Would Trump military parade merely honor the REMFs of the world?

I find it somewhat odd that President Donald J. Trump would be taking inspiration from France and Bastille Day for a way to put on a great big spectacle ultimately paying tribute to himself.

This is what inspired Donald Trump to think of a military parade in the streets of D.C.

For the storming of the Bastille, which led to the ultimate overthrow of King Louis XVI, was literally a moment when the peasants of France overthrew their wealthy royal nobleman of a leader who actually supported the concept of American independence – someone who along with Marie Antoinette were most definitely not of the people.

YOU’D THINK THAT even Trump would realize that he’s the comparative figure to Louis (with first lady Melania being the equivalent of the alleged “cake eating” lady). The comparable move would be if the masses of this country (the majority of whom didn’t vote for him) were to get fed up enough to violently overthrow him.

Is that really the image Trump wants to put in the public mindset? Besides, I thought the Trump-types were the ones who openly denounced anything associated with France?

Somebody’s not thinking this all the way through. But as Trump himself said, he saw the big Bastille Day parade last year in France, saw the grand martial display of power and authority, and wishes he could have something similar to pay tribute to himself.

How Trumpian is the image of old ...

Which has led to countless numbers of people using their Photoshop software to create all kinds of goofy images portraying Trump as some sort of equivalent of the late Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet.

WHICH WOULD BE the closest you’d find to photographic images of Trump in a military uniform – for as so many have pointed out, he was of military age during the Vietnam War era, yet managed to avoid doing any sort of military service.

Heck, even George W. Bush could claim to have been in the Texas Air National Guard (although some insist he didn’t even fulfill the minimum service requirements) back in that era.

Not that I expect the ideologues who claim to value military service to mind so much – maybe they can be bought off by the image of a military parade. Forget about a Trump presidency actually accomplishing anything significant or meeting any of its promises.

... of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette?

You got a great big garish parade!!!

IF YOU’VE GOT the impression by now that I don’t think much of the idea of a parade, you’d be correct.

It’s actually mostly because I don’t really care much for parades in general. There are more sincere ways to pay tribute to someone than to stage a grand spectacle clogging the streets of the city, while expecting the masses to stand passively by.

I think those who serve in the military deserve more than a parade whose real purpose would be to pay tribute to the man with the bad combover whom many (including my sister-in-law, Vicki) refer to as the “big cheetoh.”

Perhaps it’s because I remember the two big military spectacles in Chicago during my adult life – back in 1986 and 1991. The latter was a series of parades held across the country to pay tribute to those who were in the military (including a cousin of mine) during the Gulf War of 1990.

Is this Trump's image of himself?

REMEMBER WHEN WE were foolish enough to have thought we resolved all the disarray and chaos of the Middle East in a matter of two months in Kuwait?

The former was when some types of people felt the need to finally put an end to the Vietnam era by staging parades welcoming back the troops who were so callously ignored when they really returned home more than a decade earlier.

I still remember watching that parade, and being told by veterans who actually saw combat that the crowds of former soldiers on display here were most likely the “REMFs” who never even came close to the front lines of fighting (figure out the obscenity for yourself). Is that what we’re most likely to see from a military spectacle in this Age of Trump?

DUCKWORTH: Most accurate?

If that’s the case, then perhaps Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., is correct with her latest fund-raising e-mail, in which she says troops, “don’t need a show of bravado. They need steady leadership. They need long term funding.” And if they don’t get it, perhaps someday the masses will be offended enough to revolt in a Bastille-style image against Trump Tower buildings around the country. That would be gory.

  -30-

Where would we be today on Vietnam?

The Vietnam War documentary on PBS ending Thursday night has had many intriguing moments through its 10 parts, but I have to admit the moment that will stick in my mind was one bit that aired Tuesday night.

The downtown Chicago memorial to the U.S. military conflict in Vietnam, just off the Chicago River. Photographs provided by Gregory Tejeda

The moment was some footage of a woman, Jan Howard of Nashville, Tenn., whose son, Jimmy, had served in the Army and been killed in combat. Anti-war activists approached her, asking for her support of their cause – figuring that she’d be grief-stricken and they could claim her son’s death was pointless.

HER REACTION, IN the video snippets, was to tell the activists that her son may have died to support their right to protest, but that she’d shoot them dead if they ever approached her again.

Why do I suspect that in this Age of Trump, there were probably some people who viewed the two-week-long documentary who cheered that woman on – and probably wish that she could turn her ire on the ballplayers who now are protesting racial issues as part of sporting events.

In some ways, we need to comprehend the societal split we endured some 50 years ago – back in the days when a large segment of the populace decided our government officials could no longer be trusted to be truthful or honorable in their conduct because of what happened in Vietnam.

One of few spots where S. Vietnam flag still flies

Because much of the societal split we now have dates back to those days. The “hawks” of the ‘60s are now the grandparents of many of the modern-day types who are touting the rancid rhetoric of President Donald J. Trump – whom they see as leading an effort to take back U.S. society from the “doves” who opposed the war all those years ago.

THEY’RE THE BASIS of the “red” states of America, although I suspect if you had told that woman she was a “red,” she really would have pulled out that pistol and fired. She ain’t no “Commie,” she’d claim.

What always intrigues me about the societal split is the way that the divide plays out.

In the years after the war, the “right” was determined to believe that the “hippie freaks” LOST. That anybody who had ever opposed U.S. military involvement in Vietnam was permanently discredited – a stain that only the passage of time would wash away. The election of Ronald Reagan as president, followed up by the elder George Bush, reinforced that thought.

No dog poop in Chicago's Vietnam memorial

Which is why I always felt that Bill Clinton (and his mouthy bride Hillary) was despised so much by the right. If their theory were true, neither one of them should ever have had a life in the public eye. Yet Bill Clinton gained the presidency, while Hillary had a quarter of a century in the public eye, and came dangerously close (in their eyes) to winning the White House as well.

THE FACT THAT we got a Barack Obama presidency in the mix only further reinforces the notion that the left-leaning individuals of back then are not tainted for life – and in fact have left their mark on our society for the better. A reality that the Trumpites of our time wish they could undo.

Chicago relics of the Vietnam era

When U.S military interests pulled out of Vietnam in 1973, the hopes were that a split status would evolve – a North Vietnam of Communist leanings and a South Vietnam allied with the western world. Similar to what became of the two Koreas. It didn’t happen – the North stormed its way in and took the South two years later.

Although I have to admit that such a notion of a split Vietnam continuing to this day carries a bit of scariness. If you think about it, would we really want a North Korea-like nation in existence – one that would be all too eager to ally itself with Kim Jong Un’s constant threats to resume the Korean War of the early 1950s against the United States?

Which may be a “fight” that the “right” may be yearning for – a chance to undo a military stalemate and turn it into a “win!” Even though sane people have more sensible things to focus attention on.

NOW I DON’T know how all this would play out, if it were to happen. Much of the reason the anti-war movement became so intense was because of the practical fear of many to not want to get killed in combat. Maybe they had enough going for themselves in life that they wouldn’t view the thought of a medal awarded posthumously as a worthy accomplishment.

Nowadays, we have a volunteer military that makes it likely that everybody in service feels they’re gaining something of benefit to themselves. I don’t see the uprisings – except perhaps from the “right” who wish they could create John Wayne-like images for a modern-day military conflict.

PBS shows Howard still upset w/ anti-war movement

USA Today recently had a graphic on their website explaining the concept of the draft lottery that used to exist, and let people see for themselves how likely they would have been to be called to duty – in my case, my birthday was number 11 in the lottery, which means I would have had to scramble for a worthy excuse for a deferment to avoid active duty. Of course, I was only 5 back in 1970 – nobody called on me in reality.

But in my family’s case, I have two uncles who served in the military during Vietnam – one volunteered for the Marine Corps while another was drafted into the Army. Both saw their share of combat activity, but managed to come back in one physical piece – an accomplishment that I’m sure Howard would have wished for her son.

  -30-

Memorial Day; ‘yea’ or ‘nae’ for those who do their military service?

I never served in any branch of the military; that fact doesn’t make me the least bit unique.

How many will gather at Chicago's Vietnam Vets' memorial? How many even know it exists? Photographs by Gregory Tejeda

There are many who for whatever reason manage to avoid a stint in the Army or any other military organization, and certainly don’t think our lives are any less complete as a result.

OF COURSE, THERE also are those in our society who made a point of enlisting the first chance they got, and wind up thinking of their time in uniform and being among those who “serve their country” as the high point of their lives!

Some even come away with thinking their military record entitles them to prime treatment for the remainder of their lives.

We have a serious schism in our society; often viewing various issues quite differently. And not just a matter of whether we think Donald Trump is a “great American” or a “pompous fool” totally unfit to be carrying the title of Commander-in-Chief of our nation’s military!

That split includes how essential we think it is that one have a military service record as part of their permanent record, or how much "lip service" they pay to the concept -- I attended a Catholic mass that included a musical tribute to the armed services in its choir's Sunday program; and while many were eager to support the idea, only a tiny minority of the congregation admitted to actually having served. Which gets down to the essence of the direction we think our society ought to be headed.

No dogs allowed?

THERE ARE THOSE people who will say that one reason, if not the primary reason, that Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were unfit to be president is because they never served in the military (and in the case of Clinton used many of the legal maneuvers people of that era engaged in to avoid a call-up to active duty).

Some of an older generation remember back to the military draft, and think that forcing people of various economic and social classes to interact helped ease the societal split that now exists.

Posters or helmet -- which is 'your' side?

Although others, including those who managed to avoid military service, would argue that the very concept of having done a stretch in the military puts a person into a mindset that makes them too narrow and unfit to address the serious problems confronting our nation, and our world.

Perhaps we all ought to be engaged in something more than blind faith in forcing esoteric concepts of what one wants to define as patriotism by a trip out to the cemetery to pay tribute to someone who was unfortunate to have lost their life during their military service.

SOME OF US like to talk about the “ultimate sacrifice” those young men made, I’m sure many of them could have contributed something equally worthwhile to society had they had a chance at a long- and full-life.

While many of those who these days do enlist in the military often do so because their options in life are limited; and that military stretch may be their best option for preparing for an adult life.

I remember in my own case, my mother would have been appalled if I had seriously talked about enlisting. I remember when Army recruiters sniffed around me when I was 16 and in high school, she gave them the cold shoulder.

In my case, that probably was a wise direction. I did make the most of a college education, and it stirred me in the right direction toward what I wanted to do (yes, I actually figured out as far back as age 13 that I wanted to be a reporter-type person). I resisted the Army’s marketing pleas to “be all you can be.”

WHILE I HAD cousins who did stints of military service, and it helped them come up with the funds to pay for future education options they took on or taught them some skills used later in life. It worked out well for them, and I’m sure for many of the individuals who have done military service.

Easier to eulogize past conflicts?

My point in stating all this is that I’m not about to hold it over anybody’s head that I didn’t have to use the military to get ahead in life. Meaning I’m not about to defer to those who want to act as though the fact that they did a stretch in uniform somehow makes them superior.

I actually find such an attitude to be arrogant and unfit for anyone to have in our society. Particularly because it places a view that one can claim superiority for doing something that may well have been their only realistic option in life.

And on this Memorial Day when we pay tribute to the contributions of military personnel throughout our history, perhaps I should even throw in that having such an attitude perhaps even qualifies as un-American!

  -30-

What constitutes a “real” American? That’s the question we must answer

Does this bobblehead have more sense?

The latest controversy absorbing the attention of the Donald Trump campaign doesn’t surprise me in the least – the fact that he would rudely attack a Muslim couple and downplay the sacrifice their son made while serving in the U.S. military is way too predictable.

The fact that some Republican political officials are now feeling inclined to bad-mouth Trump and claim he ought to be apologetic is not only going to fail to warrant an apology, it is likely to offend the mentality of Trump backers.

IT MAY WIND up being used as further evidence by those people of how the Republican Party is out of touch with what they feel about this country.

And I don’t doubt that Trump himself is garnering some form of emotional strength from being criticized publicly on this issue. It may well be the perfect example of how differently from the masses the Trump-types are in viewing the world.

At stake is the activity of the past few days centering around Khizr Khan and his wife, whose son Humayun, was killed in action while serving in the Army.

The couple was used by Democrats during last week’s presidential nominating convention to show an example of an Islamic family making the same ultimate sacrifice of losing a family member to military service as many other families in this country have done.

 

How many bothered by front page photo?

IT WAS SUPPOSED to be an example of how nonsensical so much of Trump’s anti-Islamic rhetoric during his presidential campaign has been.

Trump, if he had any political sense, or compassion of any kind, would have let it go. The Khans would have had their convention moment on national television, and most likely would already have been forgotten.

But Trump is Trump. He felt compelled to respond with ridicule of the couple, which caused Khizr Khan to retort with comments about how lacking in humanity or a soul Trump truly is.

It seems that Khan has captured the sentiment of many people – as there are many Republican operatives who wish Trump would just shut up. After all, GOP candidates don’t usually go about criticizing military personnel or their families.

THIS IS EVEN an issue that has brought together Illinois’ two candidates for a U.S. Senate seat – both Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., and Democratic challenger Tammy Duckworth made a point on Monday of seeing who could come out and publicly bash Trump the hardest.

The long-time Naval Reserve officer in Kirk and one-time Army helicopter pilot in Duckworth both wanted it known they thought Trump would make a completely unfit Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. military if he actually won the presidential election.

Did Mark Kirk repudiate Trump thoroughly,...

And not just because of the draft deferments he got some five decades ago that kept him from ever having to serve in the military during the Vietnam War – I’ll give Trump the benefit of the doubt and accept that he really had bone spurs in his heels that would have made him physically unfit for military service, even though he also has boasted that the Philadelphia Phillies expressed some interest in him playing baseball professionally when he was a teenager.

But I don’t think Trump will be swayed by any of this. Maybe not even the fact that his vice presidential running mate, Mike Pence, says he wishes Trump had kept quiet about this. Because I’m sure there are people who perceive individuals like the Khans as somehow not deserving of the ability to think of themselves as being part of this nation.

... or did Tammy Duckworth top him?

THEY PROBABLY VIEW the sacrifice of Humayun Khan as being less than significant. In fact, much of the “meat” of their political philosophy is a serious debate over who deserves to be able to think of themselves as belonging in this country to begin with! What with all their rhetoric about deportation and exclusion of certain individuals who aren't Anglo enough for their tastes!

It wouldn’t surprise me if they see that Chicago Tribune front page on Tuesday with a full-color photograph of Khan’s headstone, and are offended that a military headstone would bear the star and crescent symbol of Islam where they think the Christian cross ought to be.

A lot of things that reflect the reality of modern-day society offend them, and they perceive this presidential campaign as a conflict to restore the old order of things. That is something that the bulk of us ought to keep in mind when we ponder our own thoughts about whether we should have Hillary or Donald in the Oval Office.

Do we really “make America great” by returning to many of the nonsensical hang-ups we had in the 19^th Century; or come full around and accept the realities of where we are in the 21^st?

  -30-

Who deserves the political blows in upcoming Tammy Duckworth trial?

It has become the legal case that only political geeks will care about. Many of whom probably couldn’t tell you where Union County, Ill., is located without checking first on a map.

DUCKWORTH: Legal trial? Or political witch hunt?

I’m talking about the lawsuit currently pending against Democratic Senate nominee Tammy Duckworth because of some of her actions from back in the days when she was head of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs.

DUCKWORTH, HERSELF A veteran of the early 1990s version of a Gulf War who lost her legs as a result, has in the past been criticized for that part of her record. After all, it was then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich who picked her. So she has to be tainted; to listen to her political critics.

Most of whom object to her primarily because as a military-oriented person, they think she ought to be opposed to Democrats, rather than identifying with them.

In this particular case pending in the rural Southern Illinois county where Cape Girardeau, Mo., is the largest major city nearby, two former employees of the Anna Veterans Home claim they were punished on the job as retaliation for their personal politics.

The lower courts had previously rejected this lawsuit, but politically-motivated ideologues have been more than willing to do what they can to revive it. Which means the Illinois attorney general's office is required to continue to fight against it, and tax dollars continue to be spent on it.

AS THOUGH THE thought of the continued existence of a pending lawsuit is more important than actually trying to resolve the situation involving these two workers.

After all, what else can they use to beat Duckworth symbolically over the head with if not the image of a lawsuit claiming she mistreated military veterans?

Now I don’t know personally the specifics of the cases involving these two workers. I’m influenced heavily by the fact that it has lingered through the legal system for so long that it has become old and moldy.

So I found it interesting that the Chicago Tribune reported that the judge involved in the case, Mark Boie, wants the sides to come together for a pretrial conference out of hopes all the sides can come to an agreement and settle the case out-of-court.

IN SHORT, TURNING the Aug. 15 date back into just another one of the dog days of the summer – rather than the beginning of a civil suit trial that Duckworth’s opponents would just as soon see drag out into early-to-mid October.

After all, wouldn’t it be keen from their viewpoint to have the possibility of a negative court judgment coming down in the weeks leading up to the Nov. 8 elections in which Democrat Duckworth is trying to depose Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill.?

Which is really what this case is all about.

It is why Kirk is eager to keep the case alive, and complained this week that any effort to settle out-of-court amounts to an injustice. He wants that day in court his campaign is desperate to believe will allow him to out-military Duckworth in the public eye.

WHICH IS REALLY a shame, since Kirk was the longtime Naval Reserve officer who had a military record of his own, even though there have been the past allegations that he tried to exaggerate his claims.

Certainly, I doubt Kirk or many other people really care if one of the women was fired from her job at the Anna facility as retaliation for allegedly complaining about her boss (she was later reinstated), or if another woman got a poor job review that cost her a pay raise.

This is about wanting to politick through the court system. And I’m sure the only thing that would shut up the Duckworth opponents is if the judge were to ultimately issue some sort of ruling in her favor! 

  -30-

One’s heroic stance is another’s ‘subversion’ as we all see it

It’s all a matter of perspective, the way we view certain actions. The nincompoop acts of some people come off as rational in others’ mindsets.
 

Isn't the military in and of itself a political statement?

The things some people see sense in get denounced as acts of subversion by others – to the point where I think the things people complain about probably say more about the individuals doing the ranting than they do about the people who supposedly did wrong.

IN MY MIND, I already can hear the rants of those people who will take offense to President Barack Obama (just because he’s Obama is their real reason) and the fact that he’s going to make an official visit to Hiroshima in Japan.

That, of course, is one of only two cities that ever actually got “nuked” as U.S. military personnel, at the direction of commander in chief Harry S. Truman, went ahead and used the atomic bomb.

That act brought about the end of the Second World War, and I’m not about to entertain a debate over whether use of the bomb was appropriate. It happened is about all that really matters.

But I’m sure Obama’s critics are going to complain that he shouldn’t be taking part in any ceremony that might view the Japanese residents of Hiroshima or Nagasaki in a favorable light – one that would give credence to the Japanese perspective of the Second World War that they were the ultimate victims because they were the targets of the atomic bomb.

WHICH AS I see it, is about as ridiculous a perspective as those who try to claim the U.S. civil war was solely about the concept of state’s rights and a tyrannical U.S. nation overstepping of bounds against what is mildly referred to as the Southern way of life.

I’m already braced for the hostility that will be spewed, probably all too similar to those people who are complaining about the black female cadets from the military academy at West Point who claim the photograph of them with clenched fists was a statement of solidarity with the subversive elements of the Black Lives Matter movement.

 

OBAMA: On verge of offending ideologues yet again?

Although if you change “Black Lives Matter” to “Black Panther Party” then it shows the argument hasn’t changed one bit during the past decades. Some people are determined to believe the Anglo approach to our society truly is the only one appropriate.

Which probably also means the rest of us ought to accept that we don’t really belong in this nation and ought to leave. Even though I’m positive I ain’t going nowhere, and I doubt many others are planning to leave as well.

THEN, OF COURSE, there’s the plight of Mel Reynolds, the one-time member of Congress who is being held in jail in Kankakee County because of the pending charges against him that he went several years without filing income tax returns.

That’s the argument federal prosecutors plan to make against him. Although Reynolds says he now plans to plead guilty. Not because he admits he did anything wrong. He wants to view himself as the victim because his incarceration restricts the amount of time he can spend with an attorney preparing his defense.

I’m sure in Mel’s mind, he’s undergoing an ordeal that would make Ghandi or Nelson Mandela sympathize. Although I’m also sure the vast majority of people would not think twice about rooting against Reynolds.

REYNOLDS: Victim? Or whiner?

I also couldn’t help but notice news reports where Reynolds claimed he was a target for assassination by gang members because of some of his actions back when he served in Congress – which supposedly was the reason then-President Bill Clinton gave him that pardon back in 2000 before leaving office.

DOES CLINTON NOW wish he could take that act back? Could it be something that comes up during the current presidential campaign for use against wife Hillary?

Or will there now be some people who secretly will wish for the gang members to “finish the job” that Reynolds claims they were given?

  -30-

Trump trumps Rauner when it comes to being wealthy fool full of himself

Anytime those of us in Illinois think our governor excels in the arrogance department with the way he equally refuses to compromise toward a new state budget, all we have to do to get a jolt of reality is take a look at Donald Trump.

Does Trump need boot in behind to shrink ego?

The New York real estate developer who thinks his wealth is evidence of his genius has managed to tick off so many people with his recent views on Mexicans. Now, he’s ticking off people who probably want to believe Trump knows exactly what he’s talking about on that issue.

FOR NOW, TRUMP is going after military veterans – specifically Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., whose public image relies heavily on the fact that he served during the Vietnam War and did a lengthy stretch as a prisoner of war.

There are those who give McCain so much credit for the fact that he was incarcerated by the North Vietnamese faction and endured more than his share of torture.

Trump recently went out of his way to mock McCain, saying he deserves no real praise for his military record. Although I suspect his real criticism is the fact that Trump donated money to McCain’s unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid.

Which means he wasn’t able to “buy” the ability to tell the president what to do. That is really what interest the overly-wealthy corporate types have in electoral politics – they want to have their business interests reinforced!

OF COURSE, IN the case of Trump, he has a decades-old track record of having an over-bloated ego and sense of self-importance – the motivation for his latest bid for the Republican nomination for president in next year’s election cycle.

McCAIN: How heroic is he?

Just as Rauner got tired of trying to buy political influence through campaign contributions and went ahead and got himself elected to a political post, Trump is trying to do the same.

Yet I don’t think Rauner has the nerve to pull off the trash-talk that Trump has given us; nor would he then follow it up by spewing stupid-talk about how others ought to apologize to him for having the nerve to think that he is wrong to begin with.

That is what we have got from Trump – he thinks people critical of his Mexico rhetoric have done him wrong, and now he thinks those upset with his criticism of McCain ought to bow down and beg forgiveness for having the nerve to say he’s wrong.

RAUNER: What does he think of The Donald?

FOR THE RECORD, I’ll agree that McCain’s military record often gets exaggerated by political partisans who want to score political points on Election Day. They want to think every Republican official warrants praise, while also blasting any military veteran (remember John Kerry from ’04) who winds up becoming a Democrat.

But trying to trash McCain bolster his presidential dreams just comes across as tacky.

Because I always thought the fact that McCain endured the mental strain of incarceration in the service of his nation was worthy of some respect. I suspect that Trump – if he ever had been put in that situation – would have cracked within minutes.

The wimp!!!

I KNOW SOME people are eager to make much of this by saying it actually benefits Trump. After all, there are polls showing Trump doing well in Iowa and New Hanpshire (the first states to express themselves in the upcoming election cycle) and leading nationwide.

That nationwide lead is only 17 percent – or roughly one of every six people who think of themselves as Republican. That’s a lot of Republicans who don’t want Trump, along with all the people who don’t think of themselves as being a part of the GOP.

Many of those Republicans are going out of their way to avoid saying anything – they don’t want to give the Democrats they invariably will challenge any ammunition to be used against the Party of Lincoln.

Although it makes me wonder if, in his private moments when he’s in the Executive Mansion, Rauner’s shuddering in disgust is a combination of Trump’s latest ego-bloated statements AND the decaying condition of his official residence!

  -30-

Wounded war vet; or “Rod Blagojevich protégé?” It’s gonna be ever so ugly!

One thing is for sure – the 2016 campaign for U.S. Senate from Illinois is going to be an ugly campaign from Day One.

Which literally was Monday; Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., wants to go from representing the far west suburbs in Congress to representing the entirety of Illinois in the Senate.

SHE MADE THE announcement that she will take on Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., who is seeking re-election to a second term following a lengthy stint representing the North Shore suburbs in the House of Representatives.

I was aware that she had an announcement stunt planned, yet still have to admit to being caught up by the spin being put on the event by the various sides in this upcoming election cycle.

We haven’t even chosen a new mayor (or a sequel to the old mayor) yet, but already we’re being asked to get into the heat of things for 2016 in what could turn out to be the nastiest campaign that will take place in Illinois (we’re just not going to care as much about president this time around since we won’t have a ‘favorite son’ to root for, or against).

As expected, Duckworth kicked off her campaign by reminding us of her military service and the fact that she was a helicopter pilot who suffered severe injuries that cost her a leg. “Ten years ago, I nearly lost my life when an RPG tore through the cockpit of my Black Hawk helicopter in Iraq,” was how her campaign statement begins.

NOTHING NEGATIVE TO say yet about Kirk (who suffered a stroke shortly after getting elected to his current term in the Senate).

Although Duckworth did say in her introductory statement, “We deserve elected officials who will do for our fellow Americans what my crew did for me in Iraq; look out for our hardest hit and most vulnerable, work together for the sake of our mission and refuse to give up until the job is done.”

I’m not sure if she’s just saying that she’s a tough broad, or that Kirk is somehow less than capable. I’m sure there will be countless future statements and actions that will further elaborate on what we’re supposed to think of Kirk – who served for many years himself in the Naval Reserve.

Yet the Republican opposition that is determined to keep the Illinois post in the GOP column for partisan purposes has its own share of shots it will take at Duckworth, starting with the first three words of the statement issued by Illinois Republican Chairman Timothy Schneider in response to Tammy.

“ROD BLAGOJEVICH PROTÉGÉ... ."

Literally, we’re told that Duckworth, “is not the kind of partisan politician Illinois families want to represent them in the United States Senate.” For she’s allegedly the, “extreme wing of the Democratic Party,” according to the party hacks.

Aside from reminding us of the Blagojevich tie – which was that she served as director of the Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs for three years back when Rod responded to the title of “governor” rather than “inmate” – we’re also told that Tammy voted “92 percent” in line with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Although considering how often rank-and-file members of Congress vote along with their respective party leaders, I’d wonder if the truth is more that she differed from Pelosi some 8 percent of the time!

IT’S ALL POLITICAL trash talk. None of it should be taken too literally.

Particularly since in my case, the statement from Schneider showed up in my e-mail box some 40 minutes before I got the Duckworth statement telling me she was running. Tammy was slow on the draw, it seems.

It wouldn’t have mattered what she said or did; the key was to get the names “Blagojevich” and “Pelosi” into the political discourse. Just as Duckworth wanted to remind us of her personal tale – which offends the conservative ideologues who want to believe anyone with military experience is naturally a Republican.

“How dare she be a Democrat!?!,” is what the GOPers think. Just as da Dem partisans are sputtering with disgust at the mention yet again of Blagojevich. And the rest of us will stock up on Tylenol for the statewide headache we’re going to experience between now and Nov. 8, 2016.

  -30-