Illinois Review

Messaging "Big Oil"

by Collin Corbett

Part One:  Combating the Liberal Spin

There is perhaps nothing more aggravating than when conservative candidates and Republican officials are confronted by liberal activists who chastise them for their “support of Big Oil,” and the only response they can muster is a stammered slur of equivocations. In the past month I’ve seen this situation replayed over and over, with only a single official handling the situation with anything resembling deftness. In today’s political climate, there is no excuse for this being a “gotcha question.” It’s time we messaged this issue properly.

Democratic lawmakers in Washington have called for an end to energy subsidies such as those given to “Big Oil” companies operating in the United States, pointing to $4 billion in subsidies the five largest oil companies receive each year. Their reasoning has emotional appeal: with a lagging economy, rising national debt, and worsening unemployment levels, subsidies to rich oil magnates are simply enriching “fat cats” at the expense of hard-working Americans. So how can we compete with this picture? It’s easy: stick to the facts.

Hate spews from Leftist Tweets

Earlier today we on IR proposed the idea of adding "political views" to the special protection categories listed in the Illinois Human Rights Act.  Maybe you thought we were exaggerating the problem of mean and spiteful liberals using every means possible to shut down, intimidate or stifle conservative thinking.

Today, a local Chicago media outlet is running a story about Fox News conservative talk show host Glenn Beck. Here's some of the comments that's Tweeting on that story.  Still think we're overreacting?

Statewide News Headlines

For June 30, 2011

• State Legislators' Stipends Cost Taxpayers $1.7 Million
• Quinn Faces Deadline to Act on New Ill. Budget
• Biotech Group Names Quinn 'Governor of the Year.'
• Ill. Likely to See Fierce Battle over Gun Control
• Illinois State Legislature Passes Strengthened Wage Bill

Cut, Cap and Balance: A path to fiscal responsibility

Americans for Prosperity - Tim Phillips & Phil Kerpen

We enthusiastically support the “Cut, Cap, and Balance” framework for debt-ceiling negotiations and are committed to opposing any deal that fails to follow it: substantially cutting spending immediately, capping it going forward, and adopting a balanced-budget amendment with strict tax and spending limitations. But for the cuts to go beyond a blip on the otherwise relentlessly upward march of government spending (or worse, amount to accounting gimmicks), they must be based on specific, structural, permanent reforms to grow the economy while lowering the trajectory of federal spending. Moreover, without those reforms, caps will prove unenforceable when they get overwhelmed by entitlement promises, or when the political pendulum swings back toward tax-and-spenders.

A Bad Idea Keeps Coming Back

By Mark Rhoads

In general, government hates activity it cannot tax or control.  Government hates the non-geographic nature of the internet because the reach of web is global but the jurisdictional boundaries of governments have geographic limits.  Now there is another new law in California to impose a duty on internet retailers such as Amazon to collect sales tax on purchases they think are made by residents of that state.  This greedy and counterproductive tax policy in Illinois and other states is yet another clumsy attempt to make an end-run around a 1992 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Quill Corp. v. North Dakota 504 U.S. 298 (1992).

Obama, the class warfare demagogue

Publius Forum's Warner Todd Huston challenged Barack Obama's class warfare demogoguery spewed in a press conference Wednesday ...

Obama is the worst demagogue we’ve had in the office of the president since Franklin Roosevelt, a man who also severely attacked the evil rich at every turn. And, as a reminder, FDR’s actions lengthened The Great Depression by years. Like FDR’s economic failures this president has nothing to offer the nation but class warfare.

Maybe conservatives should be protected by the IL Human Rights Act?

Over the weekend, conservative talk show host Glenn Beck's family had a unnerving experience as they viewed an outdoor showing of a Hitchcock classic at a local park.  Beck shared with his radio audience earlier this week how his family was harrassed and verbally intimidated.  At one point, a nearby antagonist kicked a glass of wine onto Beck's wife's back.  Not one person stood up to defend Beck, who, because of his notoriety, decided it not best to publicly respond.

When we first heard about this, it was pretty clear that the Beck family were pbullied, the current plague that has gripped our public school system.  Teachers are being taught how to deal with bullying, beauty queens are on anti-bullying tours, kids are told to report anyone they see bullying.  Verbal intimidation on the Internet and on air waves is a public nuisance and threat.  But there's still a reason for which discrimination and bullying is permitted: if you're of the wrong political persuasion.

Game over in Illinois

Karen McConnaughay announces bid for Illinois Senate

WEST DUNDEE, ILLINOIS—Citing the need to tackle the state’s chronic mismanagement and economic crisis, Kane County Board Chairman Karen McConnaughay today announced that she will not seek a third term as the County Chief Executive, but will run for the Illinois State Senate in District 33.

Before a crowd of supporters on the River Walk in West Dundee, McConnaughay, (R-St. Charles) pledged to work to get Illinois back to work and to reduce the size and inefficiency of government.  She stated that Kane County and the rest of the state will not be able to realize economic recovery until the state government makes serious changes to reform the way it does business.

Will The GOP Select A Candidate Like the Democrats Did with Obama?

By Ghost of John Brown

About 150 years ago, voters across our then adolescent country selected a gangly Abraham Lincoln to lead our nation during one of it's darkest days.  While he was not an exceptionally good looking man, he had a great intellect and was a man of great principle.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt was similarly elected during one of our nation's most severe economic times about 80 years ago.  He was elected even though he had polio and wasn't able to get around like most. Reporters protected him and didn't publish pictures of him in his wheelchair.  One of my heroes, Winston Churchill, was a portly, cigar chomping politician who led his country through one of its darkest times.  The common thread with all three of these men is whether or not they would be elected today in our media circus and our vain view of candidates.  They weren't handsome or robust, but they were arguably the right men for the job (well, except FDR did everything wrong, but that ruins the flow of the article).