Michael Madigan Is Way Off Base On Andy Shaw

Michael Madigan Is Way Off Base On Andy Shaw

Illinois Speaker of the House Michael Madigan is way off base on Andy Shaw but that really shouldn't surprise anyone who understands a little something about "king-making."

And in Illinois the undisputed king-maker is Michael J. Madigan and not Andy Shaw of the Better Government Association.

Besides where does the Speaker of the House even get off saying that Andy Shaw is out to tarnish Democratic Candidates? Hell, Illinois Democrats do a hell of a great job at tarnishing themselves nearly every time they open their mouths.

Da noive of some people!

Oh well what are you going to do with these career politicians who have lived so high off the hog for so long that they have become the over-stuffed hogs they have become and are unable to accept the criticism that goes along with it. Perhaps they need to take a good hard look into their mirrors before assuming the standard gorge thyself position in front of the public feeding trough.

Maybe, just maybe they would then realize that most people (you know those without a vested interest in having the same career politicians re-elected) just don't trust your typical law-makers around here. Especially Illinois Democrats who have managed to bring this state to the brink of bankruptcy while still refusing to address the very issues which created the mess in the first place.

In short, Mister Madigan, the Democrats have no one to blame but themselves. Political corruption, cronyism and nepotism have become time-honored traditions under the Illinois Democrats. Hell, even when they are finally caught they continue to defend those traditions all the while rambling on about their well-endowed balls.

So what in the world could Andy Shaw possibly say or do to irritate you?

I suppose the only thing that could possibly piss you or anyone of the 71-member House Democratic Caucus or members of the Democratic State Central Committee you sent letters to is the thought there is a government watchdog looking into what that membership is doing.

So let's call an ace an ace shall we?

Matter of fact, I wish Andy Shaw would do even more than he does to expose people like Patrick Ward and how you helped grease the way for him to have government employment while drawing a government pension. Hell, I wish Andy Shaw would have responded to my emails. But that doesn't mean that the people of Illinois shouldn't know about alleged or blatant in your face actions by our so-called elected leaders.

My advice? Grow up and take the heat as it appears you have been able to do that quite well without so much of a hint that your step-daughter will ever do her sworn duty to investigate any allegations involving you or your closest colleagues and allies.

So sit back - enjoy your daily apple.

Besides you can even keep telling people to go pound sand.

Which, by the way, I've heard you are really good at.

psst

Hey There! Please Subscribe To My Blog!
Type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Spot on, Michael; and while Madigan is king here, Obama is Emperor, silencing anybody who disagrees. Or destroying them personally.

    However, this will not keep a single True Believer Democrat from casting a vote for Madigan and even for Obama should he decide to further ignore the Constitution and run for a third term.

    The king is never dead. Long live the king (said under duress).

  • In reply to Richard Davis:

    Thanks Richard. And you are equally spot on as well!

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    With the third term b.s.?

    At least the U.S. has a 22nd Amendment, and, as far as I know. Obama would rather go back to teaching at the U of C.

    Maybe Richard sees the Egyptian Army, though.

  • In reply to jack:

    I am sure Obama is aware of the 22nd Amendment but I dunno I kind of have to go along with the essence of what Richard had to say - he may be aware but that might not matter to a man like Obama. At least due to his actions to date - which is a pattern everyone would be very wise to heed. Not sure about the Egyptian Army though. lol.

    Now here is a whimsical email someone sent me of 36 "1sts by Obama and called Quit Trashing Obama" (now some things are clearly hooey - others well not so much):

    "Quit trashing Obama's accomplishments. He has done more than any other President before him. Here is a list of his impressive accomplishments:"

    1. The 1st President to apply for college aid as a foreign student, then deny he was a foreigner.

    2. The 1st President to have a social security number from a state he has never lived in.

    3. The 1st President to preside over a cut to the credit-rating of the United States.

    4. The 1st President to violate the War Powers Act.

    5. The 1st President to be held in contempt of court for illegally obstructing oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

    6. The 1st President to require all Americans to purchase a product from a third party.

    7. The 1st President to spend a trillion dollars on "shovel-ready" jobs when there was no such thing as "shovel-ready" jobs.

    8. The 1st President to abrogate bankruptcy law to turn over control of companies to his union supporters.

    9. The 1st President to by-pass Congress and implement the Dream Act through executive fiat.

    10. The 1st President to order a secret amnesty program that stopped the deportation of illegal immigrants across the U.S., including those with criminal convictions.

    11. The 1st President to demand a company hand-over $20 billion to one of his political appointees.

    12. The 1st President to tell a CEO of a major corporation (Chrysler) to resign.

    13. The 1st President to terminate America's ability to put a man in space.

    14. The 1st President to cancel the National Day of Prayer and to say that America is no longer a Christian nation.

    15. The 1st President to have a law signed by an auto-pen without being present.

    16. The 1st President to arbitrarily declare an existing law unconstitutional and refuse to enforce it.

    17. The 1st President to threaten insurance companies if they publicly spoke out on the reasons for their rate increases.

    18. The 1st President to tell a major manufacturing company in which state it is allowed to locate a factory.

    19. The 1st President to file lawsuits against the states he swore an oath to protect (AZ, WI, OH, IN).

    20. The 1st President to withdraw an existing coal permit that had been properly issued years ago.

    21. The 1st President to actively try to bankrupt an American industry (coal).

    22. The 1st President to fire an inspector general of AmeriCorps for catching one of his friends in a corruption case.

    23. The 1st President to appoint 45 czars to replace elected officials in his office.

    24. The 1st President to surround himself with radical left wing anarchists.

    25. The 1st President to golf more than 150 separate times in his five years in office.

    26. The 1st President to hide his birth, medical, educational and travel records.

    27. The 1st President to win a Nobel Peace Prize for doing NOTHING to earn it.

    28. The 1st President to go on multiple "global apology tours" and concurrent "insult our friends" tours.

    29. The 1st President to go on over 17 lavish vacations, in addition to date nights and Wednesday evening White House parties for his friends paid for by the taxpayers.

    30. The 1st President to have 22 personal servants (taxpayer funded) for his wife.

    31. The 1st President to keep a dog trainer on retainer for $102,000 a year at taxpayer expense.

    32. The 1st President to fly in a personal trainer from Chicago at least once a week at taxpayer expense.

    33. The 1st President to repeat the Holy Quran and tell us the early morning call of the Azan (Islamic call to worship) is the most beautiful sound on earth.

    34. The 1st President to side with a foreign nation over one of the American 50 states (Mexico vs Arizona).

    35. The 1st President to tell the military men and women that they should pay for their own private insurance because they "volunteered to go to war and knew the consequences."

    36. The 1st President to tell the members of the military that THEY were UNPATRIOTIC for balking at the last suggestion.

    So How is this "hope and change" thing working out for you?

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    Most of this is hooey.

    For instance, social security numbers seem to be by region, but the birthers never established that you have to get them in a particular state.

    IIRC, Clinton was held for perjury or contempt, and eventually plea bargained it when he left office. Ford had to pardon Nixon to avoid Nixon getting indicted.

    And, I'm sure that the credit rating one was more due to the Tea Party rather than Obama.

    The jobs might not have been "shovel ready," but they were sure asphalt plant ready.

    Basically, I don't know why you went to such lengths to republish something from the clearly deluded, who can't even give citations to the factual matters he or she claims, not to mention coming to strange legal conclusions (at least without a citation to the case where the contempt was supposedly held).

  • In reply to jack:

    Jack I am surprised as it should have been evident why - but here goes - there is clearly a perception out there about Obama and whether it is real or not, or whether truth is interspersed with half-truths or even outright hooey - the perception remains and has been a part of the political landscape. And please give me some credit here as I said mostly hooey and called the email whimsical.

    But on a serious side and there is a serious side - Obama has done much to discredit himself from presidential blunders (such as bowing to monarchs and emirs) to outright lies over NSA spying and making comments about Obamacare when he knew prior to making the speech that what he was saying was distortion despite Weinstein's best attempts on Meet The Press to give us her explanation of the then and now double-speak.

    Look I said I was willing to give the man a chance a long time ago and I've kept my word; I also said he could have been a great president provided he wasn't led around by his ears by party leadership, etc., etc., etc.. The fact is, though, he has let a lot of people down, most of all himself. And for what? Because he wants to show the world how Chicago Double Speak Politics works or whether or not its application could dupe the entire nation?

    Really Jack, it is not all the Tea Party Extremism that I have also railed against - it is both the Democrats and Republicans playing fucking mind games on their constituencies.

    So when one adds it all up, well hey I get it on how perceptions can become urban legends and/or even stoke outright anger. It all begins with the political lie.

    And despite the spin on either side - a lie is a lie is a lie.

    And believe me the nation has had plenty from this administration (and yes others as well in our history). Bottom line - I don't trust any of these mothers any longer and I wouldn't put anything past them if the truth be told. And I see by everything I hear and read I am not the only one.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    I'm not going to buy anything hook, line and sinker, either.

    However, I just read something to the effect that if someone has to have that big of a list to try to prove a point, they are trying to bolster something that isn't believable, when a few pithy examples would suffice if the person had a point. When a certain number are obviously the product of logical inconsistencies or unsupported assertions, that rule certainly governs.

    And, pretty much Richard Davis sent you into the ditch when he tried to equate a truth about Madigan with a falsehood about Obama (i.e. term limits). And I don't care what the person with maybe 24 delusions out of 36 points perceives.

  • In reply to jack:

    Perhaps so my friend, unfortunately perceptions and delusions seem to rule many a people's thought processes. But it is what it is and things get a life of their own and that is why I say I can see the essence in someone's comments. So I am not inclined to view Richard's comments as sending me into the "ditch." I suppose the reason for that is I sense a higher level of frustration among people today as opposed to other times when it comes to government. Now I have also sensed a needless amount of fear as well, particularly after Obama was elected and that is based on something completely other than being about government if you know what I mean. Still, I have to look at things from both sides by nature and there are legitimate concerns and don't think they or comments should be discarded so quickly either. For instance, anyone who tells me (or you) that everything that this administration has done has been on the up and up thus far, well that's pretty darn comical too.

    Look, like you I prefer to deal with hard facts as my basis for accepting or rejecting something but you have to admit that many people don't and that is why I threw that whimsical email out there. Let's face it, more people than not (who are already negative towards Obama for whatever reason) have accepted many of those points and that has just perpetuated the fact that nothing gets solved these days. So I guess I have to look at things for how they are as opposed to the what they are if you get my drift.

    As for my own personal beliefs, well I don't even care about all that Birther stuff or other delusions because, like I said - it is about something else entirely. But I do care about important things like what happened at Benghazi, the NSA spying and impunity given a secret court while Wall Street Rogues aren't in jail. I am also upset about Obama knowingly lying about what should have been his landmark achievement instead of throwing in that "sub-standard" crap into the equation. And it is not the first time he has been caught in an outright lie either. But it doesn't seem to matter with him or his administration. The ends do not justify the means! Yet a pattern has emerged and that should be of real concern to everyone. As for everything else well yeah it is just fluff but I am not going to suppress someones opinion when I know what's driving it. Besides we have all seen how Illinois has manipulated the law and its own Constitution so who's to say that Obama's handlers wouldn't try an usurp the Constitution of the US? So I have to believe that that is what Richard meant with his comment. Just so you know I respect everyone's right to say what they believe unless it turns into a personal attack on me or my family. I write this blog hoping to have people read it and even more - respond to it. And I really enjoy having dialogue with people and getting to know what they think versus what I think. So I dunno call me whatever but people can basically say what they wish here without fear I will judge them or not give them the same respect they showed me by reading the piece and commenting. Guess that is just the way I am.

  • You have a better explanation this time.

    As far as it goes, we certainly haven't had a completely truthful President since Jimmy Carter, and look what kinds of messes that inspiration for Pat Quinn got us into.

    Bringing up Benghazi makes me dispute the pundits that say that Hillary Clinton is a shoe in. Apologizing and saying one is accountable doesn't count for much.

    However, maybe based on my background, distinctions do make a difference. The last I heard, there were term limits for the Presidency, the Chicago Machine didn't appoint the Supreme Court (and Sotomayor and Kagan had to go through Senate scrutiny), and despite what Mr. 36 points said, Justice Roberts said in the prevailing opinion that the Commerce power didn't justify requiring that someone buy something, but the Tax power said a tax penalty could be imposed. In that Mr. 36 points ignores those details, this was mere propoganda, and I didn't find it very comical, just like you didn't get a laugh out of Ted Cruz, even though, in the big picture,what he did was fairly harmless, at least compared to the "Boehner Rule" (which is reportedly also being used to hold up the immigration reform bill). Up to now, while I have heard of the filibuster and similar stuff in the Senate to hold up action, I sure haven't heard of a House rule that a bill can't come to the floor if the majority leader can't get all of his caucus to back it.

  • In reply to jack:

    Certainly can't dispute your honest president comment Jack. Quite frankly things have degraded exponentially since Carter's days and don't think we will ever return to what I consider political normalcy. It has gotten so nasty and partisan that whatever innuendo is made is taken for Gospel; i.e. the 36 Points. Of course I can see why you wouldn't see them as comical but it does go to show what people are willing to accept versus say the cold hard realities. And it is that that seems to be driving the discourse and helps explain why our political system is so far out of kilter. Sadly this is the world we live in and negative ads will continue to be the norm as people remain inclined to only pay attention to politics until some 45-60 days before an election.

    Of course there are people like me who believe that voters should be paying attention throughout if we are to be able to decipher what is real and what isn't. Well at least I think it would. But we humans are creatures of habit and so long as the gamesmanship among political parties, the mass media and the pseudo-pundits found on cable well I don't see much changing in terms of distorting facts and/or shaping one's own opinion on them.

    I guess the best thing for me is to absorb whatever comes my way and see if I can make any sense of it. For instance I know where Richard's mindset is and while we all make what sounds like a preposterous statement somewhere within there lies a real concern about where we are headed. In example, when we speak of term limits I am sure if some politicians had their way they would scrap the Constitution if they could. Sure the checks and balances are there to hopefully protect us from such a thing but I don't discount a fear from either side of the ideological aisle as to what some people's true motives are. So again, it is about the essence and I get that. Let's face it, people get fearful when they see their elected leaders contort, distort and obstruct.

    Look, I think both sides of the aisle leave much to be desired and I am still convinced if more people hold their officials accountable things would be different, if not well we will just get more of the same. Where and how it all ends is anyone's guess but I hear your logic and don't necessarily disagree with any of it. But I can see where it has become harder for people to see through all the clutter out there too.

  • In reply to Michael Ciric:

    But it all gets back to my point that we are at least not at the point where someone is sending in the Egyptian Army (although I did once suggest sending the National Guard to restore democracy in Illinois).

Leave a comment