NTEB: Minnesota Under Attack From Sharia Law

Supreme Court Justice Breyer: Founders Were For Restricting Guns...Why B...

A Different Christmas Poem (Revised)

Nigel Farage: 'Who the Hell do You Think You Are: The Euro Game Is Up!'

Make this guy the President! Lt Col Allen West.

"Marxism in America" by Lt. Gen. (Ret.) W.G. Boykin - OAK

"Here's to You Mr. Jefferson" Awesome! by Mike Church

Why haven't Metra board members been fired

Here's one answer: The Metra board has almost as many bosses as it has members. The 11 directors are appointed by politicians in eight jurisdictions, a power-sharing compromise that's more about turf protection than joint governance.

Accountability? Forget it. Removing the board would require collective action by commissioners in Cook, DuPage, Kane, McHenry, Lake and Will counties, as well as the mayor ofChicago and the president of the Cook County Board. The directors can fire each other, but it takes a formal finding of incompetence or neglect of duty and a vote of eight. It's hard to clean house that way.

transit boards; lots of perks, little accountability - chicagotribune.com

When the Democrat Party Left You Behind

November 8, 2010 | Filed Under Congress, Conservatives, Constitution,Democrats/Leftists, Elections, Government, Government, Corruption,History, House of Representatives, Liberals, President, Selwyn Duke |

-By Selwyn Duke

Many years ago, a very nice lady with whom I was having a political discussion announced to me, “I’m a Democrat.” My immediate response was, “By birth or by choice?”

It’s a relevant question for many Americans, as some treat party affiliation as if it’s akin to ethnicity. It can work like this: Their pappy was a Democrat, and their grandpappy was a Democrat, and their great-grandpappy was a Democrat, so they have to be one, too. This is despite the fact that the party has changed along with the generations. Their grandfather is gone — and so is the party that he once supported.

This is why it’s interesting when an elderly person who was a passionate Democrat in his salad days is still so today. I would say to such an individual, “It was very brave of you to admit you were all wrong about things and abandon all your old beliefs.” If this left him puzzled, I’d explain that since the Democrat Party is radically different today than it was 50 years ago — since it’s now pro-abortion, for all intents and purposes promotes faux marriage, advocates race-based quotas, pushes amnesty for illegals, bails out wealthy fat cats with our tax money and refuses to enforce laws in a race-neutral fashion (the Black Panther case), among other things — that he must accept this radical agenda as well. After all, to oppose this ideological sea-change in the Democrats but still support them would be to place party ahead of principle.

We all know, of course, that principle must take precedence. So I have a question: How does it make sense to, in the name of loyalty to your grandfather’s party, abandon his principles? Did he stand for the secular agenda outlined above, which also includes things such as an unconstitutional and coercive healthcare plan, measures to let non-citizens vote, suing states for enforcing immigration law (razing Arizona), punishing schoolchildren based on racial quota, opposition to Second Amendment rights (not an issue presently only because it’s a vote-loser), the effort at thought control known as hate-crime law, confiscatory taxation, politically correct speech codes on college campuses and sensitivity training in workplaces, and granting the federal government almost unlimited power over our lives?

Certainly, there are rank-and-file Democrats who do embrace the above. You’ll find many of them in my area (near NYC), for instance; these are people who are every bit as liberal as the politicians for whom they vote. But when I traveled through Middle America, I encountered a different kind of Democrats. These were people who were fairly traditional Americans — but ethnic Democrats. They don’t accept the agenda I outlined; in fact, misled by the mainstream media, they often aren’t fully aware their party has adopted it and, consequently, orphaned them. They don’t realize that ceasing to vote Democrat would not be leaving the party, as you can’t leave something that left you long ago. It would simply be a recognition of the abandonment.

Yet ethno-political patriotism can be a powerful force. When hearing evidence of this painful abandonment, many ethnic Democrats will rationalize it away, much like an abandoned child may convince himself that daddy will be home any day now. But that day will not come. Contemporary absentee Democrat politicians — who, as Reagan said, “have gone so far left, they’ve left the country” — will only come home for your votes. Their hearts are in Washington, D.C., which, under their dominion, isn’t even in America anymore.

Of course, there are some middle-American Democrats who will still feel comfortable voting for their party’s nominee in their district races, believing he’s far more traditional than the party average (often the case in conservative districts). Here, however, we must be mindful of a certain factor: Politicians not only feel party patriotism — they feel party pressure. If Democrat politicians buck their leadership’s line too much, they can incur the wrath of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Axis. This is no doubt one reason why the so-called Blue Dog Democrats elected in 2008 quashed the hopes of many and signed on to the Obama agenda.

What this helps underline is that while some apathetic folks like to say it doesn’t matter whom you vote for because, and we’ve all heard this, “There’s no difference between the parties, anyway!” they have it exactly backwards. The difference is the greatest it has been in modern times.

Consider that while House Democrats in 1970 voted with their party’s majority only 58 percent of the time, that figure is now91 percent. And it is precisely the same among Senate Democrats. (Among Republicans, the party-unity figures are only slightly lower, 87 and 85 percent, respectively.) Even more to the point, with extremely rare exception, even the least liberal Democrats vote with their party approximately 75 percent of the time.

What does this mean? If you want to stop the Obama-Pelosi-Reid, unconstitutional, über-statist metastasizing of government, you must do what may seem to contradict this article’s thesis. Instead of judging a candidate solely on his merits, you must also consider his party before casting a vote for him. But you don’t do this driven by ethno-political loyalty, but for a thoroughly logical reason.

He will consider his party when casting votes for you.

In other words, let’s say you have a Democrat and a Republican running in your district who are (or at least seem) like ideological twins. They may both talk a good game — and it’s even possible that both may be good people. But only one of them will feel pressure to join the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Axis. Only one will have the screws put to him to vote for legislation such as the healthcare disaster, cap-and-tax, the porkulus bill and amnesty for illegals. Only one of them will be a member of the No-Longer-Your-Grandfather’s-Democrat Party.

And, remember, party affiliation is not ethnic orientation. “American,” though, ought to be.

I think granddad would understand perfectly.
(Originally posted at American Thinker)
____________
Selwyn Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show. His work has appeared in Pat Buchanan’s magazine The American Conservative and he writes regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective. He can be contacted at SD@SelwynDuke.com.

2012 is near

Maybe NOW people will understand....

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100.00

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men [the poorest] would pay nothing.

The fifth man would pay $1.

The sixth man would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man [the richest] would pay $59.

So that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that $20 divided by six people is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everyody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using. He proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

So, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing [a 100% savings].

The sixth man now paid $2 instead of $3 [a 33% savings].

The seventh man now paid $5 instead of $7 [a 28% savings].

The eighth man now paid $9 instead of $12 [ a 25% savings].

The ninth man now paid $14 instead of $18 [a 22% savings].

The tenth man now paid $49 instead of $59 [a 16% savings].

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20 savings," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10 in savings!"

Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that the richest among us got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night, the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the tab.

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.

The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed. For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics

Power of the Individual -The Young Cons

Young Con Anthem

What is America's True Form of Government?

Elections Have Consequences

We The People

Jack Cafferty Rips Obama on Failed Openness Pledge: 'Just Another Lie To...

The Last Best Hope

Obama cousin at Tea Party rally rips Obama, health plan: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES

Dr. Milton Wolf, an Obama cousin at Tea Party rally rips Obama, health plan ::

CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Metro & Tri-State

September 17, 2010

BY STEVE LORD Beacon News

President Obama, stimulus packages and national health care came under criticism Thursday night at a Tea Party rally in St. Charles.

Dr. Milton Wolf, an Obama cousin, told the crowd of 300 at the Pheasant Run Resort that the national health-care plan needed to be repealed.

"Now, many say it can't be repealed. If you believe we cannot repeal Obamacare, I have just one message for you -- yes, we can," said Wolf at the event, which is part of the November Is Coming bus tour.

Wolf also quipped that he is "the leader of the conservative wing of the first family. It's been said I should be the next president, and it's been said I have a psychiatric disorder, and both were within my own family."

The Americans for Prosperity and the Kane County 912 Tea Party infused the crowd with their crusade for fewer taxes, smaller government, more freedom and even a sense of history.

The stimulus package also was criticized.

"This is a time in history when we can make a change, the right kind of change, if we stay engaged," said Joe Calomino, head of the Illinois chapter of Americans for Prosperity.

Also joining the program were Amy Jacobson, co-host of WIND radio's "Big John and Amy" show and a former television reporter, and former "American Idol" contestant Krista Branch, who sang "I Am America," a popular YouTube video and the signature song from her album of the same name.

But those on the program stressed that the evening was not about officials or personalities -- only two local politicians showed up, state Rep. John Millner and state Sen. Randy Hultgren, who is running for Congress from the 13th District -- but about what the man in the street can do to pursue conservative ideals.

Wolf said people need to donate to candidates, knock on doors, talk to neighbors and make phone calls.

"In 2010, voting is not enough," Wolf said. "You need to step out of your comfort zone and find a way to get involved."

Sun-Times Media

American Thinker Blog: Muslim children 'bear the burden of 9/11'

American Thinker Blog: Muslim children 'bear the burden of 9/11'

September 12, 2010

Muslim children 'bear the burden of 9/11'

Ethel C. Fenig

Who bears one of the biggest burdens from the attacks of 9/11? If you were to answer the families of the victims of that horrible day just nine years ago, you would be wrong according to the politically correct,weepy report in the Chicago Tribune by Manya Brachear which turns the followers of the religion that inspired the attacks into victims.

Muslim teens grow up in shadow of terrorist attacks
Children bear burden of day Americans will never forget

The old fashioned paper article carries it even further with an additional headline
"Muslim children bear burden of 9/11."

Now certainly the carefully selected, wholesome model American Muslim teens depicted in this article, who were children on that day, didn't take part in the attacks. And as children they must have been confused when they received strange looks or heard some mild negative comments such as "terrorist" directed at them and their families. And that's the only "burden" they suffered. But they're teenagers now, older. They still don't seem to question certain aspects of their religion or culture--indeed some are rather defiantly proud of it--and indeed, the article portrays them as victims--"burdened," - not by the evil of their co religionists who acted in the name of their mutual religion but by others understandably wary of them.

No mention anywhere in today's Chicago Tribune are the children left parentless by 9/11. How are they faring? Perhaps because it wouldn't be politically correct, the Tribune ignores them. But these children as well as all the survivors of those slaughtered are the ones who "bear a burden" that will endure for all their lives.

By ignoring them and focusing on a marginal human interest story Ms. Brachear created a twisted moral equivalence; inflating some minor distractions into major problems to create victims where there were none while ignoring the true suffering victims of the survivors.

Manipulating public feelings in this way worked in the bad old days when the MSM were the gatekeepers of the news. Now it merely exposes their biases and failings.

Posted at 08:07 AM

NJ Gov. Chris Christie Humbles Another Union Hack

Budweiser Commercial

This is the commercial spot Budweiser produced after 9-11. They only aired it once so

as not to benefit financially from it - they just wanted to acknowledge the tragic event.

This is so consistent with a company who always does things with a ton of class!!

Can you imagine what the cost was considering production, air time, etc.?

I never saw this commercial until now .... it is quite moving.

Wow! Talk about a picture being worth a thousand words!

President George W Bush Greeting Troops at DFW

I Want Your Money Trailer (2010) HD

BREAKING NEWS! - Is Barack Obama Really A Saudi / Muslim "Plant" in the ...

How many socialists sit in Congress today?

WASHINGTON – The Democratic Socialists of America boasted in a newsletter to insiders 70 of its members currently serve in Congress, but an independent survey by WND suggests the number of actual avowed or semi-secret socialists in the House and Senate is considerably higher – at least 82.

How many socialists sit in Congress today?

Video: The Tea Party vs. The Anti-War Movement Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0vV3O9s4y

By EyeBlast.tv Staff | Mon, 08/02/2010 - 18:04

Now that both liberals and conservatives have coordinated protest movements it is fair to compare the two. Luckily sECULAR sTUPIDEST has put together a great video which shows the March 20th, 2010 Anti-War protest in D.C. and the March 20th, 2010 Tea Party in D.C. (Language Warning)

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz0vV3GWdtW

Obama Depopulation Policy Exposed! Red Alert!!!!!!

Death & Taxes

Democracy vs Republic with Red Skelton, a Classic

New Documentary Charges Obama Stole Nomination From Hillary

Morning Bell: Reclaiming Our Founding Principles

Posted July 5th, 2010 at 8:45am in First Principles

Happy Birthday America! America is 234 years old. She was born on July 4, 1776, with the passage of the Declaration of Independence. Since then, America has grown from thirteen colonies on the east coast to fill a vast continent. Her economic and military power is envied around the world. And the American people are hardworking, churchgoing, affluent, and generous.

Independence Day is an opportunity each year to remember the root of our success—our founding principles as set forth in the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration of Independence serves as a philosophical statement of America’s first principles. As Matthew Spalding describes, the Declaration affirms that all men are created equal. By nature, men have a right to liberty that is inalienable, meaning it cannot be given up or taken away. And because individuals equally possess such inalienable rights, governments derive their just powers from the consent of those governed. The purpose of government is to secure these fundamental rights, and the people retain the right to alter or abolish a government that fails to do so. Continue reading...

The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog

MARINE STUNS A TEA PARTY WITH THE FOURTH VERSE OF THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER

by LIBERTYS ARMY on JUNE 7, 2010

The Contract from America

We, the undersigned, call upon those seeking to represent us in public office to sign the Contract from America and by doing so commit to support each of its agenda items, work to bring each agenda item to a vote during the first year, and pledge to advocate on behalf of individual liberty, limited government, and economic freedom.

Individual Liberty

Our moral, political, and economic liberties are inherent, not granted by our government. It is essential to the practice of these liberties that we be free from restriction over our peaceful political expression and free from excessive control over our economic choices.

Limited Government

The purpose of our government is to exercise only those limited powers that have been relinquished to it by the people, chief among these being the protection of our liberties by administering justice and ensuring our safety from threats arising inside or outside our country’s sovereign borders. When our government ventures beyond these functions and attempts to increase its power over the marketplace and the economic decisions of individuals, our liberties are diminished and the probability of corruption, internal strife, economic depression, and poverty increases.

Economic Freedom

The most powerful, proven instrument of material and social progress is the free market. The market economy, driven by the accumulated expressions of individual economic choices, is the only economic system that preserves and enhances individual liberty. Any other economic system, regardless of its intended pragmatic benefits, undermines our fundamental rights as free people.

1. Protect the Constitution

Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does. (82.03%)

2. Reject Cap & Trade

Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumer prices, and weaken the nation’s global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures. (72.20%)

3. Demand a Balanced Budget

Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax hike. (69.69%)

4. Enact Fundamental Tax Reform

Adopt a simple and fair single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words—the length of the original Constitution. (64.90%)

5. Restore Fiscal Responsibility & Constitutionally Limited Government in Washington

Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states or local authorities, or ripe for wholesale reform or elimination due to our efforts to restore limited government consistent with the US Constitution’s meaning. (63.37%)

6. End Runaway Government Spending

Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of the inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth. (56.57%)

7. Defund, Repeal, & Replace Government-run Health Care

Defund, repeal and replace the recently passed government-run health care with a system that actually makes health care and insurance more affordable by enabling a competitive, open, and transparent free-market health care and health insurance system that isn’t restricted by state boundaries. (56.39%)

8. Pass an ‘All-of-the-Above” Energy Policy

Authorize the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation, lowering prices and creating competition and jobs. (55.51%)

9. Stop the Pork

Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the budget is balanced, and then require a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark. (55.47%)

10. Stop the Tax Hikes

Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains, and death taxes, currently scheduled to begin in 2011. (53.38%)

——————————

Get involved. Sign the Contract. Join the movement. Make sure your voice and your priorities are heard. Together, we can and will make a difference.

American Thinker: The Lawyers' Party

By Bruce Walker

The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers' Party. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer and so is his wife Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate.) Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office thirty-one years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work. The Democratic Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history like Gingrich.

The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And so we have seen the procession of official enemies in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party grow. Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all consuming. Some Americans become "adverse parties" of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class action suit. We are citizens of a republic which promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws, we are contorted by judicial decisions, we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to use, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers' Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.

American Thinker: The Lawyers' Party

Illinois parolees disappear after being released early - Springfield, IL - The State Journal-Register

By JOHN O'CONNOR

The Associated Press

Posted Jun 23, 2010 @ 02:55 PM

Last update Jun 23, 2010 @ 07:51 PM

Dozens of parolees, including one imprisoned for his part in a 2008 murder, have disappeared after they were set free as part of a secret early release program, according to documents acquired by The Associated Press.

The parolees were let go as part of the “MGT Push” plan that Gov. Pat Quinn shut down in December after The Associated Press revealed it.

The Illinois Department of Corrections’ practice has been not to tell the public when the convicts take off, but the agency said Wednesday it would change that.

MGT Push has embarrassed Quinn as he runs for re-election, although the Democratic governor has said he didn’t know that Corrections Director Michael Randle was going to release violent offenders. The administration ordered parole agents in January to begin “intensive compliance” checks on the released prisoners.

More than 50 MGT Push parolees are currently on the lam, according to documents from Corrections obtained under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act and analyzed by The Associated Press.

Some gone for months

While many who go astray are picked up within days, some absconders have been gone for months. Those currently on the list have been missing an average of 136 days, or 4.5 months, according to the AP analysis.

“Our teams are working full-time to apprehend these offenders,” Corrections Department spokeswoman Sharyn Elman said.

Corrections seeks help from local and federal police in tracking down the convicts, although most are found by parole agents. The public has not been told they are missing, and the agency’s website lists their status as “parole” — the same as for the thousands of parolees whose location is known.

“It’s dangerous. People could be hurt,” said Jennifer Bishop-Jenkins, a crime victims’ advocate with IllinoisVictims.org.

Elman initially said the list changes too rapidly for the agency to be able to accurately report parolees who are on the run. OnWednesday, however, she said the agency was developing a way to update parolees’ status.

Quinn’s office would not comment.

Hundreds released early

The MGT Push plan was meant to reduce the prison population by giving discretionary good-conduct credit — known as “meritorious good time” — to offenders as soon as they arrived at prison. They were rewarded for good conduct even before they had a chance to show they could follow the rules.

Hundreds of violent criminals were among 1,745 who were released weeks early. Some had spent as little as seven days in prison.

When the “intensive compliance checks” started, many of the people released under MGT Push were sent back behind bars for minor rule-breaking: Failing to make a daily telephone check-in, having beer in the house, not being home twice on the same day when agents came knocking, documents show.

But dozens are missing.

They include Curtis Nelson, 21, who was released three months early on a three-year sentence for mob action. Unarmed, he accompanied two armed men during a June 2008 shootout in Sauk Village that killed a 20-year-old man, according to the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office.

Nelson has been missing since April 24, when he bolted a community treatment center where he’d been enrolled because of his continued drug use.

Among a dozen other missing parolees with violent histories is Michael Watkins, 53, absent since Feb. 5. Watkins was set free six months early on an 18-month stint for aggravated drunk driving. In the mid-1980s, he was sentenced to nine years for attempted murder, home invasion and burglary.

Data could be incomplete

The number of absconders is probably greater than 50 because the AP data is two weeks old, and Corrections doesn’t automatically report when an inmate goes missing.

Also, it doesn’t include parolees who have been deported or turned over to immigration authorities because they are suspected of being in the U.S. illegally. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement could deport or release them, the agency doesn’t automatically notify Corrections, so prison officials consider them missing unless they get calls from the parolees.

Some on the list may have been apprehended but are being held in county jails; the agency doesn’t report them as in custody until they’re in state prison.

Lawmakers sent legislation to Quinn last month that would require information on parolees to be posted on the Internet within three days of their early release.

It should have included a requirement that missing parolees be labeled, said Rep. Dennis Reboletti, R-Elmhurst, minority leader of the House Judiciary Committee for criminal law.

“Victims have a right to know where these people are, and the public isn’t being made aware of that,” Reboletti said. “The governor doesn’t want the embarrassment of the public finding out that the people he released early and put on parole are missing.”

Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

Illinois parolees disappear after being released early - Springfield, IL - The State Journal-Register