EXTRA: Chicago a city of conventions, but also of sanctuary as well

Chicago likes to boast that we’re some sort of ultimate destination for places looking to hold a convention.

'Ground Zero' of the immigration protest movement this week

We have all these hotels, along with facilities capable of staging such events. When combined with all the other attractions of the city that people can stop by and visit while doing business here, we’d like to think there just isn’t any legitimate reason for people to want to do a convention elsewhere.

OF COURSE, THERE are those who’d rather have their events in Las Vegas – figuring that out-of-towners would feel more comfortable with gambling away their money rather than taking the time to study our city.

But nonetheless, we like to think we’re a major convention center. To the point that it becomes a big deal when Chicago actively tries to chase away a group that wanted to hold its professional gathering here.

But that’s just the case with the convention that began Tuesday at the Marriott Marquis Hotel – located just a block away from the McCormick Place convention hall.

For it seems the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency put together a program for all the businesses they work with in the course of their work. It would be a gathering of a who’s who of the federal immigration enforcement world. A chance for them to talk shop about their industry.

WHICH INCLUDES THE ways and means by which people are deported from the United States. Which, since we’re a sanctuary city that officially does not cooperate with the federal government in terms of enforcing immigration laws means we don’t even want their business.

Mayor Lori Lightfoot went so far as to try to get the hotel chain to kick the federals out, get them to find some other city to hold their gathering. It didn’t work. They’re still here in Chicago, and it means we’ll get to see people picketing the hotel to express their disgust with what it is these people do for a living.

It does seem that the hotel has agreed to prohibit immigration officials from trying to detain any guest of the hotel whose citizenship status is not quite clear. But that’s as far as they’re willing to go. They don’t want to lose any business.

So the gathering took place, with acting Homeland Security Secretary Kevin McAleenan being the key speaker Tuesday. And this will be one event that many Chicagoans will be more than glad to see finish its business and move on by week’s end.

  -30-

Chicago Cubs get favorable federal ruling if their fans are obnoxious

It never fails to amuse me to see people try to latch themselves onto someone else’s larger concept out of the belief they can carve out a niche that would gain them some money.

These fans might buy Cubnoxious gear

I still remember back in the days of the Chicago Bulls winning championship after championship after championship and people were talking about this being a “three-peat” that someone actually had the phrase trademarked so they’d be entitled to some compensation for its greater use.

I ALSO RECALL how someone thought they’d get ahead of the game by trademarking the phrase “four-peat.” Of course, they were the ultimate loser because of Michael Jordan’s stint in baseball that cost the Bulls a fourth consecutive NBA title.

So perhaps it’s in that light that I regard a recent ruling against a man from Iowa who wanted to trademark the phrase “Cubnoxious.” His plan was to produce t-shirts bearing the phrase which he’d presumably sell to people who find the Chicago Cubs baseball franchise incredibly obnoxious and unbearable in its existence.

I have no doubt there’d be a market for such a product – particularly if one were to focus their sales efforts to the area where the Bridgeport and Armour Square neighborhoods meet up.

Which, by the way, is the spot where Guaranteed Rate Field is located. Basically, I have no doubt that White Sox fandom would be willing to buy into such products, along with the bootleg “Cubs Suck!” products that one can stumble into.

ANYWAY, THE U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s appeal board ruled this week in favor of the Cubs, who challenged the right of the Iowan to use the phrase – which is something they find offensive in that it implies White Sox fandom is totally legitimate in regarding the existence of the Cubs as the equivalent of a boil on baseball’s tushy.

Seriously, the appeal board ruled that the Cubs have “convincing evidence” that they have a public image that could be tainted by such negative statements.

It also pointed out references in assorted news reports, Twitter comments and even Yelp – where the Reuters wire service reported that people writing personal reviews of the neighborhood surrounding Wrigley Field about having to avoid “Cubnoxious drunkards” who taint Lake View with their presence at Cubs ball games.

Only the Cubnoxious find this humorous

Basically, the Iowa man lost out because his slur against Cubs fans isn’t even all that original. Not enough for him to be able to make any money off of it.

IT IS A bit humorous from a baseball standard that the Cubs felt the need to fight off such a slur, and that they were forced to fight the notion that their fans are a batch of buffoons who don’t really have much of a clue about what takes place on the diamond.

Then again, I also wonder what Judge Cynthia Lynch was thinking when she wrote her legal opinion, saying, “given the similarity of the ball club’s strong marks to applicant’s mark, and the overlap of their goods that move in some of the same channels of trade to the same classes of consumers, we conclude that confusion is likely.”

It was probably something along the lines of, “I went to law school for this!” For a legal mind had to ultimately decide that the Cubs themselves would not go around calling themselves or their fans “Cubnoxious.”

Will have to settle for CubsSuckClub.com stuff

What next? Will we need a ruling saying that all those t-shirts depicting the Calvin character (of the old Calvin and Hobbes cartoon) urinating on an Old English script White Sox logo also are fake?

THEN AGAIN, THAT cartoon kid seems to urinate just about everywhere and on anything – all too similar to the way many Lake View residents rant about Cubs fans using their front lawns or alleyways as a place to publicly piss.

Which, if you think about it, is an act that, in and of itself, could be deemed Cubnoxious.

  -30-

Can we dump Trump?

The Washington Post is managing to tick off the sensibilities of many people who are looking forward to the 2020 election cycle with the goal of dumping that orange-tinted buffoon from the White House.

TRUMP: Is four more years really inevitable?

For the commentary by Hugh Hewitt basically implies that this upcoming presidential election is for Donald Trump to take. The 2020 election isn’t going to be close, is what we’re being told.

DESPITE THE FACT that various polls show the Trump presidency has never been popular amongst the masses, and only survives because of the incredibly outspoken level of support it draws from a minority of our society, many of whom do so because The Donald tends to give his backing to their own prejudices.]

As Hewitt feels, the one thing Trump has going in his favor is the economy. In short, it’s not in a recession or headed in that direction.

“Innovation is accelerating, not declining,” Hewitt wrote. “A recession before Election Day looks less and less likely by the day.”

In short, Trump will not be taken down by the very factor that caused many people to back Bill Clinton over incumbent George Bush (the elder) in the 1992 election cycle.

I’M NOT WILLING to totally dismiss this theory, because I happen to have a cousin who leans Republican and is nominally a Trump backer who defends his ideological choices by saying the state of the economy is really the only issue that matters.

All of Trump’s moments of stupidity and ignorance on so many issues that cause offense to the sensibilities of the majority of us? He argues they just won’t matter, in the end.

Which means that the masses of voters come Nov. 3, 2020 will wind up supporting, either enthusiastically or begrudgingly, the notion of a second term in office for Donald Trump.

BUSH: Trump won't lose due to economy

Something that I’m sure the man’s over-bloated ego will construe as evidence that we really, really love him – and that those of us who don’t want the return of Melania as First Lady can just go and “suck it,” so to speak.

NOW I DON’T doubt that Trump can win re-election, although I think the real factor at work is that many people just won’t be able to reach a consensus on who should be the Democratic challenger against Trump.

I actually think the dozens of candidates thinking they’re the only ones who could possibly run a winning campaign will actually result in enough electoral chaos so that none of them would be capable of getting enough voter support to prevail on Election Day.

Too many people who think that we have to have Bernie Sanders, Or Joe Biden. Or Pete Buttigieg. Or it has to be someone who specifically is NOT a white man. While refusing to consider anybody else. Democrats may not be capable of reaching a consensus candidate to challenge Trump.

Which could result in an election cycle that the masses find contemptible. They hate Trump, but can’t stand whoever it is that winds up getting the political nomination to run against him.

OR, WORSE YET. The confusion level is such that the same Electoral College mess that enabled Trump to win the presidency with 3 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton could kick in yet again. Right now, I'd have to think the odds are too great that Trump will once again get less than 50 percent of the vote.

BIDEN: Leading Dem, for now

Donald Trump could easily wind up as the two-term president who never took a majority of the vote and also was unable to ever get his popularity rating in polls above the 50 percent mark. In short, the man forced upon our society by an outspoken minority determined to force their ideological leanings upon the masses.

Some might think that a “victory,” of sorts. History would record Trump as a president no one wanted. But in reality, it would record him as a two-time victor – and further reinforce the leanings of the ideologues into thinking they’re the only people who really matter.

Some might want to think that the lack of a recession is a Trump accomplishment. But if anything, the fact that Trump has a snowball’s chance in that place ending in double-hockey sticks of winning re-election really ought to be blamed on the political ineptness of those who want to Dump Donald, but can’t quite figure out how to do so.

  -30-

Buttigieg the presidential “flavor of the month,” how long will that last?

Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind., seems to be the flavor of the month when it comes to the presidential election cycle we’ll go through next year.

BUTTIGIEG: Really a 'new' Obama?

As in people interested in picking a Democrat from amongst the dozen or so currently in the running to challenge Republican Donald Trump are focusing their attention on Buttigieg – who seems to be trying to build up the notion that he’d be the equivalent of another “Barack Obama,” somebody whose election would give them a “first” to support.

BUT WHILE BARACK was the first black man who managed to win the presidency, Buttigieg would be the first openly gay man (and a married one, to boot) who could be elected president.

For all those people appalled at the notion that Trump won the presidency back in 2016 on a campaign of undoing all the “firsts” that Obama had brought our society, I’m sure that picking Pete as president would seem all the more appropriate.

His election could be perceived as undoing all the harm that this Age of Trump has brought upon us.

We’re going to be getting a lot of Obama/Buttigieg comparisons in coming months. The Chicago Sun-Times pointed out this week that several of the people who helped raise money to get Obama started at the beginning are now on the Buttigieg train.

Does 'Mayor Pete" replace Obama, … 

IN FACT, ONE of them on Tuesday is staging a fundraising event for Buttigieg. John Atkinson told the newspaper he’s now fully committed to “Mayor Pete.” Part of the reason is that he figures Buttigieg is from Indiana – one of the Midwestern states solidly in the Trump camp.

Could Buttigieg be a key in Democrats taking Indiana’s 11 Electoral College votes away from Trump – along with those surrounding Great Lakes states such as Michigan and Wisconsin? That could well be the key to a Democratic presidential victory in 2020!

The talk has been offered up that both Obama and Buttigieg are Midwesterners – Great Lakes-types who aren’t tied to the East or West coasts. Both also have their ties to Harvard University.

Superficial ties, they may well be. But compared to many of the reasons offered up by Trump’s backers for supporting him (mostly because they like the way he offends the sensibilities of the majority who voted against him, but weren’t enough to win the Electoral College), they come off as all-too sensible!

… or just a better option to Trump?

I’M WONDERING HOW soon it will be before the reports start getting stirred up about how Buttigieg, in his first few weeks as mayor of South Bend, fired Police Chief Darryl Boykins.

He was the first black police chief, and there are those who think it was because Buttigieg chose to side with white cops who had their own racial hang-ups.

The New York Times already has reported on the issue. But how long until the news organizations that put the ideological spin on their reports (under the guise that it’s everybody else that reports “fake” news) get ahold of this – wanting to let us know that Buttigieg is some form of hypocrite unworthy of our support?

With the conservative ideologues desperately hoping they can stick a knife in the back of the Buttigieg supporters who’d be inclined to think he’s another Barack Obama.

OF COURSE, WE’RE nearly a year away from the primaries where people actually cast ballots for who should get the presidential nominations (it’s March 17, 2020, in Illinois). Buttigieg possibly could have long faded-away as a credible candidate by then.

SANDERS: Will he get Dem nomination?

Particularly if those people who seriously want Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont to be more successful this time around (I’m not amongst them) than he was in the 2016 Democratic primary manage to succeed.

If anything, what people need to be doing is looking to the future – finding someone with a vision to advance our society forward, rather than reverting to the past.

Perhaps not someone offering up visions of being an Obama successor. And certainly not somebody determined to keep wearing that ridiculous cap about “Make America Great Again” by reverting to a vision of our society that offers to exclude so many of us.

  -30-

EXTRA: Trump could have learned lessons from Rauner example in Illinois

I’m not getting all worked up with excitement at the notion that the “shutdown” of federal government came to an end Friday at 35 days – largely because I’ve seen just how stupid political stubbornness can be in my home state of Illinois.

TRUMP: Losing? Or plotting new strategy?

For the deal President Donald Trump is agreeing to is that he’ll sign off on a measure that re-opens the federal government for three weeks, with a congressional committee supposedly studying the “border wall” issue to come up with a compromise plan that will allow for money to erect Trump – the Wall along the U.S./Mexico border.

HONESTLY, I COULD easily envision that three weeks from how, nothing will change, the “shutdown” will resume and everyone will claim that everybody else is to blame for what could become the months-on-end cessation of the federal government.

In fact, I wonder if this three-week reopening of the federal government is nothing more than a conniving plot by Trump to create circumstances that will allow him to claim he’s not to blame. Because it’s pretty obvious that just about everybody IS blaming The Donald for our government failing to live up to its obligations.

Sort of like a “do-over” to try to shift blame to “da Dems.” While letting Trump give his “State of the Union” address Tuesday in the Capitol as intended.

Maybe it’s because the memory of Bruce Rauner as Illinois governor is still so fresh in the minds that I recall how he would up taking blame for the just over two full years of inactivity by Illinois state government.

RAUNER: Trump could learn from Bruce's defeat

EVEN THOUGH GOING through the news “clips” produces stories early on in that shutdown with Rauner insisting he’d be the political victor of any such shutdown.

The circumstances are way too similar.

Rauner had as his crusade that was more important to him than the daily operations of state government his so-called “reforms,” which really were nothing more than measures meant to undermine the influence of organized labor within state government.

While Trump wants to build the barrier he claims will keep all the foreigners from being able to enter the country – even though anyone with sense realizes the foreigners enter the U.S. through airports or the U.S./Canada border – which is must more easily passable than the desert terrain that separates U.S. from Mexico.

PELOSI: The victor? Or just a delay?

RAUNER’S STATE SHUTDOWN resulted when the governor wouldn’t sign off on a state budget without the so-called reforms being included – even though it really was a completely separate issue from daily governance.

Just like Trump’s border barricades really ought to be done separately from the daily operations of the federal government.

But several months passed in Illinois when our officials approved a budget that would supposedly fund the state for six months – thereby giving time for us all to talk and reach compromise.

Which would have worked; if only we had officials inclined to want to negotiate in good faith. All that happened was six months later, the state shut down again – and that ultimately resulted in the combined shutdown of just over two full years for Illinois.

WHICH RESULTED IN the state developing much more severe financial issues and debt that it’s going to take our state years, if not decades, to cope with. I can really, truly see the same situation developing at the federal government level.

BUTTIGIEG: Could he be '20 beneficiary?

Are we truly headed for a situation that can only be resolved by the 2020 political demise of Donald Trump – with the voters taking it upon themselves to be so disgusted that they “dump Trump?” Or 2024, if it turns out the Democratic Party becomes too inept to put forth a credible presidential challenger (always a political reality).

It’s too bad that Trump couldn’t study our situation and try to learn from it for the betterment of the American people.

Then again, Trump is enough of an egomaniac to think he has nothing he could learn from anybody – which is the real reason that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has come out looking like a political genius in recent weeks. With The Donald looking like little more than a chump!

  -30-

Would anybody really miss not hearing a political speech by Donald Trump?

One of the things I used to like about the old television series “The West Wing” was the way the show’s writers could work in trivial tidbits about politics and government for our amusement.

TRUMP: Wants to say how wonderful he is!

I remember one old episode where the Bartlet Administration faced a potential problem – he was expecting to use the upcoming State of the Union address to deliver a message he was eager to get out to the public, but the Congress headed by the opposition party didn’t formally invite him to do so.

WHICH SOUNDS ABSURD that conditions could really devolve to such a situation. Yet Donald Trump is the master of a presidency that seeks to be absurd in every aspect.

Meaning that scenario actor Martin Sheen played for laughs over a decade ago is now the reality of the state of our nation.

In theory, Trump is expected on Tuesday to deliver his annual address before Congress to tell us exactly where things stand within our government.

It is expected his speech would be loaded with ridiculous rhetoric and pompous talk about how every thing that is wrong with our nation is the Democrats’ fault – and how the key to our salvation is to follow The Donald’s lead and just shut up and do what he tells us to do!

BUT BECAUSE WE still have a federal government engaged in a shutdown that will reach a month long (and counting) pretty soon, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did the unthinkable. At least in Trump’s mind.

She revoked his invitation. Unless Trump knocks off his nonsense that has prolonged the shutdown and allows things to get back to operating as they’re supposed to, she’s not going to give him the platform to talk.

Which is something that I guess hurts the Trump ego. I have no doubt that the man is looking forward to being on national television – with his speech pre-empting programming everywhere so he can put on his “show.”

PELOSI: Denying Trump the chance to blather

You know the one I’m talking about. Democratic members of Congress will sit silently, while Republicans will get all worked up in cheers and applause at all the pre-ordained moments meant to make it appear that they’re spontaneously acknowledging the man’s genius.

IT WILL FEED his ego. It will make Trump think he’s truly a significant historic figure – instead of a man who truly makes former President George W. Bush look like a mighty intellect by comparison.

But Pelosi is denying him the opportunity to do so. Which has the Trumpsters all worked up, and the head cheese himself plotting how to stage an event that he’ll bill as an alternative to the State of the Union.

Most likely, something similar to those events he had during the 2016 election cycle – where he spews some trivial blather, finds a person or two to single out for the partisan crowd’s abuse then gets someone to offer after-the-fact reaction claiming that Trump is a political genius of the highest magnitude.

If you get the feeling I’m finding the whole situation worthy of mockery, you’d be correct. The reality is that these political addresses always contain a touch of phoniness regardless of who speaks.

BUT IN THE case of Trump, the level of blather will reach intense levels of b.s. I really don’t think anybody will miss the speech if it turns out that Trump doesn’t present it on Tuesday.

SHEEN (as Bartlet): More presidential than The Donald

If anything, Pelosi will be doing the nation a favor by not allowing an event that would pre-empt programming people would rather watch. We won’t have all those people swearing at their television sets Tuesday night when their favorite show isn’t on because Trump wants to tell us just how great he truly is.

Of course, if my mind is correct, that old “The West Wing” episode resulted in the president ultimately getting his invitation to give his speech. Life went on in that television presidential administration.

We’ll have to wait and see if reality turns out the same – or if the level of national inanity reaches a new high and political commentators are denied their chance to get Trumpsters all worked up with their allegations of presidential ignorance. Because those people may well be the only ones who truly will care about this ultimate non-issue.

  -30-

EXTRA: Bureaucracy (sadly) rules!

We’ve been hearing a lot in recent weeks about these caravans of people from central American nations who’d like to have a chance at a better life in the United States.

Within sight of United States, Trump creates more bureaucracy to thwart caravan

The ones that have been traveling throughout Mexico, and some of whom have actually made it as far as Tijuana. Meaning they’re literally here. Right across the border from San Diego and U.S. territory proper.

WE’VE ALSO HEARD the stories of U.S. military personnel being amassed along the border, so as to appease those people who approve of the Age of Trump we now live in who want those foreigners kept out of the country in whatever way possible.

It was encouraging to learn of military officials expressing objections to being used in such a manner. Yet in some ways, it is equally discouraging to see the tactic being used by Trump to achieve the ultimate goal of keeping those people out of the country.

Let the bureaucrats rule!

As in throw so many legal obstacles in the way of actually being able to enter this country (the one that claims it is all about helping “your tired, your poor. Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free”) that maybe, just maybe, many of them will merely give up and go back home.

Leaders of U.S. and Mexico (below) … 

IT SEEMS THE U.S. officials have actually reached an agreement with Mexico; by which the people now waiting their turn in Tijuana to have a chance at seeking asylum here will have to wait in Mexico.

Even though their cases will be decided in U.S.-based courts, they won’t be able to wait it out here. And it will be a wait – because the number of individuals now seeking and likely to seek asylum will take months for the courts to properly dispose of.

If anything, this has been the attitude that our federal government has taken in dealing with immigration – creating a bureaucratic mess meant to thwart the desires of those who’d want to be a productive part of our society here.

Rather than try to reform our immigration laws so as to deal in any sensible way with the masses who want to be part of life here, we’d rather create as many obstacles as we can dream up.

… work out deal that lets bureaucracy rule

ANYBODY WHO TRIES to say that we’re merely trying to deal with the masses of people passing through Mexico on the way to the United States in logical manner is spewing nonsense-talk. Trump, after all, also let it be known he’s prepared to close the U.S./Mexico border outright “if for any reason it becomes necessary.”

Such as perhaps if too many of the people who have caravanned their way from central America to Southern California actually manage to get the U.S. court system to approve their desires to live here.

It’s not surprising that, in Mexico, there are people who are getting upset at the notion of these central American natives having to be held within their country just because the United States has certain officials who wish they could make the issue go away.

It’s like our ideological nitwit officials are trying to dump a problem off on someone else – exactly the same way they always try to claim other countries are dumping their problems off on U.S.

THIS WHOLE SITUATION is one that is bound to become an embarrassment to the United States. It will be one of the biggest buffoonish acts to be committed by the Trump presidency.

ROBERTS: Challenging Trump viewpoint

Not that I expect the fanatics who approve of The Donald to ever admit any of this. All they’ll hear are the words “foreigner” and “Mexico” and they’ll be desperate to accept it, no matter how absurd the mechanics of it all are.

Because if they really had faith in this nation and its systems of operating, they’d be willing to trust the courts to weed through the large number of people seeking asylum in this country.

Then again, these people are the ones who these days are denouncing Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts for his recent statement that, “there are no Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. An independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”

  -30-

Federal bureaucracy, red tape – is that the key to thwarting sanctuary cities?

It has long been the conservative ideologue manner for dealing with abortion – a medical procedure they’re determined to view as criminal, but which sensible people do not.

Just another step in Trump's efforts … 

They have their similar-minded elected officials push for policies and regulations that make a person’s ability to obtain the procedure so much of a burden that it effectively makes it impossible for many women to obtain – even if it remains in the law books.

IT SEEMS THAT the ideologues are taking a similar approach to immigration; specifically to the notion of Sanctuary Cities. As in the concept that federal immigration officials ought to do their own work in enforcing federal policies that are overly harsh, and shouldn’t be able to draft local law enforcement into doing their leg work.

It seems they’re once again trying to mess with the federal funds that many local police departments rely upon to fund their efforts. Almost as though they’re saying cities are free to declare themselves sanctuaries from the ideological nonsense that has taken over our federal immigration policies.

But those cities can count on being messed with in ways that it will make it difficult, if not impossible, to do the jobs that actually are within their listed responsibilities.

That certainly is happening in Chicago, where on Friday the city felt compelled to file a lawsuit yet again against the U.S. government for messing with the funds the Chicago Police Department expect to get. And that, in fact, every police department gets.

EXCEPT THAT IN this Age of Trump, officials want to withhold as their way of pressuring Chicago into accepting a more intolerant attitude toward “all those foreigners” whom they’re determined to believe are the root cause of all the problems our society faces.

Because once again, Chicago is being forced to fight for its share of the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant funds – a program that has become a significant part of the federal government’s efforts to help bolster local law enforcement.

Which is something that President Donald J. Trump always claims he’s interested in doing whenever he goes on yet another of his nonsensical rants about how messed up he thinks Chicago is.

… to bully Chicago and Rahm Emanuel into submission

But yet what does he actually do? Trump has talks with singer Kanye West about a whole lot of nonsensical babble, while messing with the funding that might help local police to do more in addressing crime.

THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE is pathetic in so many ways – largely because it occurred a year ago.

Chicago had to take legal action in order to get its share of grant monies, and a U.S. District judge wound up ruling in the city’s favor that federal demands requiring city and Cook County jail officials notify them of every inmate they were holding who had questionable immigration status were not sufficient cause for the feds to withhold some $2 million from the Chicago Police Department.

Yet it seems the Justice Department is once again refusing to cough up the cash, as city officials still have yet to receive the letter confirming that they’ll get the money this year.

As though officials in this Age of Trump have decided they don’t want to pay attention to any court order. They’re going to persist in pursuing their ideologically-motivated policies whose long-range intent are to make certain people feel so unwelcome in this country that they’ll want to leave.

ALMOST LIKE THAT “self-deporting” nonsense talk that came up during the presidential campaign of 2012. It’s as if this goes beyond anything that Trump says or thinks, and has become a part of the Republican platform for addressing the issue.

Ought to think before rants about bullying

Ignore those people who won’t do what they’re told, and maybe they’ll just give up.

It will be interesting to see how long it takes the courts to issue an order forcing the federal government to cough up Chicago’s share of the proceeds. It’s not like there’s anything new this year that didn’t apply last year.

As for whether the same nonsense will occur again next year, most likely it will. That may be the ultimate reason that strong turnout come Nov. 6 (and again in 2020) is so important – perhaps the so-called “silent majority” needs to be reminded their guy got 3 million fewer votes in 2016 – and that they’re really a loud-mouthed minority whose ideological bigotry doesn’t belong in the 21^st Century.

  -30-

What were the lessons learned from Anita Hill with regards to Kavanaugh?

I still remember the moment of the “pubic hair on my coke.”

KAVANAUGH: Purely partisan politics?

As in listening to a radio broadcast of the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, when his former colleague Anita Hill recalled a moment of the two of them together when Thomas made his little quip to her.

MY COLLEAGUES AND I couldn’t quite believe anybody could be that lame in thinking such a line would be humorous. Or that Thomas could actually think that such talk would make him appealing to women.

But it really happened, the Senate eventually confirmed Thomas to his appointment that he still holds nearly 30 years later, and I’m sure there are political people out there who think the lesson learned from the whole “Thomas affair” is that such allegations are outlandish and best ignored.

Because, hey, we’ve had a misogynistic sort on the Supreme Court for all these years now, and it hasn’t brought an end to the Republic. Similar to how I’m sure they’re also thinking that it doesn’t matter what President Donald Trump (the man who supposedly thinks the way to appeal to women is to “grab ‘em by the pussy”) may have done in his life.

It only matters when Bill Clinton does it, because he has partisan leanings they are directly opposed to. Taking him down politically is the whole purpose, along with destroying anybody who might be remotely like him in any way.

GORSUCH: Does he need Trump allies on ct?

ALL THESE THOUGHTS have been popping into my head a lot with the hearings taking place concerning the political fate of Brett Kavanaugh. He’s the man whom Trump wants to put on the Supreme Court of the United States – in large part because of a belief he’ll shift the partisan leanings of the court sufficiently enough that the ideologues can start making good on their more-than-four-decade-old desire to do away with the 1973 ruling that made abortion a legitimate medical procedure.

So to try to take him down, we’ve learned about the woman who says that back when she was 17 (and Kavanaugh also was a teenager), he tried to molest her. She had to fight him off.

As if that isn’t sufficient, we’re now learning of another woman who remembers back to her freshman year of college in the mid-1980s when she says fellow student Kavanaugh used a college party to expose himself and try to get her to touch his genitals.

GARLAND: Some still bitter he's not on ct?

We actually have some people making the claim of, “How many women have to come forth before we see Trump’s appointee as unfit for such a position?”

ALTHOUGH I ALSO don’t doubt that Trump-types will never make such an concession – and not only because they just don’t care what these women say Kavanaugh did to them.

It’s all about the fact that Trump himself wants to be able to reform the Supreme Court in his own image, and needs as many people of his partisan persuasion to be appointed to the high court.

He has the one appointment he got because the Senate successfully managed to keep former President Barack Obama from filling the vacancy caused by the death of Antonin Scalia – an act that some find disgraceful. Although I’m sure the ideologues think the real disgrace is that Obama got to make two other appointments – and we now have Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in life-time legal posts.

Now, the conservative strategy is to ensure that Sotomayor and Kagan ultimately become isolated – and we get a whole slew of Supreme Court rulings of the future that come down to 7-2 votes. Which could happen if Trump is the one who gets to pick a replacement someday for 85-year-old Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

WHILE THE OPPOSITION will do what it can to thwart Kavanaugh – and theoretically any other opening there might be on the Supreme Court. Perhaps some think they can literally take back the high court seat they want to believe should be held by Merrick Garland (the man Obama tried to pick for the court, but couldn’t).

THOMAS: Does he need companion?

The shame of all this is that the women themselves become a sideshow. The reality of what happened to them all those years ago becomes irrelevant – to the point where back in 2010, Virginia Thomas (Clarence’s spouse) had the nerve to publicly demand that Hill apologize for letting the world know about his awkward-bordering-on-tacky sense of humor

Are we going to get similar demands in the future of the women who now are coming forth to tell their stories of back when they knew Brett Kavanaugh?

While it may be true that his behavior as a young man wasn’t much different from other males, it really doesn’t excuse him. And the fact that we already have Thomas on the high court doesn’t mean we need to have another boor to keep him company!

  -30-

Immigration detention center project won’t die; just going further south

It seems the powers that be who want to build a jail-like facility for people awaiting hearings on immigration violations (and possible deportation from the United States) are not about to give up.

Will these types of activists express their objections ...

Their plans to build such a facility somewhere in the Chicago metropolitan area to accommodate immigration violators in the Midwestern U.S. are cropping up again.

ONLY NOW, THEY’VE moved not only across the state line to Indiana, but south to Newton County – a place so far south that I’m sure the locals who live there would seriously resent any claim that they’re part of the Chicago area (Wikipedia says they are).

It’s a fairly isolated place with lots of open space, which means it might be possible to build the desired facility in a place where it would have little interaction with the real world – just like more conventional prison facilities.

Perhaps this is what the project’s backers feel is necessary to get away from the objections that have constantly arisen all the other opportunities that this has come up for discussion.

Personally, I remember back when the powers-that-be wanted to build such a facility just outside of Joliet. When locals objected, talks shifted toward building it just south of Crete (which is roughly the southernmost suburb of Chicago) not far from the now-defunct Balmoral Racecourse.

ALL THE HOSTILITY toward the project caused Crete officials to back away, which caused the project’s supporters to shift over the state line into Indiana and there was some consideration to building it in Gary not far from the Gary/Chicago International Airport.

Concerns about the airport’s flight patterns being a potential security risk for a detention facility, along with the outspoken immigration activists who have followed this project everywhere it has gone, caused Gary municipal officials to give up their support for the idea.

... so far distant from Chicago?

Now, it seems the supporters of a detention center have found a place about 65 miles away from Chicago (about as far south as Kankakee) where they hope there will be a lack of opposition to the idea of locking up people who may only be caught up in the immigration bureaucracy because they got pulled over for a traffic violation – and some eager cop was willing to notify immigration to “take ‘em away.”

As the talks proceed toward whether to build such a facility in Newton County -- a place whose total population (just under 14,000) is less than most suburbs. I’ll be curious to see how many of the activist-types will continue to follow this project.

BECAUSE SOME OF the objectors are people with an interest in our nation’s immigration policy, and they have followed it from municipality to municipality.

From Joliet to Crete to Gary, Ind., will they now show up in Kentland (the county seat) to let their objections be known. Or will they figure they’ve pushed this proposed facility far out enough into the “middle of nowhere” that they can live with its existence “somewhere else.”

I’ve heard the arguments on all sides, with the objectors hating the idea of detaining people while the immigration violations are pending. While supporters either aren’t bothered with their incarceration, or they’ll argue that these facilities aren’t really prisons.

Some may even argue that the current status of these violators would improve if they weren’t held in traditional jail conditions (many are sent to the McHenry County Jail in Woodstock, which has a contract with the federal government to detain such people).

PERSONALLY, I’M MOST concerned with the fact that these detention facilities are run by private companies, rather than by a government entity like the federal Bureau of Prisons. Meaning many of the regulations meant to protect the rights of inmates in the federal system do not apply. This particular facility would be built by GEO Group of Boca Raton, Fla.

I don’t doubt that in this Age of Trump that we’re now in, there are some who aren’t bothered by that thought. But we should be. Our “rights” are only as safe as the most vulnerable in our society.

And it may well be that among the most vulnerable are those people whose immigration status is unclear – particularly since there are those who enjoy being able to harass such individuals to make up for the short-comings in their own lives.

So has this project moved far enough away from Chicago that the locals will be willing to tell its objections to “stuff it!” or will the objectors (a combination of religious folks and Latino activists) continue to push to where it eventually becomes an Indianapolis issue, rather than Chicago?

  -30-

Chicago and Illinois back efforts to thwart count of citizens, not all people

It shouldn’t come as a shock that Chicago municipal and Illinois state governments are officially joining in a lawsuit filed in New York challenging the federal government’s attempt to gain an official count of citizens, rather than all people, when the next Census Bureau population count is done in 2020.

Emanuel fighting against proposed Census change, ...

For all the rancid rhetoric spewed by President Donald Trump against Chicago, it would only be natural that we’re going to be mistrustful of anything the “Twit who Tweets” tries to do.

WHILE I’M SURE that in Trump’s mind, the whole world is supposed to keep quiet and take whatever abuse he feels like dishing out, in the real world, people tend to fight back.

With real people usually siding against the bully who tries to push people around. I  couldn't help but notice that even the Republican candidate for attorney general, Erika Harold, is speaking out against Trump on this issue -- that's how bad an idea it is.

So we now have lawyers from Chicago city and the Illinois attorney general’s office cooperating with the lawsuit, which says the desire by Trump to have the Census Bureau add a question about everybody’s citizenship status is little more than a cheap trick to get certain types of people to avoid participating

Which would result in their being under-counted and would mean certain regions of this nation where the locals are more Trump-friendly would wind up gaining more influence.

... as is Lisa Madigan

BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, the Census population count is a very significant action that determines how government allocates its resources.

I’m sure the Trump-types think that anything given to anybody else is a resource wasted.

Personally, I view the idea of a citizenship count as wasted effort, because the Census is supposed to be a count of how many PEOPLE are actually living here. In a sense, citizenship is an irrelevant issue,

Now I have heard some individuals say they fear that marking “no” on a form asking “Are you a U.S. citizen?” will result in the federal government focusing more attention on them.

SOME FEAR THE Census Bureau will wind up notifying Immigration and Customs Enforcement about their existence – and the end result will be more harassment.

Trump would prefer sycophants in charge

I’m not so sure I see that, since the Census already asks people to indicate their ethnicity and race (I always mark down that I am of Mexican-ethnic origins – both of my grandfathers were born there, along with one of my grandmothers).

Technically, that could open me up to official harassment from the federal government, since I don’t doubt there are some people in positions of authority stupid enough to think that all Mexicans, if not all Latinos, or anything even remotely ethnic ought to be illegal – and that the ones who have citizenship are somehow taking advantage of a “loophole” in the law.

Even though U.S. citizenship itself is really little more than an accident of birth. It’s certainly not a mark of an individual’s superiority in any way.

BUT THE TRUMP-types don’t want to view life and our society that way, which is why we get such nonsense-talk about making an issue of citizenship and the Census.

So bad an idea not even Harold can back it

Which is likely to create yet another drawn-out legal battle; one that could last for months – if not years.

The ideologues talk about the need to “protect voters” and ensure that the Voting Rights Act is being complied with. Although their view of following the law usually amounts to thinking that only certain individuals ought to have a right to cast ballots – as in the ones who will use them to support the “right” candidates.

Which, to me, sounds like such an un-American ideal. All the more reason we Chicagoans ought to feel pride that our officials are on the proper side, and we can only hope their lawsuit ends successfully, just as other legal initiatives that have thwarted Trump desires to end sanctuary cities and to cut off their federal funding.

  -30-