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-

Trump-types at Wrigley; so apropos

The Republicans, particularly that faction of the Grand Old Party that actually believes in the ideals of Donald Trump and is willing to spend their own money to try to get him re-elected in 2020, will be convening in Chicago this weekend. 

Will Trump-ites invade Wrigley? Or will it feel like usual touristy crowd?

They’ll be at the Four Seasons Hotel, where they’ll be partaking in sessions where they’re supposed to plot just how they go about trying to get a majority of the electorate to cast ballots for Trump.

AND LIKE ANY other batch of tourists, they’re planning on taking a trip to Wrigley Field. They’re taking a chartered bus on Saturday, where they’ll attend a reception at the ball club’s offices across the street from the ball park.

Then, they’ll catch the game against the St. Louis Cardinals.

Not that it should be a surprise. The excessively-wealthy Ricketts family owns the ball club, and also has been prominent Republican backers who have made it clear they don’t have any objections to Donald Trump during his term as president – and certainly wouldn’t object if he manages to get re-elected next year.

Although news reports indicate it’s not exactly like it will be a takeover of Trump-ites at Wrigley Field.

Trump used to claim Yankees-fandom, … 

THEY’LL BE SEATED together in a separate section, which the team is refusing to identify. Perhaps they think it’s possible for the Trump-ites to blend in with the Cubbie crowd.

Although I won’t be surprised to learn that the bulk of the fan base attending Saturday’s game won’t actually be able to identify which of the people there are attending because of Trump – and which actually care about the ball game!

Then again, the stereotype of the Wrigley denizens is of a batch of people who are there to be seen, and probably care less about the activity on the playing field.

So maybe the only way we’ll be able to tell them apart is if the Trump crowd takes it upon themselves to wear those ridiculous red “Making America Great Again” caps – while everybody else will be anxious to wear Cubbie blue.

… just like Hillary Clinton used to do

EXCEPT FOR THOSE fans of the Cardinals who make the trip up to St. Louis. They’ll be in Cardinal red, identified most clearly by the “birds on the bat” logo that St. Louis has worn for decades.

Seriously, what always has struck me about the character of the crowds that attend Chicago Cubs ballgames is how touristy they are.

It’s like people who come in from out-of-town make a point of checking out the Willis Tower, Navy Pier and shopping on Michigan Avenue – and if they really feel like doing something “nitty-gritty,” they take in a ballgame.

In that sense, all the political out-of-towners coming to Chicago this weekend will be able to blend in with the Wrigley Field faithful. No real Chicagoan will be seen anywhere near 1060 W Addison St. (which cinematic fans automatically know is the alleged humble abode of one Elwood J. Blues).

SO I FIND it humorous to know that some people are getting all outraged about the ballpark presence of Trump-type people at Wrigley this weekend. Personally, I find it quite fitting. The Wrigley scene is exactly where I’d expect them to show up on those rare occasions they’re in Chicago.

As for the rest of us who’d rather not think of anything political when we venture out to the ballpark, perhaps we’ll find a reason to check out the Chicago White Sox. They’re in Kansas City on Saturday, playing a weekend series against the Royals.

Odd how many different outlets mis-IDed this 'Disco Demolition' photo as 1974's 'Dime Beer Night' in Cleveland

But the Washington Nationals will make an appearance this week, followed up by a four-game series against the New York Yankees. Personally, I’m considering making a trip to Thursday’s game – when the White Sox are holding a promotion remembering the 40-years-ago “Disco Demolition Night.”

Free t-shirts to those fans who want to remember the night when Steve Dahl developed a national reputation, and the White Sox game that night is still remembered – not bad for a promotion of a game between the American League’s two fifth-place ballclubs that season and will be remembered long after Saturday’s Cubbie affair is forgotten.

  -30-

EXTRA: A GOP “civil war” brewing at Chicago suburb political conventions?

Rick Santorum lives on in Chicago suburbs. Photographs provided by American Conservative Union

The Illinois Republican Party is holding its convention Friday and Saturday in southwest suburban Tinley Park, hoping to get the party faithful together to get them all worked up about the prospects of voting on Election Day.

No, they’re not going to put Illinois into the Republican column of electors for the presidential campaign. But they’re hoping to inflict their share of damage on Democrats, and probably would consider it a major deal if they could keep Rep. Joe Walsh, R-Ill., from losing to Democratic challenger Tammy Duckworth.

NOT THAT WALSH himself is going to be anywhere near the Tinley Park Convention Center, the facility located just off Interstate 80 that party leaders brag they chose because of its easy access to downstate Illinois.

Why make rural Illinois Republicans have to drive for another hour or two through the Chicago area to get to a northwest suburban convention site?

Yet somehow, I suspect another reason they’re in Tinley Park (which admittedly has a nice convention facility) is because the Donald E. Stephens Convention Center in Rosemont (near O’Hare International Airport) is already taken.

For that is the site of the American Conservative Union convention being held Friday at the very same time that party functionaries are trying to get people all worked up to vote GOP!

WALSH IS AMONG the people who will be speaking at the union’s convention, along with Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill. (the Republican who beat Duckworth the last time she tried running for a seat in Congress).

Among others who were expected to have a presence at the gathering include the failed presidential hopefuls such as Herman Cain, Rick Santorum and Michele Bachmann – names which have some attraction to segments of the electorate.

They’re also supposed to include names such as New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal.

For those people who want a Grand Old Party experience, it sounds like the real bash is taking place in Rosemont – while the Illinois party leaders are gathered in Tinley Park, less than a mile from the site of the Lane Bryant store where five people were killed some four years ago in a still-unsolved case.

UNLESS THE PROSPECT of a “surprise” birthday party for St. Louis-area congressional candidate (and failed Illinois 2010 lieutenant governor nominee) Jason Plummer held Thursday got you all excited, it seems like the people the party leaders want to appeal to have all chosen to show up at the other end of Cook County.

It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that events were scheduled in conflict with each other. In the public’s eye that often cares less about political concerns, I’m sure it was a bigger deal a few years ago when the Chicago White Sox scheduled their winter fan convention on the same day of the Super Bowl.

Still, it makes me wonder which party operative is responsible for deciding that this weekend was the one for Republicans to gather in the Chicago area.

We’re going to be seeing the split between the party regulars and the ideologues who these days get most worked up over the prospect of voting for Republican Party nominees – even if in many cases they’re really voting AGAINST Democratic challengers.

BECAUSE I’M SURE that group would eagerly have rebuffed the party officials if there had been any suggestion put forth that these two sides somehow work together.

So what’s my point in stating all of this?

JINDAL: What GOP thinks Obama should try to be like

It’s just that the American Conservative Union says in the statement that they’re gathering in Chicago on Friday to, “take the fight for the future of America directly to President Barack Obama’s backyard.”

Yet if we look to the president’s “backyard,” we get to see the split that harms the party’s chances of Election Day victory – which may well be the reason that Obama overcomes the concerns about a sluggish economy and wins Term Number Two come November.

  -30-

Would Blagojevich be a classic Batman supervillain, or a one-time two-bit geek?

I know this is a thought that will be regarded as heresy by comic book geeks the world over. But to me, Batman is that cheesy comic parody from 1960s television. Adam West and Burt Ward rule!

Not that I plan to be among those people in Rosemont on Saturday to see the pair. The idea of spending time at a cocktail party with two aging actors strikes me as being a bit depressing (although the idea of hanging with Julie Newmar – no matter how old she may be these days – is enticing).

I’M REFERRING TO the Wizard World Chicago Comic Con event being held this weekend, giving various comic characters a chance to show themselves off in hopes of making some significant extra cash. People wishing to go to that Batman cocktail party will have to cough up $20 and pay for their own drinks, in addition to the $25 admission fee to the event itself.

Of course, most of the attention that event has received in recent days is because of one of the other attractions. Rod Blagojevich.

He’s going to be on hand for about six hours on Saturday in Rosemont, signing autographs and giving away pictures of himself, along with engaging in some brief chitchat with people who attend.

The event’s organizers claim there is nothing odd about inviting Illinois’ former governor. They say their event is about pop culture, and that Blagojevich has now become much more than just a government official. He is a personality in and of himself.

I DON’T KNOW if I think that highly of Milorod.

But I have been wondering if it is all too appropriate for Batman and Robin to be in Rosemont on the same day as Blagojevich. Because a part of me wonders what kind of Batman supervilian we could concoct from the persona of Rod Blagojevich. I have no problem envisioning the Goofy Guv being included on this Rogue's Gallery of criminal masterminds who were defeated by Batman.

During his three years on prime-time television (and in reruns throughout the decades that these days air on WWME, channel 23), Batman took on regulars such as the Joker, Penguin and the Catwoman. But he did battle with such lesser personas as the cowboy Shame (played by Cliff Robertson), Louie the Lilac (Milton Berle) and Bookworm (Roddy McDowall) – who may have been the most literate criminal mastermind to exist in Gotham City.

So how would it be such a stretch for Batman to have to fight off the schemes of The Goofy Guv (alias, Miles Roderick Blagoyawhatever)?

ENVISION BATMAN FEELING the need to rid mighty Gotham of corrupt politicians engaging in schemes meant to enrich themselves at taxpayer expense. The real-life Blagojevich persona wouldn’t need to be tweaked all that much in order to turn him into a super-villain.

Think about it.

The Joker was a hideous clown, while Catwoman was a sexy feline. That pompadour atop Blagojevich’s head would be his visual trademark. Perhaps they could even come up with a gimmick by which the Goofy Guv would use all that mound of hair in order to hide weapons to try to fight off Batman and Robin.

He would dress in overly flashy suits that probably cost a lot of money, but don’t have enough true class to show what a pretender he is at being a respectable part of society.

WHEN TIME COMES for Batman and the Goofy Guv to brawl (BAM! POW! SWOOSH!), he’ll strip down to a jogging suit and try to run away using his incredible stamina. Of course, Batman will have the Bat-mobile to use to catch him.

When it turns out in mid-episode that the Goofy Guv actually manages to capture Robin, thereby requiring Batman to come rushing in to his rescue, we will see some scheme by which Robin is dangled from the ceiling, while being tortured by Elvis Presley’s music being played at deafening sound levels.

All the male villains had a female cohort. The Goofy Guv would have Chatty Patti – who will leave you speechless with a stream of profanity if you get too close to her man.

Of course, all of Batman’s villains had comical henchmen to help in their criminal schemes. That would be a problem for the Goofy Guv, since as far as I can tell, no one in Illinois government likes him enough to want to have anything to do with him. The Goofy Guv and Chatty Patti would have to ride solo.

NO HENCHMEN IN pompadoured wigs and jogging suits for the conniving couple.

In the end, Batman always prevails. That would happen with the Goofy Guv as well. And I can picture the perfect Batman-type ending.

All Batman has to do is reach into his utility belt and produce an aerosol cannister of hairspray remover. One spray of that at the Goofy Guv’s head, and his hair becomes such an unruly mess that it falls over his eyes – thereby leaving him blinded long enough for Batman to capture him (while Yvonne Craig’s Batgirl manages to chase down Chatty Patti on her purple motorcycle).

Which would be the appropriate outcome, because I can’t help but think a real crime is taking place this weekend up on Rosemont.

REMEMBER HOW I said people have to pay an extra $20, plus the cost of their drinks, to attend that Batman cocktail party? By comparison, people who want a Blagojevich autograph will have to pay an extra $50 and an extra $80 to have their picture taken with the Goofy Guv.

The idea that Milorod is worth more than television icons like West and Ward must be a crime against our society’s pop culture.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Just to acknowledge fact, Rod Blagojevich did put in several hours Saturday at the Comic Con, signing autographs, wandering the grounds and joking with the people to whom a fun day is getting to meet “Bo Duke” and “Captain Kirk.” The Chicago Tribune managed to capture the sight of Blagojevich sitting in the driver’s seat of the Batmobile (photo eight in the gallery), which makes me wonder if Adam West should knock some sense into Rod for that alone.

St. Paul, Minn., not the place for Chicago political people to be this week

The Chicago Argus will not be paying as much attention to the nominating convention taking place this week in St. Paul, Minn., as it did to the Democratic Party pep rally last week in Denver – and not because of some political bias against the Republican Party.

It’s just that the Chicago presence in the town where Charles Comiskey owned and operated one of his first ball clubs (eventually converting that baseball franchise in the Western League into the Chicago White Sox of the American League) will be minimal.

IF THIS WERE the “Illinois Argus” or the “Springfield Argus,” then the Republican National Convention taking place today through Thursday would be the main event because it would be a chance to hear from the local political officials who have spent the past couple of days telling themselves that Republican presidential hopeful John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as a running mate was a bold move that will appeal to rural folks.

It won’t help him take Illinois, because this has become such an urban-oriented state – much to the dismay of people from places such as Rockford, Springfield and Carbondale.

As it is, the weakened state of the Illinois Republican Party (which has allowed Democrats to take over everything on the Statehouse Scene in Springfield and to allow a Chicago Democrat to be the heart of a national movement that could boot them unceremoniously from the White House) is such that our state’s Republicans are getting banished to the back of the Xcel Center arena where the convention is taking place.

This week will be about seeing some of the outer suburban political people along with officials from central Illinois try to assert themselves, only to realize that the heart of the Republican Party these days is in the states where “rural America” prevails.

WHILE ILLINOIS MAY have a geographically large swath of its land with rural characteristics, the bulk of the population lives in the urban areas (about two of every three Illinoisans is a Chicago area resident, with almost half of the state’s population living in a Chicago suburb).

It’s not like Illinois resembles neighboring state Indiana, where the part of the state that is an extension of the Chicago area accounts for about 10 percent of the overall population. The rest of the state tends to think in terms of the need of holding that 10 percent in check (to prevent the influence of urban Chicago from “contaminating” the people who don’t think of it as an insult to be called “Hoosiers”).

That is why I never thought the Obama campaign should seriously regard Indiana as some sort of swing state whose 11 Electoral College votes they could win, and why I’m not surprised to learn that Indiana Republican Chairman Murray Clark is telling NPR affiliate WBEZ-FM radio that the choice of rural Alaskan Palin clinches the Nov. 4 Indiana elections for the McCain/Palin campaign.

He may be right.

OF COURSE, THE thought of keeping someone from “dreaded Chicago” out of the White House likely would have meant many Hoosiers would have voted for McCain/Lieberman, McCain/Ridge or McCain/Fonda (as in Jane) – if it meant not casting a ballot for Obama.

It also is why I don’t discredit a story I read in the Southern Illinoisan newspaper of Carbondale, where the local political officials are predicting strong McCain support across the 96 Illinois counties that lie outside the Chicago area.

Jackson County Republican Chairman Bruce Wallace probably is correct when he says Obama, “doesn’t have much juice south of I-80. I think the southern part of the state is going to be McCain.”

On the surface, it has become a paradox of Illinois politics. The roughly 30 southernmost counties that comprise Southern Illinois (a.k.a., “Little Egypt,” to some) have long histories of supporting the party of Franklin D. Roosevelt and strong Democratic Party organizations that oppose Republicans for local offices.

BUT THE URBAN views on social issues often don’t play well here (I’ve heard one political observer say of Southern Illinois residents who cast votes for Democrats, “they don’t realize the Democratic Party doesn’t care about them anymore”) and many of the people who vote for a Democrat locally will turn to the GOP for its candidates for federal office.

But it ultimately comes down to population. The Chicago suburbs comprise such a large percentage of the state’s people, and many of those tend to associate more with Chicago than with rural Illinois. At most, Southern Illinois is about 5 percent of the state’s overall population. Even when combined with solidly Republican central Illinois, it only comes to about one-third of the people.

So as sad as it may seem so some (and I’m enough of a government observer geek to find intellectual stimulation in the activities of any political persuasion), the show in St. Paul is not going to have a strong area presence.

Taking a quick look at the speaker schedule, I found only one Illinoisan on the convention program. Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill. – whose North Shore suburban congressional district is turning so much less and less conservative that a Democrat may actually defeat him on Nov. 4 – was to speak Monday. Yet his appearance is among the ones to be curtailed due to a desire to downplay political festivities at a time when it appears a hurricane may strike the U.S. mainland.

KIRK NEEDED THE public attention to prop himself up, which is sad considering he has a respectable record during his eight years in Congress.

It’s a far cry from the political show in Denver, where Chicago political people dominated the first scheduled day of the program, and continued to pop up throughout the week.

The people from our area who get a trip to St. Paul this week are the have-nots of Illinois’ political scene – the ones who get to hang out with the party bigwigs from states where the Republican Party still matters in hopes they might learn a strategy or two that might make them more competitive here in the future.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: Illinois is to the national Republican Party what Chicago is to the (http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/08/at_gop_convention_illinois_del.html) Illinois GOP. And I still remember the 1996 state GOP convention where the Chicago “delegation” was banished to six chairs in a back corner of the Assembly Hall arena.

It may very well be true that the presidential aspirations of Barack Obama don’t have “much juice” (http://www.southernillinoisan.com/articles/2008/08/30/local/25668540.txt) in Illinois south of Interstate 80. But that doesn’t mean he won’t win the state as a whole.

Did anyone ever really believe the Obama/Biden campaign would be competitive in Indiana (http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/Content.aspx?audioID=28587) outside of Gary?

The Republican National Convention this week will be John McCain’s best shot of knocking down to size (http://www.gopconvention2008.com/schedule/service.aspx) the 6 percent lead Obama had Sunday (according to the Gallup Organization) over the McCain campaign.

What's wrong with "Super Delegates?"

Perhaps it is because I am a political junkie who finds fascinating the mechanics of government, but I really don’t understand why people are getting all bent out of shape about the concept of un-pledged delegates making the final decision for the Democratic Party’s presidential nominee.

“It’s unfair.” “It ignores the will of the people.” “It sounds like a Communist/Fascist/(insert immoral political philosophy of your choice here) plot.”

“IT’S UN-AMERICAN.”

Those are the thoughts being expressed by the Professional Political Pontificators these days about the “super-delegates” who may wind up casting the final votes and deciding whether Barack Obama or Hillary R. Clinton will be the Democrat who gets to tangle with likely GOP nominee John McCain come the Nov. 4 general election.

Those people (many of whom are professional pundits who prostitute their viewpoints for money) want to think it is wrong for several classifications of delegates to be included this year in Denver at the Democratic National Convention.

While most of those delegates were either allocated to supporters of whichever candidate won the popular vote in each congressional district or which candidate took the popular vote across the state, some delegates have a different status.

Followers of Hillary R. Clinton are hoping that Barack Obama fills the same niche that Lyndon Johnson filled at the 1956 Democratic National Convention held in Chicago. LBJ tried to put himself forward as a presidential candidate, but his time in the White House didn’t come for another seven years. Photograph provided by Chicago History Museum.

THE DELEGATES WHO were allocated based on elections results are obligated to go to the nominating convention and support (at least initially) the candidate for whom they declared support early on.

When former Illinois Attorney General and state Comptroller Roland Burris (one of the delegates I voted for in a district that solidly went for Obama) travels to Denver, he is required to remain true to Barack. Only if the convention turns into a free-for-all with no candidate being able to take a majority would he be allowed to consider changing his mind.

Then, there are the un-pledged delegates, also known as the “super-delegates.” They do not have to declare a preference, and they can vote at the nominating convention for whichever candidate they choose.

The triple-P’s of the world would have you think that all these “super-delegates” are craven individuals who are going to ignore the will of the people in their respective states and pick a presidential nominee based on which one is willing to offer them personally the best perks.

THEY ALSO STATE these “super-delegates” are, “elected by no one” and are, “accountable to nobody.” They want to believe this is the equivalent of the days of old when Tammany Hall and Chicago Machine politicos would cut political deals that did not have the interests of the public in mind.

I don’t buy it.

For one thing, it is not true that the “super delegates” are un-elected. In reality, they are elected government officials – they just weren’t elected specifically to be “super-delegates.”

In each of the 50 states, the “super-delegates” include every member of Congress (including the two senators). Also included are the governors and other high-ranking state officials. There also are a few slots in each state that are filled at the last minute, and party officials usually pick people who are reliable when it comes to voting along with the mood of the political party.

IN ILLINOIS, THERE are 35 super-delegate slots among the delegates at the convention. Of those, 32 are set and the other three will be filled some time in May.

Some choices are likely to be made based on the desires of the Democratic Party to have a convention of presidential nominators that bears some resemblance to the overall racial and ethnic makeup of the United States of America. There also are party rules that require the delegations from each state to consist of an equal number of women and men.

The bottom line is that for those of us from Illinois, the Democratic “super-delegates” are going to be people like Sen. Richard Durbin, Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, and Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill.

I expect Mayor Richard M. Daley also will be a “super-delegate,” unless Rich decides he doesn’t feel like spending a week in Denver this summer. In which case, he will probably arrange for one of his brothers (former Commerce Secretary William or Cook County Board member John) to fill the slot.

THESE PEOPLE WERE elected to their positions of influence in large part because they know how to reflect the moods of the people who live in their respective districts. If they really behave in a manner as reprehensible as the triple-P commentators would have us believe, we can always take it out on them come Election Day.

Would Sen. Durbin (who probably is a shoo-in for re-election to his third term in the U.S. Senate) really be willing to risk the wrath of the voter and give his token Republican opponent a legitimate campaign issue to use against him? Does Blagojevich want to stir up the wrath of Democrats even more than he already has by cutting a sleazy presidential deal?

There is another factor to consider.

The “super-delegate” issue only comes into play if the regularly chosen delegates who are publicly bound to a specific candidate cannot reach a decision on their own as to who the presidential nominee should be.

THE CRITICS WOULD have you think that the “will of the people” was being ignored by the super-delegates. In reality, the “will” is uncertainty. If the will of the people was as strong for one candidate as these pundits want us to believe, then one of the candidates would wind up with a majority of the elected delegates.

There would be no need for the next step of “super-delegates,” whose purpose would be to serve as a tiebreaker mechanism used by the political party if the majority of declared delegates become hopelessly deadlocked and cannot choose a candidate.

Insofar as political mechanisms are concerned, “super-delegates” sounds to me like a reasonable way to break ties. At least those individuals have to put themselves on the record, and their political legacies (always a priority with elected officials) would be at stake if they truly voted for someone the locals hated.

I always hate it when government matters are decided on something that is the equivalent of a coin toss. For those who think I’m exaggerating, all too many decisions with great effects on public policy were made by dumb luck.

HAD THEN-ILLINOIS Secretary of State George H. Ryan reached into the antique glass bowl once used by Abraham Lincoln and picked out the name of a Democrat in 1991, Republicans likely NEVER would have gained control of the state Legislature in the 1990s.

But Ryan picked out the Republican name, and the commission that drew political boundaries for the decade used their influence to favor their political party. Likewise, Democrats gained control in the 1980s and in the current decade because that same random drawing ended in their favor.

Would you really want the Democratic Party’s nominee being chosen by putting the names of Obama and Clinton into a hat (perhaps one once worn by Franklin D. Roosevelt), and picking one out at random?

WHAT I FIND ironic is that both Clinton and Obama (in their roles as U.S. senators from New York and Illinois respectively) are “super-delegates” themselves. Both will get the chance in Denver to personally try to sway their “super-delegate” colleagues over to their side. It’s not like either one of them will be at a disadvantage due to access.

Besides, the concept of political party officials getting together to decide who should represent their party for president is a good thing, particularly if the convention turns into a debate.

The last thing that a healthy Democracy needs is a nominating convention that is a pre-set schedule of events intended to be a candidate coronation or an over-glorified political pep rally.

REGARDLESS OF THE celebration that one campaign will do at convention’s end, the other side will wind up the loser. Then, the winner has to reach out to the losing faction and remind them of the issues they have in common (which in the case of Obama and Clinton is most everything). If the winning Democrat can’t do that, then we the people of the United States of America get President McCain.

It will be messy to watch the politicos at work while they figure out whether we are better off with Obama or Clinton at the top of the ballot. But the “mess” IS Democracy at work.

Democracy is often rambunctious and raucous. It is not neat and pretty. As far as I’m concerned, anybody who would want “neat and pretty” politics is asking for something that is really and truly Un-American.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., who also is a “super-delegate,” has a problem (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-oped0212delegatefeb12,0,4373892.story) with the concept that his colleagues at the Democratic National Convention may actually have to decide amongst themselves who the political party should nominate for president.