Because I live in Chicago, one of the questions I get asked a lot via email or comments on this site is if I know why the Obamas both lost their licenses to practice law in Illinois (not that a lack of license can really stop a Democrat from practicing law…just ask Elizabeth Warren about that). I think I know why they lost their licenses, but the answer may surprise (or disappoint) you.
According to people I know who worked with Michelle Obama when she was employed by the City of Chicago, Michelle hated being a lawyer. The work was too hard and she was not very good at it. The reason Michelle went to work for the City is because she was hired via a recommendation from Jesse Jackson which then qualified her as a “Jesse Hire”; this is slang here in Chicago for an “untouchable hire”, meaning this is someone on the City payroll who can never be fired or even disciplined in any way because their employment was a political favor to someone. In Michelle’s case, that someone was Jesse Jackson and Michelle was thus one of the many black people working for the City at Jackson’s insistence who were not expected to actually do their jobs and instead could read newspapers, shop in catalogs, play Minesweeper on their computers, or just spin aimlessly around in their swivel chairs all day. Michelle reportedly took two or even three lunch breaks a day, would disappear for hours, went on constant “personal appointments” and treated her work space at the City like it was an airport lounge: a place to go for a while to kill time where she could snack, peruse magazines, gossip, and talk loudly on the phone with girlfriends and laugh and laugh and laugh.
No one could say boo to her and a LOT of resentment developed, of course, but this is how Chicago operates and even Mayor Daley (who ruled the city as a king) was terrified of angering Jesse Jackson because Jesse’s big threat was always to find some excuse to dispatch the Rainbow Push Coalition to the streets to rant, rave, scream, and protest that Daley was…wait for it…bet you can’t guess…RACIST!
So, “Jesse Hires” were a form of extortion of the City that required people Jesse personally recommended for jobs be essentially given paid positions to read newspapers and talk about babies for as long as they wanted. It’s not just Jesse who gets these “hires’ though. A lot of Aldermen have them, too…and as long as the Aldermen are in power and have votes the Mayor needs for certain things, then friends and family of the Aldermen get to work for the City in positions similar to the one that Michelle Obama held after she left Sidley Austin. This is all pretty common knowledge in Chicago. Before I was identified as a political writer and my cover was blown (I used to write this site anonymously until Fran Eaton of the Illinois Review outed me for personal reasons because she wanted to help an ex-boyfriend get back at me), I used to work freelance gigs for the City doing event planning or coordinating special projects…which was ridiculously lucrative and a lot of fun. I will never, ever be able to land one of those freelancing assignments again because I’m clearly no fan of Rahm Emanuel but back in the Daley days when I was doing these gigs I saw a lot of these “untouchable hires” just taking up space in the various offices I’d visit in my day. These people were always kept in the very back, in cubicles, and some of them would even sleep during the day. Once, I saw a group of them playing cards…in a work area, not a break room. Some of these positions require driving around town but it’s not really with any particular goal in mind. They might be listed as delivery people, but they don’t deliver much and spend about 7 hours just cruising around, stopping for snacks, maybe going to a movie. Whatever they want.
Michelle Obama “worked” in this capacity for a few years, until Valerie Jarrett (whom she became friends with during her stint as a “Jesse Hire”) took her with her when she went over to the University of Chicago Medical Center. I believe at that time that Barack Obama was already a state senator and it was clear he was being pushed for bigger things…so it was natural for the Medical Center to want the senator’s wife on the payroll so that they could funnel money to him through her as rewards for steering legislation towards passage that would benefit University of Chicago. This is how Chicago works, folks. Michelle didn’t do any more work at the Medical Center than she did for the City and her job duties involved trying to keep black people from going to the emergency room at the hospital for treatment without insurance and instead go to these sub-par “medical clinics” that the Medical Center wanted them steered towards instead. At one point, Michelle received a ridiculously large raise right around the time that the University of Chicago received a massive funding infusion for the Medical Center from Springfield, where Barack Obama was on his way to becoming a United States Senator. Surely this was just a coincidence and was not a way for University of Chicago to buy favor from the next US Senator representing Illinois by dramatically increasing his wife’s pay to over $300,000/year for doing relatively nothing all day.
After Michelle vacated her position in 2007 to join the Obama presidential campaign full-time the Medical Center did not bother replacing her and eventually eliminated her old job…since there was no need for this position or the expenditure as it was only there in the first place to buy influence from Michelle’s husband.
Read the rest of this entry »
This is not as bad as Iceland and its elves, but an eyeless spider has delayed a $15 million construction project
One of the study abroad programs I undertook in college was to Iceland, where I worked on GPS-mapping glaciers and lava formations out in the field. It was often like being dropped off on the moon and left to fend for myself for many hours before a tiny speck on the road in the distance would become the only car I saw all day and I’d get picked up to head back to the research camp. The roads would twist and turn in Byzantine ways at times, making bizarre loops around rocks or scrags of underbrush. Iceland has few trees, but those that are there are slender and meek…with entire highways diverted far out of the way to respect the sapling’s “personal space”.
In Iceland — and I am not kidding in the least — construction projects must hire a “Elf Consultant” whose job it is to perform a sort of Icelandic feng shui so that the “invisible people” of Icelandic folklore are never upset by the building of roads, bridges, and house. Icelanders are the most superstitious and ridiculous people in the entire world in some ways: they are beyond gullible while simultaneously believing that since they are descended from Viking stock that they are invincible. The only thing they fear are the invisible elves they truly and actually believe cause their cars to malfunction, their electricity to go wonky, or their water to scald them to death (which actually happens every once in a while while someone is showering and there’s a surge of geothermal energy that boils the water in Icelanders’ bathroom pipes, killing a few people every now and again…no doubt when the elves are angry).
The Cult of Gaia in this country — otherwise known as “environmentalists” are almost as bad as the Icelanders with their elves. The latest bit of insanity is a $15 million construction project that’s been sidelined because of a tiny blind spider that would be disturbed by the construction.
I really love animals and used to want to be a zookeeper or a paleontologist when I was a kid. I think almost every animal out there is either interesting or delicious (or both). But some of them are just losers who can’t be coddled all the time. Species go extinct every day, and not because of anything that humans do. If that wasn’t true, then you’d be riding a triceratops to work tomorrow or taking the brontosaurus bus. Maybe you, reading this, would be some sort of evolved velociraptor yourself.
Read the rest of this entry »
The Right to Kill — how conservatives should use the right words to drive a wedge between Independents and the Left
[ Click to embiggen: Ask yourself this...how many women would voluntarily want to participate in displays like this if the emphasis was taken off the "choice" of having an abortion and was instead placed on the mother's "Right to Kill" a baby that was developing inside her. Suddenly, women like those in this picture would seem like monsters for turning a "Right to Kill" demonstration into a carnival atmosphere ]
Democrats are trotting out the abortion-as-wedge-issue weapon today, due to stupid remarks made by Missouri candidate Todd Akin that have now given Claire McCaskill a lifeline to hang onto her Senate seat. Republicans have a gross history of allowing the Left to dominate with this issue, and continue to maintain it as an issue, to control a large percentage of women voters in this country. This is what the Left does: it keeps various identity-voting blocs on the Democrat plantation through combinations of scare tactics, outright lies, hate mongering, and goon squad enforcement. Women are perpetually told they must vote Democrat or else Republicans will take away their right to kill babies. Actually, Democrats say they’re “protecting a woman’s right to choose” but the more accurate and smart way to put this is to change it to the “right to kill babies” phrasing. If Republicans would do that, then comments from someone like Todd Akin would not due so much damage to the GOP ticket in a state like Missouri.
I graduated from a Catholic high school in a nice suburb of Cleveland that had a Pro-Life Club. I attended exactly one meeting of the club because I was turned off by the gruesome depictions of aborted fetuses that hung around the classroom. I’m someone who doesn’t enjoy sitting through gory slasher movies and I didn’t have the stomach to even consider going to medical school, as I’m not inclined to look at images of blood and body parts in general. Halloween for me is all about the candy and the colorful, cute, and/or sexy costumes…and not the severed limbs and dripping blood.
I’ve never understood why the Pro-Life movement made the strange marketing and branding decision back in the 1990s to feature gory abortion shots in all of its materials because this stuff turns off a wide swath of the public who is receptive to the Pro-Life message but is alienated by its messaging.
A few months ago it occurred to me how this could easily be solved if conservatives just started referring to abortion as “The Right to Kill”. As in, “a woman’s right to kill her baby”. That’s technically what abortion is, anyway: it’s the killing of the baby that’s growing inside someone. But calling it “The Right to Kill” will cull the crowd of those who feel comfortable standing on soap boxes to advocate “abortion rights” or “the right to choose”.
Words matter, and I realize that conservatives have a hard time understanding this. I’ve written many times about how saying “liberals” instead of “Leftists” actually helps Democrats, but almost every “heavy hitter” conservative writer and pundit frequently uses the term “liberals”. That’s foolish, because Democrats focus-group test everything and know that Independent voters (who, let’s be honest, really decide the elections at this point) have a positive impression of the word “liberal”…just as they have a positive impression of the word “Pro-Choice”. I bet the terms “Leftists” and “Right to Kill” would send Independents screaming in terror. Which is why conservatives need to start using these terms exclusively.
Read the rest of this entry »
Hatemail of the Day: “You have done a lot of damage and the backlash to your unreseached and bios article is nothing welcoming”
[ Click above to embiggen: but don't get your hopes up that all of it will make any sense ]
I always get oddball hate mail whenever I write an article about terrible and hypocritical things the “gay community” does. This one that came in last night from a Sidetrack patron named Greg Baird (who also claims to be a “national lecturer on LBGTQAI issues” for Bass-Schuler Entertainment in Glenview, Illinois) stood out (and not just for the poor grammar and endless typos…which beg the question of just how educational and informative “lectures” from him could ever be to an audience older than pre-school). Greg was prompted to
ramble incoherently write in because he didn’t like my calling Sidetrack the Video Bar out for hosting events such as the Equality Illinois Pie Toss that serve as “two-minute-hates” against Christians, Republicans, and generally anyone else the “gay community” in Chicago declares “an enemy”.
You can read the article at the link above to see what got Greg Baird so riled up.
This perfectly illustrates a few things about the “gay community” that I think conservatives need to know and understand. My friend Megan Fox and I talked this morning about it and her perspective as a lifelong Republican and suburban mom is interesting because she has little contact with the gay community or the political Left and doesn’t understand a lot of how they operate and what comes as second nature to people like a Greg Baird.
Read the rest of this entry »
Open Letter to Rush Limbaugh: Please Call Attention to the Fact that Gay Community “Leaders” Have Been Ginning-Up Anti-Christian Hatred and Calls to Violence for YEARS
Dear Mr. Limbaugh,
Whenever I write an Open Letter to you I feel like there are cinnamon rolls taped to my head and I’m pleading into R2D2, “Help us, Obi-Wan, you’re our only hope!” but the truth is, Mr. Limbaugh, that you’re the only person with the guts to tell things like they are and take-on the “untouchable” issues that conservatives and Republican political pundits are seemingly terrified to go near. The end result of this reluctance to tip sacred cows is that the media and the Left (but I repeat myself) are able, for decades, to foster subcultures in this country that do great harm while serving as goon squads that Democrats gleefully dispatch against Republicans every chance they get.
One such group that needs your immediate attention is the nation’s self-styled “gay community leaders” who preach hatred and rev crowds up to violence against Christians at just about every gay event (such as Gay Pride Parades or festivals like “Market Days” here in Chicago) and also in gay bars that turn innocuous events like Halloween parties or fundraisers into political events by having M.C.s take to the mic and make incendiary political speeches about how evil Christians are, how much Republicans supposedly want to “put gays in concentration camps” (a bizarre accusation that’s repeated often in the gay community), and how gays need to “get” Christians and Republicans before “they get us!”.
This happens nationally. It’s not coincidental and is being directed behind the scenes by gay “community leaders” who take their marching orders from the memes churned out by gay publications in every major city and in national rags like The Advocate.
Read the rest of this entry »
How Gay Community Leaders Promote Hate and Encourage Violence Against Christians: Chicago’s Sidetrack the Video Bar as Case Study
[ Sidetrack M.C. (and Chicago public school teacher) Bradley Thomas Balof incites a crowd of gay men to hurl expletives at Christians and Republicans in the form of a Chick-Fil-A effigy during a two-minute-hate conducted during a fundraiser for Equality Illinois held at Sidetrack the Video Bar in Chicago in August 2012 ]
Yesterday, Floyd Corkins II of Herndon, Virginia — who worked with The DC Center, an LGBTQAI community center in the nation’s capital — brought a gun to the Family Research Council’s headquarters because he was driven by an all-consuming hatred of Christians and egged on by the nation’s self-styled “gay leaders” to “get in their faces” and inflict harm on the people that the gay community routinely brands as “enemies”. He concealed his gun in a Chick-Fil-A bag as a political statement and likely got the idea to do that from the nonstop, hate-fueled rage the gay community’s directed against the fast food chain for the last month because of COO Dan Carthay’s unapologetic promotion of traditional Christian values.
Gay bars like Sidetrack the Video Bar here in Chicago are hotbeds of this anti-Christian hatred and encouragement to violence, where patrons are often led in “two-minute-hates” against Christians, Republicans, and other declared “enemies of the gay community”. It is truly only a matter of time before another gay man like Floyd Corkins picks up a gun, stuffs it into a chicken bag, and sets out to murder Christians because self-styled LGBTQAI “community leaders” put that idea into his head.
Read the rest of this entry »
On August 2nd the House released an investigative report on Solyndra, the failed solar energy company, which shows beyond a doubt the Obama administration abused taxpayer dollars for political gain.
Solyndra received a $535 million loan, straight from our pocket, as part of Obama’s “green jobs” strategy. Indeed, Solyndra was considered one of the jewels in Obama’s green recovery crown. When Obama visited the plant in 2010, he highlighted Solyndra as an example of the “right thing to do for the economy,” claiming the plant would employ at least 1,000 high paying jobs.
As is so often the case with lofty oratory, the reality never lived up to the rhetoric.
First, the Obama administration pressured federal reviewers to sign off on Solyndra despite misgivings about the viability of the company and of the government’s loan model. Emails released by the investigators show the Office of Management and Budget responding to White House requests by saying “We would prefer to have sufficient time to do our due diligence reviews.” The loan was ultimately approved, clearly under political duress as an OMB staffer remarked “given the time pressure we are under to sign off on Solyndra, we don’t have time to change the model.”
Solyndra’s CEO at the time hailed the “Bank of Washington” for coming to their aid.
It quickly became clear that Solyndra was in peril as it began to miss payments on the loan. A government analysis warned that the company would run out of money in September of 2011 and recommended that the government simply cut its losses. Instead, the government chose to restructure the loan, ultimately wasting MORE of our tax dollars than if they had simply allowed Solyndra to fail.
The investigators released emails which clearly indicate the decision to restructure the loan – which inexplicably put taxpayers LAST to recoup losses – was made for political reasons. One government analyst remarked that a Solyndra failure “would likely be very embarrassing for DOE and the Administration.” Another commented that she was “vastly confused by DOE’s decision to negotiate away their senior position in this transaction.”
The final insult came when White House Chief of Staff Jack Yew, perhaps sensing that Solyndra was beyond saving, decided to wash his hands of any further involvement in the Solyndra restructuring. Let me say that again to be sure it sinks in:
Despite the administration’s self-proclaimed “quite active interest” in securing the loan for Solyndra, just months before it failed, the White House distanced itself from any further decision making.
No doubt so that when it finally failed, they could blame it on OMB / DOE / Bush (which is exactly what they tried to do).
Still undetermined is exactly what role Obama bundler Robert Kaiser played in securing Solyndra’s loan in the first place. Emails show Kaiser “advised associates” on how to secure federal assistance for Solyndra. As it turns out, Kaiser’s family also had a “substantial” financial stake in Solyndra. Coincidence?
This is an example of Chicago Politics at its finest. We have a choice in 2012. Are you voting for four more years of cronyism and abuse of our wallets? “Bank of Washington” my ass… it’s the Bank of We the People. I say we shut the damn doors. #ABO2012
Here in the U.S. we have a long tradition of secret ballots, and we feel like our political preference is generally a private matter unless we choose to reveal it to those with whom we interact. Unfortunately, we couldn’t be more wrong about these assumptions.
I first discovered the ugly truth about our political privacy purely on accident while researching the history of campaign finance laws. I’ve always known that campaigns and political organizations are required to disclose their contributors. What I didn’t know is that the entirety of that disclosed information is public record and easily obtainable by anyone with access to the Internet.
Let me introduce you to one of the most potentially dangerous tools on the Internet: The Federal Election Commission’s financial disclosure database. Curious about the political affiliations of your neighbors? How about the businesses you frequent? Just punch in your zip code and prepare to be shocked. Anyone who has contributed $200 or more will be shown with their name, employer, and you can even click through to the filing form to see their home address.
The danger is not so much the fact that the information is collected, or even that it is made public. The danger is in the level of accessibility. Imagine a world where anyone could open up a “Political Contributors” app on their iPhone and, with GPS technology, call up a summary of contributions by party for each nearby address. Imagine if Yelp included a “political affiliation” tag for each business, or a tally of how many employees contributed to each party.
Federal law currently prohibits the use of disclosure records for commercial purposes or to solicit contributions, but the rules on use are kind of wishy-washy. I see a whole lot of loopholes. Plus, it is not clear to me exactly how the FEC would determine that anybody was breaking the law.
The implications are serious. Politically-motivated vandalism could become commonplace, especially as we trend towards greater political division. Local boycotts could become as easy as logging in to an app on your mobile phone. People could even stage protests at businesses who employ too many contributors to a particular party.
Some will say I’m just being paranoid. I concede the possibility. However, you may recall that theft and vandalism already occurs due to campaign signs. For every one person who displays a sign in their yard, there are probably 5 more who have contributed but don’t want their political ideology plastered on their front door. Imagine if it was in the palm of everyone’s hand.
The technology is much closer than many may realize. Just a few days ago, the Obama campaign released an app that shows you nearby Democrat households. Still think I’m paranoid?
As technology improves, the lines of political privacy will continue to blur. Combine this with a growing push for ever-greater disclosure requirements and we’re headed for a dangerous “brown shirt army” situation.
This is not a partisan topic. This should concern everyone. The technology is in its infancy — we can barely imagine the potential in years to come. Entrenched interests on both sides of the aisle will seek to use it to their own advantage, which will ultimately be detrimental to the privacy and freedoms of all of us.
I used to believe that campaign contribution disclosure was generally a good thing. After all, I like to know who guys like George Soros are supporting. Now I’m not so sure.
During my research, I found that one of this nation’s original campaign finance laws (the Tillman Act) was actually created by a notoriously racist Democrat with the purpose of browbeating anti-slavery Republican corporations. As I thought about it, I realized that our current disclosure laws are right on the cusp of allowing the same type of abuse Tillman envisioned. As technology advances, political privacy is going to continue to disappear, unless disclosure laws are repealed or reformed.
What say you?
With the Olympics on everyone’s television, what better way to highlight the true idiocy of Obama’s “you didn’t build that” comment than with a brand new meme.
Hey Missy Franklin, Michael Phelps, Gabby Douglas and all the other gold medalists… in the spirit of President Obama’s theory on human success… you didn’t win that! Somebody else made that happen! After all, you couldn’t possibly have been successful without the roads and bridges that allowed you to reach the pool and the gym! The focus, the training, the countless hours of dedication… that nice but it’s barely a footnote to the contribution of the government!
No rational person would agree with the paragraph above. And yet, millions of dutifully ignorant Obama supporters see nothing wrong with the application of the same theory towards business owners. It’s madness.
Not everyone can be an gold medalist. Can we agree that these exceptional men and women are indeed born with a natural affinity for their sport? Is it OK to acknowledge that nature does play a role in the creation of an Olympic athlete?
Not everyone can be a business owner either. It takes a certain kind of person to be successful in business, and it takes an awful lot of focus and dedication. Well beyond the level of “hard work” that most non-business-owners — including President Obama — assume is necessary.
The great thing about a truly FREE country is that we don’t all have to be superstar athletes or exceptionally wealthy business owners to be successful. But in that same vein, we should not castigate those folks simply because their success is different than ours, or because we feel inadequate by comparison, or “cheated” by the system. No, we should be celebrating the success of American entrepreneurial exceptionalism the same way we celebrate our phenomenal athletes.
Barack Obama’s re-election campaign has posted a new ad accusing Mitt Romney of launching a false attack. The ad plays a clip of Romney quoting Obama’s speech where he said “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” The ad then shows text saying Obama never said that. A few seconds later, the ad even plays a clip of Obama saying those exact words.
This is phenomenal. Obama’s campaign is literally calling Romney a “liar” and a “say anything” candidate for quoting Obama’s own speech! The emperor is truly naked folks.
This is also just another example in a growing litany of evidence that whatever terrible thing the Progressive Left accuses the right of doing, they are already doing it themselves.
Click over to YouTube to watch the ad, and then give it a dislike just for fun.
Personally, I think this is a mistake on the part of the Obama campaign. Claiming your guy didn’t say something and then playing your guy saying that exact thing is pretty dumb. It will be interesting to see if the campaign pulls this ad. If they do, you can also catch Beck’s analysis (currently free). He doesn’t show the ad but he does play the audio and then plays Romney’s speech and Obama’s speech side by side.
This whole incident rekindles my theory that the main factor in choosing Biden for Vice President was to give the late night comedians a more obvious target to roast. Obama’s off-prompter gaffe record isn’t exactly stellar. All I know is that Romney better ride this horse as far as it will go because after this, I doubt Obama will go off prompter again through the rest of the campaign.
On the other hand, he seems to be so arrogant that maybe he will and just assume he can lie his way out of it like he’s trying to do here. What say you?