SPRINGFIELD AGAIN DISCUSSING CAMPAIGN FINANCE LIMITS: LIMITING MONEY IS LIMITING SPEECH

Bunch of do-gooders in Springfield have proposed campaign contribution limits saying that Illinois is "one of only four states" which don't cap campaign contributions. Well, good. That means Illinois is one of the only states that continues to believe in free speech.

Don't mistake transparency for amount. I think any significant contribution should be reported and available to the public. I think with modern drill-down technology there's really no reason that anonymous political committees can't be more transparent. But, when you talk about limiting how a citizen chooses to apply his wealth, or his time or his car or his shoe leather to get involved in politics, we part company. There is not material difference between how an individual giving his or her time and giving his or her money. Usually, our money is a product of our time and talents. Who's to say that we can give away our time and talent to support a candidate, but we can't give away the result of that time and talent? If one is unconstitutional or at least repressive, then so's the other.

Wanna talk about lowering the disclosure amount? You've got my attention. Wanna talk about excluding corporations from the process (Such as the Parking Deck that gives my republican friends so much heartburn)? We can talk? Care to make candidates file a more detailed disclosure of their possible conflicts of interest? Go for it. Most of the time my heart is with the do-gooders (Hell, even as we speak, I'm punching around on the calculator, trying to figure out my carbon footprint. I think it's 11W). But, when a human being in Illinois wants to give away after-tax money to promote a candidate he or she believes in, that is behavior to be encouraged, not banned. We want people to take an interest in government but we want to limit their ability to do that with something they earned and own? How does that promote citizen participation? How does that improve anything? It sounds like class warfare to me. Cheesy tactic by either side.

BLAGOJEVICH'S GROTESQUE RECEIPTS TAX DOG AND PONY SHOW: DOA

I had to laugh when the GRT traveling salvation show came to town to "explain" to business how great the GRT would be for, well......., just EVERYBODY.

As dog and pony shows go, the dog was dead and the pony only knew one trick.

Now we get to see this thing play through the legislative process. It's like watching a train wreck in slo-mo. Partisanship is playing almost no role, the layers are being peeled back like on a ripe tangerine. Interesting that the first public bolts are Democrat hispanics. I guess that's because that community has always had an entrepenurial side.

Anyway, it makes one wonder what the exit strategy is. I'm guessing just say "I tried" and retreat to the bunker.

Ya think maybe this country has too many chief executives in bunkers and bubbles right now. These guys need a designated naysayer who will tell the emperor he's got on no clothes. I guess I won't hold my breath. How'd that work out for Colin Powell?