Restricting or Banishing the TLM Doesn't Make Those Take TC To A Whole New Level Look Good.

The TLM is a minority in the States and therefore in every diocese. This is the simple reason why I don't take seriously the "trads are doing all sorts of mean things to undermine the Pope and the Catholic community!" Most likely the average Catholic attends an NO parish and has never been to a Latin mass let alone heard of it, especially if they're under the age of 50. This is why I'm skeptical of those who magically appear on the internet saying "Well I came across a trads who said X and Y and did Z that turned me off." Sure, I bet you did. Or you never did - at all. Stuff that never happened. You'd have to actively seek out a TLM and a more conservative Catholic group if you really wanna come across and weird stuff. 

The banning of TLM in the Diocese of Savannah is literally stupid. Literally. So, if true, that Cardinal Cupich is kicking out ICKSP whose headquarters is located in Chicago, out of the Diocese of Chicago, then that's even more stupid. This is after he allowed St. John Cantius to conintue their offering of the TLM.

Facebook "Fun"

I was on Facebook and saw a post about a man named Tony Perkins. Here's the link to the entire article that was posted. The headline reads "Guy who says God sends natural disasters to punish gays has his home destroyed in a natural disaster." I never heard of Perkins before; apparently he's the head of Family Research Center, a conservative Christian lobbying organization, that was accused of killing "thousands" of LGBT+, forcing them to commit suicide, as said in the comment section. Now I'm not sure which is more ridiculous, Perkins' supposed statement or that pro-"equality" people thinking the Family Research Center drove people suffering from same-sex attraction to take their own lives.

Either way, let's investigate if Perkins said what the article claims he said. According to snopes.com Perkins, back in 2015, was on a radio show where he and a pastor were talking about the recent Obergefell vs Hodges decision. The snopes article states -

That claim stems from a 3 October 2015 interview that Perkins did with Pastor Jonathan Cahn. While Cahn was actually the one who tied Hurricane Joaquin (which ravaged the Bahamas in October 2015) to what he said was God’s anger with the United States for legalizing gay marriage, Perkins mused (starting at around 13:15 into the podcast) that God may have been “trying to send us a message.”

Here's my attempt at a transcript at the 3:15 mark.

Jonathon: Well now we have the striking down of marriage, and I shared with you one of the key, really, flash points of judgement, is that before judgement comes there's an act of desecration and if anything was an act of desecration is to take the holy vessel of marriage, turn it against its purposes and that's what happened. And then it was celebrated by the sign of the rainbow - the rainbow is a holy vessel of God, that's a second desecration, and thirdly that night the White House becomes a desecration as it is lit up in the colors of the rainbow. I have to ask, the rainbow is about judgement, mercy, you know, and the covenant, and you know, the question is how much more can we do as a nation in the face of God to provoke judgement.

Tony: Yea, it's, it's ... All of these things are quite amazing once you look at them collectively. I'll just say this Jonathon, because I know that there are those, on the left, that like to mock these things. America has a history, our leaders actually - our presidents, our governors - when these things happened in nature, like hurricanes, all of these external events that put our nation at risk, there's a long line of historical tradition here where we, uh, not so much in recent years, but they have stepped up back and said is God trying to send us a message, and they have called upon the nation to pray and that's your emphasis here and the emphasis that we put forth is that just as in Jeremiah time God was willing to spare the children of Israel if they would simply repent, and turn back to him.

So while Tony did muse about God's anger in the form of natural disasters, the content of his words proves the headlines false. Tony Perkins never said that hurricanes are God's way to "punish gays" but are a sign to humanity for legalizing same-sex "marriage." In fact, neither did the Jonathon fellow say natural disasters were to punish homosexuals. Whether or not you think the way Jonathon does (who, by the way, has a history of interpreting worldly events like 9/11 and natural disasters as a sign of God's wrath) the headline is wrong. Unless you had an agenda, purposely twisting Perkins' words, or just were a lazy listener I don't see how one could accuse Perkins wishing death upon homosexuals. But the damage is done and people have liked the FB post. It's similar to Romney's 47% comment or Trump's remark about Mexicans and criminals - the left will twist and publish, the naive will believe anything that feeds their biases and prejudices.

As I scrolled up to the latest post of the person who linked this article, I noticed he posted that Mayor Rahm Emmanuel "banned" Trump (Rahm just declared  the city a "Trump-Free-Zone" ... Whatever that means) from Chicago because of Trump's decision on DACA (which is highly ironic once you think of it). So an American citizen, let alone the President, isn't "allowed" in a city within the country he governs, but illegals are. Totally not virtue signally at all. The post has many likes with one response yelling "I LOVE CHICAGO!" The kicker? This poster graduated in the top five of his class - actually, I think he was the valedictorian - who is now attending DePaul University, the university that went full-retard by allowing BLM protestors to intervene Milo Y.'s visit. A+ in naivety and stupidity.

So you're a Cubs fans and from Chicago, huh? Me too.

I'm a Cubs fan. My maternal grandfather watched the Cubs and with the help of my college roommates my Cubs fandom blossomed.

I can't say I didn't mind the club's losing ways before the Ricketts bought them and the hiring of Epstein. It was baseball and and as long as I could be at Wrigley Field watching the Cubs it made the pain of supporting a losing team all the more bearable. Baseball was Americana as cheerleaders and cast irons. I wanted to experience Americana and I did.

Now, it's pretty interesting to learn that every other person expressing their joy of the Lovable Losers Winners winning the World Series is "from Chicago" and a "life long Cubs fan." Oh really? How very interesting.

The fandom of the Cubs is wide reaching but I can't help but question the authenticity of these out-of-the-woodwork fans. Take this video for instance, taped at Joe's Brewery in Urbana, Illinois, where many Illinois students were celebrating the Cubbies' win.

How many are actual Cubs fans? Do they even know that there's another MLB team in Chicago called the White Sox? Trivia: What does "full count" mean? And you're from Chicago? What neighborhood?

Anyways, this all sounds petty and part of it is, but damn, it never bothered me before but since it's full-out Cubbie blue in the past few days I now understand the annoyance.

Fickle. Sensitive.

That's what I think of the people who are so disappointed with Ted Cruz when he said that Donald Trump helped create the atmosphere that happened at his Chicago rally. I'm also a little disturbed by people who said Trump had it coming (and yes, it seems like Trump lied - Chicago policemen have denied that he consulted them when cancelling the event, same with STL policemen).

There are two issues I have with the anti-Cruz and anti-Trump camps in this scenario. The first being those that support Cruz's words (anti-Trump people) by practicing the really sloppy and pathetic logic of "I'm free to attend a rally but that freedom doesn't mean I'm 'free' of not being attacked." What kind of stupid plebeian logic is that? The second are the fickle and sensitive kind (anti-Cruz people) who now resort to "Cruz is nothing to me" after he sorta threw Trump under the bus that Friday night. They then complain his whole support of the Constitution is now a farce. Puh-lease.

Look, Cruz and Trump are rivals. It's understandable why Cruz said what he said (even though I somewhat disagree). He's condemning Trump for his rude comments and arrogant words towards minorities and women in order to make himself look like the better person. Does that make me think less of him? Not really. I think it's a little sloppy thinking, less so than "I'm free to attend but not free to not get punched in the face."

Yes, Cruz should've said that the protesters were out-of-line. They were indeed rude and arrogant, being hypocritical towards Trump's own rudeness and arrogance. He should've called them fascists and punks. Whether or not Trump "deserved" his rally to be treated like that is neither here nor there; the protesters helped destroy free speech that night because they failed to "peaceably assemble." They assembled, they infiltrated the auditorium and then caused chaos.

I side with the people where there to hear Trump speak. They have every right to become angry, and in my eyes the people who acted like punks towards the supporters are closer to deserving spit and kicks. I don't like bullies, especially when they're in the form of The Left. You didn't see the KKK at Obama's 2012 rallies. You didn't see people on The Right constantly interrupting Obama's speeches when he ran for a second term.

The victims of that night weren't the protesters (the protesters are cowards and are overreacting, and I say that as a person who isn't white) or Trump. It was free speech, the city of Chicago and the people who came peacefully to hear Trump's words. I give no sympathy to Trump because I believe he bailed out of concern for his own safety, not the safety of the people who supported him, none to Cruz and absolutely no sympathy to the protesters.

Look to Illinois.

A QZ article notes that if political observers want to get an idea of the country's next president, look to Illinois. My comments are added below with emphasis in bold.

Critics say the US presidential primary system is disproportionately influenced by early voting contests in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The influence wielded by these races is little more than a happy accident. New Hampshire only lost its first-state-to-vote status in 1972, when a lack of hotel rooms in Des Moines forced Iowa officials to move their election to the front of the pack. Nevertheless, Iowans and New Hampshirites often set the tone for the rest of the primaries: elevating winners, bestowing momentum, and winnowing out the weakest campaigns.

This gives a small fraction of the US population an exorbitant amount of power in selecting the future commander-in-chief. And neither of these states are particularly reflective of the national electorate, socially or economically.

I believe this is the most insightful paragraph in the entire article.

But if you want a real understanding of what America likes in a president, look beyond Iowa and New Hampshire to the great state of Illinois.

Along with California and New York, Illinois almost always casts its 21 electoral votes for the Democratic candidate in general elections. That said, internally, Illinois is quite diverse. It recently elected a Republican governor, boasts one of the country’s most notable centrist Republican senators, and its state legislature bursts with conservative lawmakers—representing a constituency anchored in the agricultural south; far from bustling, blue Chicago.

Illinoisans have also selected the eventual party nominees every election year since 1988, when Democrats opted for their congressman, Paul Simon, over Massachusetts governor Michael Dukakis.

Illinois is also a microcosm of the nation. Quartz looked at the demographic data for all 50 US states and compared them to national averages. Illinois has by far the most in common with the country at large, according to 2014 census data:

Demographic data	US	IL
Median age (years)	37.4	37
% pop. between 20 and 34 years	20.6	20.7
% pop. aged 65+	13.7	13.2
% pop. that is female	50.8	50.9
Average household size	2.63 people	2.63 people
% men currently married	50.2	49.9
% women currently married	46.7	46.2
% families w/ children under 18	29.2	29.5
% pop. that are veterans	8.7	7.1
% pop. w/ a disability	12.3	10.6
% pop. that is foreign born	13.10	13.95
% pop. that speaks English at home	79.1	77.5
% pop. that is white	73.8	72.5
% pop. that is black	12.6	14.4
% pop. that is Hispanic/Latino	16.9	16.3
% pop. that is Asian	5	4.9
% pop. that is Native American	0.8	0.2
% pop. that IDs as “other race”	4.7	5.8
% pop. that is mixed-race	2.9	2.2
Unemployment rate	5.8	6.6
% workers employed by gov.	14.6	12.8
% workers in agriculture/nat. resources	2	1.1
Median household income	$53,482	$57,166
% households receiving Social Security	29.3	27
% households receiving food stamps/SNAP	13	12.5
% pop. health-insured	85.8	87.7
% pop. below poverty line	15.6	14.4
Median home value	$175,700	$175,500
Median gross apartment rent/month	$920	$903
% pop. w/ at least a BA	18.3	12.5
% pop. attending religious services weekly*	36	34

I will admit, how close these numbers are is rather fascinating if not a little creepy. I consider myself an amateur sociologist, and damn, this is some great social data.

Fewer Illinoisans receive Social Security and food stamp/SNAP benefits than the average American, and a smaller proportion live under the poverty line. That said, the unemployment rate is almost a full percentage point higher than the national average.

Points of particularly significant similarity include the median age, and percentages of adults aged between 20 and 34 years (major Bernie Sanders supporters) and 65 or older (Hillary Clinton’s camp). It’s also worth noting how startlingly parallel the racial demographics break down—Illinois’s African-American, Latino, Asian-American, and other minority communities are quite proportionate to their numbers nationwide.

In many ways, Illinois is a miniature version of America. A perfect RINO in Senator Kirk. Machine Politics. A bustling, sorta-Alpha city in Chicago, with small towns, farmland and small cities once you exit Chicagoland where religion is more important than said area, and where hunting game, guns and the American flag are done, carried and waved with support and reverence. Average state universities save for its flagship; top privates in U of C and Northwestern, with Notre Dame a stone throw away in South Bend, Indiana. Solid LACs as well. The state is also more interested in professional sports, with high school basketball rivaling Indiana's Hoosier passion. Out of all the cities, I do find Chicago a bit more libertarian than say NYC, LA and SF and bit more saner when it comes to liberalism (SF in just stupid liberal; NYC is corporate liberal; LA is debauch liberal). In terms of Seattle & Portland's coffee, Chicago has a growing scene of micro-breweries. Also Chicago is more of a tea city than a coffee city.

I'll also add that the electorate can be rather stupid, constantly voting (D) while complaining about political corruption. Every now and then they might get fed up enough, get some oxygen to their brain, and vote for someone not in the political system -- even if he's a white multi-millionaire in Bruce Rauner (a calmer, more cordial version of The Donald?). But vote for an actual conservative as Junior Senator? Leave that to Big 'Ol Texas. Illinois loves their RINOs for their upper chamber.

Protest to Power

As I write this, Missouri and Illinois are on their last legs for precinct reporting. In Missouri it's truly down to the wire for Cruz who is less than a percent from Trump's lead. In Chicago, Sanders has gained a sizeable since the start of today's voting. He has 48% of the votes while Clinton has approaching 51%. I find the latter group, Sanders and Clinton, to be a far more interesting battle.

Here's why. As the Salon article states -

Bernie Sanders’s political revolution blew into Chicago last week and smacked its embattled mayor upside the head. “I want to thank Rahm Emanuel for not endorsing me,” Sanders deadpanned at a rally outside the city on Friday, the same day that a huge crowd of activists shut down a Donald Trump event.

“I don’t want his endorsement!” Sanders told the crowd of supporters. “I don’t want the endorsement of a mayor who is shutting down school after school and firing teachers.”

In the Sander's rally I went to the "DNC establishment" is not well-liked by Sanders; he clearly threw Mayor Emmanuel under the bus, and those who supported him at the rally gave a good cheer. Chicago is the epitome of DNC establishment, afterall the city gave the country Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Let's not forget the infamous Daleys and the current mayor, Rahm Emmanuel. I'd even go and say that Chicago's politics is currently running this country aka machine politics.

As the article's headline, "The revolution vs. Rahm Emanuel: Why tomorrow’s Illinois primary could remake Chicago politic" a win for Sanders can send a clear message to Chicago's DNC party: Stop f_cking around with the CPD (Chicago Police Department). Sanders is the DNC as Trump is to the GOP (I'll add in Cruz as well). 

The slow downfall of Mayor Emmanuel is mainly due his handling of LaQuan McDonald's death. It seems as the days go by that Mayor Emmanuel helped protect the Chicago Police officer who shot him to death. With Ferguson, Baltimore and campus chaos like Yale's Halloween Costume Fiasco the BLM movement are yearning for heads to roll. It doesn't matter if it's President Obama's best buddy. 

Of course Jesus Garcia is hoping on the bandwagon to help get Mayor Emmanuel out of office so he can become mayor.

“It looks like the race has tightened up in Illinois,” chuckled Cook County Commissioner Jesús “Chuy” García, a progressive who last year failed to beat Emanuel after pushing him into the first runoff vote since Chicago switched to a nonpartisan system in 1995. “The impossible seems to be coming to true.”

The article goes on (bold mine)-

 Across the country, Sanders and Hillary Clinton have fought to attract young black voters amidst a year of raucous protests against police violence. Despite Clinton’s much-maligned history with tough-on-crime measures, she has managed to win overwhelming majorities in the South. But in Michigan, Sanders greatly improved his performance with black voters, fighting Clinton to a draw amongst those under 40. Last week, his campaign rolled out three new ads, featuring García’s endorsement, hammering Emanuel’s education policies, and highlighting his role in the city’s civil rights movement. In Chicago, Clinton’s allegiance with the mayor has provided Sanders with an unparalleled opportunity to attack 21st-century Clintonism as business-as-usual hostility toward the poor and people of color.

. . . .

The big local race is the Democratic primary for state’s attorney. Like most big city prosecutors, Alvarez had provoked little opposition while running an office soft on police misconduct and mercilessly bent on incarceration in a city where rampant gun violence often dominates criminal justice debates. But that all changed in November, when a video was released showing Police Officer Jason Van Dyke shoot Laquan McDonald, a black 17-year-old, 16 times as he walked away. It was only then, hours before the video’s release, that Alvarez charged Van Dyke with murder. Throngs of protesters took to the streets, demanding that Alvarez and Mayor Emanuel resign.
“It’s become primarily a referendum about Alvarez’s tenure in office and particularly her handing of police abuse cases,” says Dick Simpson, a professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Chicago. “And it’s quite clear that a majority of voters do not approve of her performance.”

Alvarez’s biggest threat is Kim Foxx, a former prosecutor who grew up in poverty, including years in the now demolished Cabrini-Green projects. Foxx pledges to crack down on police misconduct and get smart on crime by keeping low-level offenders out of the system. Donna More, a resident of wealthy Lincoln Park who has worked as a prosecutor and lawyer for casino companies, could play spoiler. She’s very unlikely to win, but hundreds of thousands of dollars in family money have put her ads on TV.

Both the Foxx and Sanders campaigns are testing the strength of a growing rainbow coalition on the city’s left, a coalition that brought Mayor Harold Washington to power in 1983 and then fell apart under Richard M. Daley. The public schools movement, and now the anti-police brutality campaign, has prompted its reemergence. Foxx, who is black, must win over Latino and white voters to win. Sanders must expand his appeal to blacks and Latinos. A win by either, and especially a win by both, would signal a sea change in local politics and bad news for Mayor Emanuel.

Last year, García was not the left’s first-choice candidate for mayor. Just as Sanders stepped forward after Senator Elizabeth Warren demurred, García announced his candidacy late in the game after teachers union head Karen Lewis was diagnosed with brain cancer.

Emanuel held him off with help from the city machine, wealthy whites and, critically, majority black wards. García had strong support from the Latino wards, along with white and black progressives. But at the time, widespread anger over school closures failed to translate into a multi-racial front with sufficient strength to win. Though García performed well with black voters, a majority of voters in majority black wards stuck with Emanuel. He benefited from an endorsement from President Obama, for whom he served as chief of staff; from mistrust between Mexican and black communities; and from Emanuel’s charge that his Mexican-American opponent was incompetent to manage the city’s huge financial mess, a charge that García says was geared to appeal to white prejudice.

In the world of García and race baiters, your opponent is appealing to white prejudice because he's concerned that you lack experience in budget/fundraising. Either García is just using the race card for political purposes or he's dead right serious. But not to worry, Mayor Emmanuel totally f_cked up by practicing old-school politics.

The McDonald video, however, has changed a lot. A close relationship with Obama might carry less weight today.

“I think that it’s a process,” says Jitu Brown, a community organizer from the heavily-black South Side neighborhood of Kenwood-Oakland. “There was a multiracial coalition that had worked together for years around education issues that really fortified Chuy’s campaign…What’s coming to the table now that wasn’t really involved in the process before” is “the voice of young black people.”

Foxx will likely receive widespread support in black wards, and Latino support for Alvarez, a Latina, is now in peril. García has endorsed Foxx, and called on Alvarez to resign last year after the McDonald video was released.

“The crisis in the criminal justice system has struck a cord with people, and now it’s not a question of voting for someone from their ethnic group,” says García, even though Alvarez “was the first woman” and “the first Latina” to serve as the county’s top prosecutor. “I have never been as optimistic about a truly diverse coalition coming together than I am now.” Which is not what he expected given his loss last year. “I think there’s a new level of awareness that we need to transcend some of Chicago’s patterns of racial block voting and go beyond those patterns into real multiracial, multiethnic, across faith coalitions.”

People don’t make history in conditions of their choosing, and Tuesday’s vote will show whether the left’s impressive organizing in Chicago has caught up with public sentiment rapidly shifting in its favor. The left in Chicago, as elsewhere, has been rushing to build up the organizing base and institutions necessary to translate public outrage into electoral power. The Chicago vote will likely be much closer than the Clinton camp anticipated. After years of defeat and in the streets, the left is ready to move from protest to power.

BLM movement is about to move from the streets to the political office. Watch out, Chicago. It doesn't get better.

“Win or lose, I think we’re in position now to be able to challenge corporate interests and beat corporate interests” in the coming years, including in the 2019 mayoral election, says Brown. “Win or lose there is a movement brewing. There definitely is.

 Bill Ayers must be patting himself on the back.

My Cruz & Sanders rally experience.

Yesterday I attended a rally in the suburbs of Chicago; to be exact I went to Glen Ellyn where a Ted Cruz rally was being held around noon. Last Friday I attended a Sanders rally. First, I will recall Cruz.

The following is what I experienced.

• Cruz likes his rallies, if they aren't held in a convention center, to be rather posh. This past Friday he was a guest speaker at Chicago's Palmer House. Tickets cost $$. I assume most at the Friday non-free event were mostly older than 40 and white. In my case the Glen Ellyn rally was free and was held in a nice wedding banquet hall. 
• Glen Ellyn would be considered an upper-middle suburb. About $90K per household. High $39K per capita.
• When I arrived the line wasn't long, just a bunch of people waiting outside the banquet doors. People were filling out "info cards" and were buying Cruz football jerseys ($45 each as opposed to $50 on his site).
• There was no one telling people to empty out their purses and bags. There was no security vetting the crowd. You simple had to walk in with a smile and present your ticket if you had one.
• People in my age bracket, millennials, weren't smoking like the Bernie Sanders crowd (which I will give a post later this week). They were mostly better dressed than the Sanders millennial crowd.
• Speaking of millennials being present - they were a minority. Most of the crowd that I've observed were on the older side, say 40 and up. To bring in race, many were white; some of Cruz's event helpers were Asian and black who were well-dressed. Very professional.
• As the banquet doors opened and people filed in, I was able to snag a seat near the press stage where the network cameras were to be set-up. I over heard an elderly woman saying to another to not take radiation because it causes cancer. "Don't let them [doctors] talk you into therapy you're unsure of." She was talking about mmograms because her doctor encouraged to take one for her left breast as well as her right. She didn't trust her.
• The event started only three minutes late. Cruz was on stage within 15 minutes after his introduction.
• A local conservative talk show host, Wheaton State Representative Jeanne Ives and a nearby black minister introduced Cruz. The talk show host talked about conservatism and Cruz's consistency as compared to Trump; Ives talked about her military sons and her trusting Cruz on being Commander of Chief (she, like her son Nick, is a West Point grad); the minister also talked about conservatism and religious life. 
• Before Cruz took the stage, the minister led the audience in saying the Pledge of Allegiance and a prayer. A lot of "Amen!"s were shouted when he asked the audience to pray.
• About halfway through Cruz's rally an animal rights activist interrupted. She and her partner in crime were escorted out.
• There was a huge "Trusted" backdrop in the other half of the banquet hall. People where getting their picture taken there afterwards.
• My placard was "stolen" underneath my seat. In quotes because I sorta let them have it - without my permission. The story goes as this: A group of ladies were searching for a placard for another, who was sitting right next to me, who asked where they got theirs. "Oh, there's one underneath that seat." That seat was mine. The entire rally she was waving it. Whatever. It's not like Cruz will get the (R) nomination let alone win Illinois since it'll be Trump for both. I remember getting a Romney placard and we all how 2012 turned out so I was a little hesitant to even actually want one. I gotta learn my lesson.
• I'll mention my peers again, though on a more superficial level. I will admit the females I saw were rather attractive. In fact, (R) women tend to be more attractive than (D) women for whatever reason, or at least the conservative side of campus liberalism and onward. *See: Emily Jashinky, Tomi Lahren, Katie Pavlich. 
 

The entire speech is below.

Onto my Sanders rally held at a suburban high school on the southwest side of Chicago. Summit is a low-middle community.

•  School buses transported people from the Toyota Park stadium to the school since there was limited parking due to the community being located in a rather blue-collar, old semi-urban area.
• During the bus ride a high school student, who later waited in line in front of me, could not believe that his friend of going to the Trump rally at UIC Pavilion. As he said, "He was drawing a stars and stripes on the poster. Then drew an eagle ... I said 'Why? Why support this man?' I couldn't believe it." 
• A fellow bus passenger was talking with a the mentioned student's group of friends, who noted that most of Trump supporters were white versus the ethnic diversity of Sanders supporters. She then proceeded to say that she was part Native American. The woman was white. Elizabeth Warren 2.0?
• Said woman encouraged the teenagers to go on youtube and compare Trump and Hitler speeches. "This is what his supporters are pushing," she proclaimed.
• It was cold, but not too cold outside. I waited for about an 1.5 hours to get into the high school. 
• The buses dropped off its passengers on the corner of Archer & 63rd St. From there we slowly crept forward with Sanders campaign volunteers telling us that no guns, knifes, or any weapons were allowed and to keep our cellphones on (to not be mistaken for a bomb). I said to mom who came with me "It seems like we're entering a CPS," with a chuckle. If Chicago decided to actually incorporate Summit then Argo High School would be a CPS (if you walk one block east towards Harlem Ave. you're in Chicago proper).
• There was a women was with a "Vegan Vote for Sanders" sign. 
• A few teenagers from DuPage County traveled to hear Sanders.
• Many of those who waited in line were youth; mainly 25 and under. I am not sure if many were Argo High School students.
• The people waiting were more ethnically diverse.
• A handful of people smoking. Many were dressed in a very "grunge, alternative" look. 
• The kids in front were rather peppy, excited about the possibility of Sanders becoming the DNC nomination if not POTUS.
• There was a Sanders bus (official) driving down 63rd getting the line cheering every now and then. A lot of honking by cars that passed.
• An anti-Monsanto chalk sign was present. The "Vegans Vote for Sanders" woman took a picture of it. 
• A lot of talk of Trump while waiting by the people behind me. There was no talk about Sanders facing Clinton. 
• When word got out that the Trump rally was cancelled the woman behind me, a UIC alumnus, gleefully expressed her feelings. "Yes! Yes! Get out of Chicago! We don't want you here! Welcome to Chicago and go back to NYC!" Since the story was breaking news to us, we did not know if there was violence - whether it was on Trump supporters or on the protesters. The UIC alumnus said, "Look how peaceful we are here!" (Note: it was the protesters that caused the cancellation and who were rowdy).
• Across the street of the high school there was a VFW where one man was standing holding a 3 Percenter Flag in silence. One crowd member thought aloud that he might be a Trump supporter. There were some vets in line waiting wearing NRA hats so who knows.
• Security was divided into two lines: bags & no bags. This was causing the line and making it look like there were more people than there were in reality.  Once we filed into our own security lines the process was painless.
• The inside track & field house was humid since everyone was conglomerated in one place with very little ventilation of cool air. There was one young woman who had to sit down because of overheating - the firefighters that were on scene assisted her.
• When compared to the people who introduced Cruz (more local), Sanders had more political prominent backers. Jesse Jackson's son and Jesús "Chuy" García - the sole rival for Mayor Rahm Emmanuel in last years mayoral race. 
• Sanders appeals to a much broader audience. Blacks, Hispanics, dope heads, naive college & high school kids, and Muslims. This comes to no surprise because of Sanders' promises e.g. free college & healthcare, "I like everyone," his dislike for billionaires (not just corporate billionaires). He's the new Obama for The Left. Hillary Clinton has become passe. 
• When Sanders mentioned war, Bush and Cheney, a couple of people in the crowd yelled "War criminals!"
• When speaking about "family values," and when he said "family values" he said it in a very mocking way, he mentioned how he supports single motherhood and a woman's "right" to choose, same-sex adoption and how people who didn't support same-sex unions weren't for "family values."
• Sanders made it clear that he'll use executive orders in order to get what he wants if Congress doesn't approve.
• Marijuana was brought up. Sanders said he would take MJ off the FDA paper as an illegal drug - the people really cheered. He said that he would let states decide to whether or not to make it legal. There was little cheer. 
• It comes to little surprise on why Argo High School was chosen: the surrounding community is a gold mine for (D)s and for politicians like Sanders. Near by Bridgeview has one of the largest Muslim communities. Southwest Chicago is home to mostly Hispanics, union workers and families that traditional voted (D). Since it has a large contingency of non-whites Sanders can pull in a lot of votes.

Sanders' full speech is below.

I have realized that Cruz and Sanders on the opposite side of the political spectrum, both in philosophy, upbringing and who supports them in terms of ethnic background.

Today in the newspaper it was said that Hillary Clinton was visiting the West Side of Chicago, speaking to union workers and visiting the Roseland community, a predominately black Chicago neighborhood for last minute votes. Inner city voter outreach is a  huge advantage to the (D)s. I do not remember Romney visiting places like Roseland on his Midwest campaign tour, and nowhere on Cruz's event page does it have inner city visits. Of course this is all a strategic plan: Get the votes where you know you can appeal.; every campaign is on a budget. The (D)s can travel almost anywhere. The (R)s are practically regulated to the suburbs and the farmland in most blue states.

*I'm fully aware that the listed women are all white, so for some ethnic diversity I will include Mia Love and Michelle Malkin, both who I think are pretty, not to mention older than those I originally listed and married as well. 

Chicago Archdiocese: Low priest numbers, possible church closings. And NCR.

The third largest Catholic archdiocese in the USA (after LA & NYC) is facing possible closings of multiple churches due to a lack of priests and building dilapidations reported by the Chicago Tribune. This is horrid news and I cannot but feel that the multiple closings are inevitable, as what happened to the NYC Archdiocese a few years ago. I will pray that some will be saved and that young men will be inspired to enter the vocation of priesthood. If there's a calling for employment and need, this is one area that really needs it. (Do you clergy show up as a national statistic as jobs?)

Now, I want to concentrate on the link. The link brings you to the National Catholic Reporter, not known as an orthodox or traditional Catholic news site. The mentality of the commentators in the comment box further proves that heretics are within the Church and if the patriarchy of the Church would just embrace "progress" the Church's health, the numbers of vocations and membership would increase, creating a more modern atmosphere and reflecting the makeup of America both in plurality, skin color and sexual orientation. This sounds mightily familiar.

Poster "AP" commented on the lack of diversity and supposed exclusion of almost every group that that Episcopalians

And most of us are moving toward progress and away from the past. Visioning church as: "inclusive and harmonious, respecting and appreciating diversity in all its forms as an asset in worship and community life" is a great theory. Means nothing until laity, clergy, bishops, archbishops, cardinals, all stand up for said diversity and insist on equal value in our church for women, LGBTQ, married priests, children, and people of color. Heartbreaking to lose what we had because the Catholic church cannot move into the new century.

Yea, how are the sects and congregations that put "social justice" and inclusion as their rallying cry look like? Not good. The US Episcopalian Church is in much worse shape, priest wise and membership wise. So go fuck yourself you may want to re-think that, AP.

Another poster, "Patricksday," said a lot of stuff but showed his true face near the end -

And when we heal our Hearts and Minds that have been damaged by misguided information from the Celibates of the Catholic Church we have the power and freedom to find healthy ways to connect with God and Jesus that do not torture us and reject us. The Catholic Church management believes God makes junk and its up to them to make us "perfect" as they view it. God who Loved us so much to craft us each uniquely to bring Joy, Peace, Laughter and Happiness to a dark world, the Church would rather have us be lowly down trotten victims, attending morbid boring repetitive services, with people who cant even extend the sign of Peace with each other, because of the lack of Joy the Catholic Faith seems to bring to their lives. The Catholic Bishops who find joy lost in the past that no longer exists for the majority of Humanity are bringing this tired old relic down by them self and are doing a fine job of it, Jesus would be proud! We will have Peace on Earth and Humanity is coming together to make that happen, sadly the Roman Catholic Church is not leading the way, its lost in the past that no longer exists. Pope Francis has made an effort, but all the people put in place by John Paul and Benedict had their own back to basics plan with Nuns in full habit, couture gowns, gloves hats, slippers and arrogance one would expect. Thankfully that plan serves the smaller fanatical Catholic Church that is being formed in limited locations[.]

Blah blah blah spirituality blah blah blah look a squirrel blah blah blah archaic traditions & rules blah blah blah Jebus blah blah blah dressing in full habits is for the small group of fanatics.

Hmmm. I believe that the full habit orders are actually increasing, slowly, while the orders who embrace modern dress are not seeing such growth. In fact, seeing nuns in full habit have inspired young women to consider cloistered life as a serious possibility.

JV winter team

When people in DC freak out about the upcoming winter vortex that's going to hit them and they think they got "winter cred" ... Psshhh. Try to survive Chiberia.

EDIT: In the DC metro, some did not mind the snow.

A small group of soldiers will brave this weekend's historic snowstorm to stand guard at the Tomb of the Unknowns at Arlington National Cemetery. 

"These guys will be out in the snow, no matter what," said Major Russell Fox, a spokesman for the Army's Old Guard, according to ABC News. 

Tomb Sentinels from the Army's 3rd Infantry Regiment's Old Guard have guarded the memorial — regardless of the weather — for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year since April 6, 1948, ABC reported. 

"A lot of the guys are looking forward to this [storm] and kind of excited about it," Fox added.

Fox said the soldiers will be shoveling snow from the plaza so it will not impede their duty.

How come I'm not enthusiastic about this?

Obama library to be built in Chicago's South Side.

The article raises the question on what it means for the area. Whatever it means is completely secondary to what happens in the South Side: gang violence which results in shootings and deaths. What can the library do to lessen the high STD rates among the blacks on the South Side? What can it do lessen the deaths by gun bullets? What can it do to renovate the city's Detroit-like neighborhoods?

The Barack Obama Presidential Center is projected to bring $600 million in economic development to the neighborhood, eliciting a mixture of hope and anxiety from neighborhood residents. Hope springs from the prospect of greater business opportunities, lower crime, and a nicer streetscape. Anxiety comes from the possibility of gentrification, in which current residents can be effectively forced out and the mom-and-pop shops that have persevered for decades are replaced by chains.

We'll how the area develops.

It's a good a thing I like libraries and museums.

A note to conservatives commenting on Chicago

PG-13 for crude language.

Old-time conservatives when commenting on Chicago need to stop being so ignorant. I know that's a word that's thrown at non-progressives all the time, but I think in this case it's appropriate.

I am not apologizing for the city of Chicago's crime rate and gang wars, but if you want to "prove" that Democratic governance is horrid every time the city is mentioned, in whatever way, then at least drop the headlines that you receive in your local newspapers or whatever - most likely immensely inaccurate - ideas you have about crime in the city.

The "Chiraq" call is effective when commenting on the shootings, when acknowledging that there is a problem in Chicago, but on the South Side. But it stops there when conservatives or when outsiders use it. Why? If you want to get into the particulars a lot of the shooting happen in select low-income neighborhoods whose residents are black. Derrick Rose lived in Englewood which is a neighborhood known for its gang wars and crime. Ben Wilson aka Benji was shot to death in the South Side neighborhood of Chatham even thought Chatham is considered more of a "safe" neighborhood when compared to the likes of Englewood.

Most of the North Side of Chicago and Southwest Side are relatively safe. The West Side is the South Side Light, but like its "heavier" half most of the crime happens in certain neighborhoods - in certain streets/pockets/zones. What demographic tends to dominate the West Side? Latinos. Most of the North Side is white while the Southwest Side is a mixture of white (ie Polish immigrants) and family oriented Latinos. 

Many of the conservatives who comment on Chicago and its crime fail to acknowledge, or simply they succumb to laziness and generalizations, that a couple of the occurring facts that fail to make the headlines: Many of the shootings are located in neighborhoods on South Side which are dominated by black residents. The problem isn't the city itself, but the culture that pervades the South Side in these neighborhoods plagued by gang wars and ghetto mamas.

It's the culture, stupid!

When old-time conservatives complain about the MSM fooling America, they are fooled as well since Chicago crime fits right into the (true) narrative that ghetto culture ruins family and potential which is pushed by the right (and 'rightfully' so).

The irony of shot-gun feelings. No pun.