for Republicans in elections. I usually base my decision on who is going to do the best job and their past accomplishments.

Now comes an endorsement for Obama by both major Chicago newspapers. Not really a shocker. As a Chicagoan I fully know if both newspapers didn't do this both newspapers would of had the full force of every black community organization and church against them. From protests to boycotts, they would be relentless.

But let's look at this factually. Obama, a self admitted cocaine snorting and weed smoking man and as of yet there is nothing that says his admitted use to these drugs have stopped. A man who may have his finger on the button that can blow up the world is a drug user. He has no military background and a few years in the US Senate, much of this time has been used running for US President. The years spent in the Illinois elected positions are basically uneventful as for doing anything to better Chicago or Illinois.

There are tons of questionable associations with Obama. From 1960's terrorists, black power preachers (Rev. Wright & Louis Farrakhan) and many more people that none of us would even want to associate with.

World leaders such as Fidel Castro, Moammar Kadafi and Hugo Chávez all have expressed their support for Obama. Three world leaders that HATE America voice support for Obama!

Obama was quoted in "Sneed" today as saying that if he is elected President, Obama desires a black to replace him as Senator. Wow, a man who if elected President would have to have tons of white votes but only a black person should hold his former Senate seat. Amazing. Imagine if John McCain said, If I am elected President I want a white person to replace me in the Senate. I am sure nobody would say a thing about it if McCain requested that.

I won't go on about Obama but I could.

Now we have John McCain. He was far from my original choice for US President. But when it came down to Obama and McCain as candidates, McCain was by far the easiest choice for me.

We have a war hero. A ex-POW of war. A 30 year US Senator. A middle of the road Republican who has NO questionable terrorists pals, NO preachers speaking of WHITE POWER, NO enemies of the USA backing him. A man that leaders around the world would fear to engage any war with. No known cocaine use, no weed smoking and didn't come for the corrupt politics of Chicago. Now I am sure John McCain is no angel and I never would even apply that. But what he is, is a man you have known for over 30 years. No hidden background, no hidden birth certificate like Obama, 30 public years in the Senate.

But none of those accomplishments mean a thing to the Chicago newspapers. For one reason only. There is one thing McCain doesn't have that Obama has. It is the reason why Obama is where he is at with no real experience. McCain is WHITE. And there is no possible way that either Chicago newspaper will endorse a white over a black for US President. Especially when it is the first black man to be a candidate in a major party for that office. It would of been financial suicide for both newspapers.

But I can tell you this. If I was at the age I was when I was deliviery those newspapers today, today would of been my last day as a newspaper delivery boy. I couldn't delivery pieces of papers that weren't printed with what so many brave men and women have died for, the First Amendment Right of the Freedom of Speech and the ability of the newspapers in this country to print the truth at all cost. Funny that in the end it wasn't the government that took the freedom of speech away from these newspapers but it was the ones who never did anything but leeched off society and never bothered to lift a finger to help this country.

Sincerely,
Det. Shavedlongcock

Ochal resigns to probally a better job

Aviation official resigns amid power struggle

By: Lorene Yue Aug. 08, 2008

(Crain's) — Embattled city Aviation Department official David Ochal resigned Friday, just days after drawing public criticism for allegedly using clout to provide electricity to his home when his Northwest Side neighborhood lost power in Monday night’s storm.

The Department of Aviation issued a news release stating that Mr. Ochal, who was first deputy commissioner, has left the department after eight years.

Mr. Ochal was the subject of a Chicago Tribune column by John Kass, who claimed he used his position to get Commonwealth Edison Co. to deliver a power generator to his home on Wednesday while his neighbors were still in the dark.

Mr. Ochal was also scrutinized in 2000 for having a backyard pool installed without obtaining proper city permits. Mayor Richard M. Daley's administration claimed Mr. Ochal did no wrong.

Former alderman confesses corruption

(AP) — A 17-year veteran of Chicago's City Council has pleaded guilty to taking payoff money and cheating on her taxes.

Former Alderman Arenda Troutman acknowledged Wednesday that she'd taken money for helping real estate developers in her South Side ward.

She pleaded guilty to mail fraud and tax fraud charges. Eleven other counts were dropped in exchange for her plea.

U.S. District Judge Ruben Castillo set December 3rd for sentencing the 50-year-old Troutman, who lost her re-election bid last year after the charges became public.

Defense attorney Sam Adam Junior says other than the payoffs, Troutman had "an impeccable record" of working her way up after a poverty-stricken childhood "in the coal fields of West Virginia."

Chicago Worst City for Personal Freedoms

Chicago Worst City for Personal Freedoms

Sunday, August 3, 2008 3:37 PM Article Font Size

Chicago is the worst �nanny-state� city in the U.S. � the metropolis with the most stringent regulations interfering with the exercise of personal freedoms. That�s the finding of a survey by Reason magazine, a libertarian publication, which ranked cities according to the degree they treat citizens as a �nanny� might treat children incapable of making their own decisions. The magazine ranked the 35 most populous American municipalities in eight categories: sex, alcohol, tobacco, guns, movement, drugs, gambling, and a catch-all category of food and �other.� The higher the score, from 1 to 35, the more restrictive the city. In the sex category, for instance, Reason looked at such factors as the number of strip clubs per capita, gay-friendliness, and adult entertainment regulations. For alcohol, it took into account restrictions on happy hours and operating hours, blue laws and excise taxes on beer, wine and liquor. The movement category included laws governing seatbelt and motorcycle helmet use, and government-operated surveillance cameras. And for the food/other category, Reason looked at menu-labeling laws, pet codes, bans on trans fats, cabaret laws and other regulations of �a paternalistic nature.� Chicago finished in the bottom half of every category, including 34 for tobacco, 33 for guns and 28 for food/other. Reason cited a ban on serving alcohol at all-nude strip clubs, restrictive gun control laws, a public smoking ban, and widespread use of surveillance cameras. It also noted that nearly a quarter of Chicago�s precincts are alcohol-free. Not far behind in second place was Seattle, with 35 for both alcohol and smoking and 32 for food/other, although it did receive a 4 in the drug category for its permissive marijuana laws. New York was next, with 34 for food/other, 31 for smoking and 28 for movement. The city banned trans fats in restaurant cooking oils and ordered fast food chains to show calorie content on their menus. Police have issued citations for infractions as minor as sitting improperly on a milk crate, and from 1997 to 2006 they arrested and jailed more than 353,000 people for possessing small amounts of marijuana. At the other end of the rankings was, not surprisingly, Las Vegas, which in addition to 1 for gambling also got 1 for sex, 4 for alcohol, 6 for movement, and 7 for food/other. Miami was next, finishing in the top half of all categories except drugs, with 1 for movement and 1 for food/other. The city �melds Florida�s conservative guns �n� smokes freedom with the licentiousness you might expect from a cosmopolitan port,� Reason observes. Three other Southern cities finished in the top 10 � Louisville, Jacksonville, and Atlanta. Here are the rankings, from most �nanny� to least: 35. Chicago 34. Seattle 33. New York 32. Boston 31. El Paso 30. San Diego 29. Nashville 28. Houston 27. Los Angeles 26. Charlotte 25. Philadelphia 24. Indianapolis 23. Memphis 22. Columbus 21. Washington, D.C. 20. San Francisco 19. Baltimore 18. San Jose 17. Dallas 16. Cleveland 15. Phoenix 14. Austin 13. San Antonio 12. Oakland 11. Ft. Worth 10. Detroit 9. Atlanta 8. Jacksonville 7. Portland 6. Milwaukee 5. Kansas City 4. Louisville 3. Denver 2. Miami 1. Las Vegas © 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.