Thursday, January 14, 2016

German Valley has a “new” police car on patrol thanks to the generosity of a Boone County community.

 

 

Belvidere PD gives squad car to German Valley

Published: Wednesday, Jan. 13, 2016 1:35 p.m. CST • Updated: Wednesday, Jan. 13, 2016 1:36 p.m. CST

 

 

German Valley's "new" police car, a 2007 Dodge Charger, is ready for action with a fresh paint job and new decals. The City of Belvidere gave the used car to the village. Photo supplied

By Vinde Wells

vwells@oglecounty

news.com

German Valley has a “new” police car on patrol thanks to the generosity of a Boone County community.

The City of Belvidere recently gave the village a squad car that the police department there was ready to retire.

With new paint and decals, the car is now on duty on German Valley’s streets

Part-time German Valley Police Chief Mike Boomgarden said the village’s only squad car, a 1995 Crown Victoria purchased used 19 years ago from the Freeport Park District, had reached the end of its run.

Looking for a replacement, Boomgarden, who is also the full-time police chief at Forreston, reached out to other police agencies to see if any of them had a good, used car they wanted to sell.

Belvidere Police Chief Jan Noble, a longtime friend, had the answer.

“The city council up there voted unanimously to give us a used car at no cost,” Boomgarden said. “They even put new tires on it for us.”

Noble said he took German Valley’s need for a car to his police commission and city council with a proposal to give then the 2007 Dodge Charger slated for replacement in the near future.

“They agreed this was a good way to help out another community,” Noble said.

Boomgarden said the car, with 80,000 miles, came with the cage for prisoners and snow tires.

Noble delivered it himself.

Boomgarden took the car to Forreston Auto Body to have rust spots repaired and a new paint job.

“We got it repainted and put our decals on it,” he said. “It’s now in service.”

 

Above is from:  http://www.oglecountynews.com/2016/01/11/belvidere-pd-gives-squad-car-to-german-valley/adh69zj/

Chrysler Faked Sales?

Fiat Chrysler Faked Sales, Dealers Say in Racketeering Suit

Phil Milford

Jennifer Surane jennysurane

 

  • Trading halted in Europe after shares fall 11 percent

  • Dealers paid to report false sales at month's end, suit says

 

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV investors reacted dramatically to the latest concerns about automotive industry scruples after dealers accused the company’s U.S. unit of offering money to falsify sales.

The U.S. dealers’ allegations add to the claims that are shaking investor confidence in the auto industry, with Volkswagen AG having admitted to rigging emission tests in the U.S. and Renault SA having had its offices raided, raising the specter of a VW-type scandal at the French car company.

“The perception investors have is that the sector has been lying for emissions, for bonuses, targets, whatever you want, therefore, you don’t want to be a shareholder,” said Massimo Vecchio, an analyst with Mediobanca in Milan. Given the Volkswagen scandal and the raid on Renault, “people are obviously scared.”

Chrysler plans to fight the U.S. lawsuit, which the company said in a statement is without merit.

Trading Halted

Fiat Chrysler trading was halted in Europe after shares fell as much as 11 percent. The company’s credit default swaps, used by investors as insurance against defaults on company debt, surged.

Dealers were paid to report fake sales on the last day of the month and then cancel the sales the next day, according to the federal lawsuit filed by two related auto dealerships Jan. 12.

“If it’s true, this could mean that volumes at Fiat Chrysler aren’t really what they appeared to be and this could mean that the numbers for revenue could be in question,” said Richard Hilgert, a Morningstar Inc. analyst in Chicago.

“Usually, lawsuits in the automotive industry are just a regular part of the business and the trading isn’t as volatile here when this kind of news breaks,” Hilgert said.

Dealer Obligations

The lawsuit, against the company’s North American unit, FCA US LLC, was brought by Napleton Arlington Heights, based in Illinois, and Napleton Northlake, based in Florida, according to court records.

Fiat Chrysler said in Thursday’s statement that it has been discussing the need for the dealer group to meet its obligations under certain agreements. Kevin Hyde, counsel for the dealers, didn’t immediately answer phone calls to his office in Westmont, Illinois.

FCA US had an incentive program which dealers could join if they met certain sales targets, and would then enable them to get subsidies for each new vehicle sold, according to the suit. The company solicited dealers to falsely report sales and funneled money to conspiring dealers, the dealers allege.

Sales Targets

Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne has set high goals for the company, including erasing 7 billion euros ($7.6 billion) in debt and more than tripling net income to about 5 billion euros by 2018. He backed off a target of selling 7 million vehicles in 2018 at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit Jan. 11, saying at the same time that 2015 earnings will be better than expected.

In one instance a competing dealership reported 85 false new reports of vehicles being delivered, resulting in it being paid “tens of thousands of dollars as an illicit reward for their complicity in the scheme,” both dealers said in the lawsuits.

The lawsuit contends the company’s actions “have been arbitrary and capricious, as well as coercive,” by “strong-arming its dealers to achieve sales numbers not clearly defined,” with “non-conspiring dealers” ineligible for bonuses.

They seek unspecified damages and a jury trial, according to court papers.

Automotive News first reported the suits Jan. 13.

The case is Napleton’s Arlington Heights Motors Inc. v. FCA US LLC, formerly known as Chrysler Group Realty Company LLC, 16-cv-00403, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).

Above is from:  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-14/fiat-chrysler-unit-accused-of-racketeering-to-falsify-sales?cmpid=yhoo.headline

Wednesday, January 13, 2016

Ted Cruz Didn’t Disclose Loan From Goldman Sachs for His First Senate Campaign

 

image

 

Ted Cruz Didn’t Disclose Loan From Goldman Sachs for His First Senate Campaign

By MIKE McINTIREJAN. 13, 2016

 

As Ted Cruz tells it, the story of how he financed his upstart campaign for the United States Senate four years ago is an endearing example of loyalty and shared sacrifice between a married couple.

“Sweetheart, I’d like us to liquidate our entire net worth, liquid net worth, and put it into the campaign,” he says he told his wife, Heidi, who readily agreed.

But the couple’s decision to pump more than $1 million into Mr. Cruz’s successful Tea Party-darling Senate bid in Texas was made easier by a large loan from Goldman Sachs, where Mrs. Cruz works. That loan was not disclosed in campaign finance reports.

Those reports show that in the critical weeks before the May 2012 Republican primary, Mr. Cruz — currently a leading contender for his party’s presidential nomination — put “personal funds” totaling $960,000 into his Senate campaign. Two months later, shortly before a scheduled runoff election, he added more, bringing the total to $1.2 million — “which is all we had saved,” as Mr. Cruz described it in an interview with The New York Times several years ago.

A review of personal financial disclosures that Mr. Cruz filed later with the Senate does not find a liquidation of assets that would have accounted for all the money he spent on his campaign. What it does show, however, is that in the first half of 2012, Ted and Heidi Cruz obtained the low-interest loan from Goldman Sachs, as well as another one from Citibank. The loans totaled as much as $750,000 and eventually increased to a maximum of $1 million before being paid down later that year. There is no explanation of their purpose.

Neither loan appears in reports the Ted Cruz for Senate Committee filed with the Federal Election Commission, in which candidates are required to disclose the source of money they borrow to finance their campaigns. Other campaigns have been investigated and fined for failing to make such disclosures, which are intended to inform voters and prevent candidates from receiving special treatment from lenders. There is no evidence that the Cruzes got a break on their loans.

A spokeswoman for Mr. Cruz’s presidential campaign, Catherine Frazier, acknowledged that the loan from Goldman Sachs, drawn against the value of the Cruzes’ brokerage account, was a source of money for the Senate race. Ms. Frazier added that Mr. Cruz also sold stocks and liquidated savings, but she did not address whether the Citibank loan was used.

The failure to report the Goldman Sachs loan, for as much as $500,000, was “inadvertent,” she said, adding that the campaign would file corrected reports as necessary. Ms. Frazier said there had been no attempt to hide anything.

“These transactions have been reported in one way or another on his many public financial disclosures and the Senate campaign’s F.E.C. filings,” she said.

Kenneth A. Gross, a former election commission lawyer who specializes in campaign finance law, said that listing a bank loan in an annual Senate ethics report — which deals only with personal finances — would not satisfy the requirement that it be promptly disclosed to election officials during a campaign.

“They’re two different reporting regimes,” he said. “The law says if you get a loan for the purpose of funding a campaign, you have to show the original source of the loan, the terms of the loan and you even have to provide a copy of the loan document to the Federal Election Commission.”

There would have been nothing improper about Mr. Cruz obtaining bank loans for his campaign, as long as they were disclosed. But such a disclosure might have conveyed the wrong impression for his candidacy.

Mr. Cruz, a conservative former Texas solicitor general, was campaigning as a populist firebrand who criticized Wall Street bailouts and the influence of big banks in Washington. It is a theme he has carried into his bid for the Republican nomination for president.

Earlier this year, when asked about the political clout of Goldman Sachs in particular, he replied, “Like many other players on Wall Street and big business, they seek out and get special favors from government.”

In recounting the decision to put all of their savings into the campaign, Mr. Cruz said in the 2013 Times interview that Mrs. Cruz immediately agreed to his proposal, even though he was trailing in the polls and still viewed as a long shot against Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, who spent $24 million of his own money on the race.

“What astonished me, then and now, was Heidi within 60 seconds said, ‘Absolutely,’ with no hesitation,” Mr. Cruz said.

Mrs. Cruz, who is on leave as a managing director at Goldman Sachs, later suggested that the reality was more complicated. She told Politico in 2014 that she thought they should apply “common investment sense” and not use their own money for the campaign “unless it made the difference” in winning. The article did not mention anything about loans from banks.

The money from the Cruzes allowed his campaign to keep running television ads in the period preceding the primary election, including a $300,000 ad buy that highlighted the story of Mr. Cruz’s father’s flight from Cuba in the 1950s after opposing the Batista regime. Mr. Cruz earned enough votes in the primary to qualify for a runoff, where he defeated Mr. Dewhurst and went on to win the general election.

The ethics reports that candidates file with the Senate require them to list all assets they held at the close of the year or that generated income during the year. Assets are reported in broad categories of value, such as $1,001 to $15,000 and $100,001 to $250,000.

Mr. Cruz’s filings show that at the close of 2011, he and his wife had cash and securities in bank, brokerage and retirement accounts worth $1.3 million to $3.4 million. They also had mortgages and a loan against Mr. Cruz’s partnership equity in his law firm. During 2012, they sold securities worth $82,000 to $355,000, and the value of other holdings was reduced by, at most, $155,000.

However, they also added a money-market account with $250,000 to $500,000 in it, and the value of other holdings increased by as much as $435,000. All told, the value of their cash and securities in 2012 saw a net increase of as much as $400,000 — even as the Cruzes were supposedly liquidating everything to finance Mr. Cruz’s Senate campaign.

The biggest change in the Cruzes’ finances in 2012 was the addition of the two bank loans, each valued at $250,000 to $500,000, during the first half of the year. One was a margin loan from Goldman Sachs. Margin loans, which are secured by holdings in a brokerage account, are often used to buy more stocks, but can be obtained for almost any purpose.

The other loan was a line of credit from Citibank. Even if the Citibank loan did not go directly into the Senate campaign, it could have freed up other assets for that purpose. While the Cruzes were well paid — he made more than $1 million a year as a law partner, and she earned a six-figure income as an executive in Goldman Sachs’s Houston office — they also had big bills, including mortgage payments and full-time child care.

Both loans had floating interest rates around 3 percent, according to Mr. Cruz’s Senate disclosures, which appear to be generally in line with rates available to wealthy borrowers at that time.

During the remainder of 2012, the Cruz campaign repaid Mr. Cruz for about half of the money he lent. His Senate disclosures show that he and his wife paid off the Citibank loan that same year. As for the Goldman Sachs loan, it remains outstanding, though the balance has been reduced to between $50,000 and $100,000.

The federal guide to campaign finance reporting for congressional candidates makes it clear that if the original source of money for a candidate’s personal loan was a margin loan or a line of credit, it must be disclosed.

“Bank loans to candidates and loans derived from advances on a candidate’s brokerage accounts, credit cards, home equity line of credit, or other lines of credit obtained for use in connection with his or her campaign must be reported by the committee,” according to the guide.

Gov. Rauner to seek end of consent decrees, ACLU responds


From an ACLU press release
2016-01-12


 


Statement of Edwin C. Yohnka: American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois on Governor Rauner's declaration to seek end of consent decrees, Jan. 12, 2016:

Yesterday, in a series of interviews marking his first year in office, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner said that a "big part" of his administration's plan going forward would be to seek release from court oversight in various federal consent decrees to which the State of Illinois has agreed.

The American Civil Liberties Union currently represents clients in five ( 5 ) such consent decrees, addressing care for children under the care of the Department of Children and Family Services, youth detained by the Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice as well as people with intellectual, physical and psychiatric disabilities who have been needlessly warehoused in large institutions and want to live in community-based settings.

Because of this experience and involvement, the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois issued the following statement about the Governor's comments. The following can be attributed to Edwin C. Yohnka, Director of Communications and Public Policy at the ACLU of Illinois:

Governor Rauner should know that adherence to terms of a consent decrees is not a political option to be debated in the media. These agreements exist because the State violated the law — often over decades — in ways that impose significant harms to our clients and others in Illinois. If he possesses a magic wand to fix the challenges faced by children in the child welfare system, youth being incarcerated or people with disabilities after years of neglect by the State, we hope the Governor uses the magic soon. The reality is that the way to make getting out of consent decrees a "big part" of his agenda is to bring the State's dysfunctional systems in compliance with the law by improving the way the State provides services and supports to people who depend on its help.

We look forward to engaging in that work, rather than debating ideological rhetoric.

Above is from:  http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/lgbt/Gov-Rauner-to-seek-end-of-consent-decrees-ACLU-responds-/53914.html

Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Father of Koch Brothers Helped Build Nazi Oil Refinery, Book Says

 

 

image

 

Father of Koch Brothers Helped Build Nazi Oil Refinery, Book Says

By NICHOLAS CONFESSOREJAN. 11, 2016

The father of the billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch helped construct a major oil refinery in Nazi Germany that was personally approved by Adolf Hitler, according to a new history of the Kochs and other wealthy families.

The book, “Dark Money,” by Jane Mayer, traces the rise of the modern conservative movement through the activism and money of a handful of rich donors: among them Richard Mellon Scaife, an heir to the Mellon banking fortune, and Harry and Lynde Bradley, brothers who became wealthy in part from military contracts but poured millions into anti-government philanthropy.

But the book is largely focused on the Koch family, stretching back to its involvement in the far-right John Birch Society and the political and business activities of the father, Fred C. Koch, who found some of his earliest business success overseas in the years leading up to World War II. One venture was a partnership with the American Nazi sympathizer William Rhodes Davis, who, according to Ms. Mayer, hired Mr. Koch to help build the third-largest oil refinery in the Third Reich, a critical industrial cog in Hitler’s war machine.

Photo

David H. Koch, left, and Charles G. Koch. Credit Paul Vernon/Associated Press; Bo Rader/The Wichita Eagle, via Associated Press

The episode is not mentioned in an online history published by Koch Industries, the company that Mr. Koch later founded and passed on to his sons.

Ken Spain, a spokesman for Koch Industries, said company officials had declined to participate in Ms. Mayer’s book and had not yet read it.

“If the content of the book is reflective of Ms. Mayer’s previous reporting of the Koch family, Koch Industries or Charles’s and David’s political involvement, then we expect to have deep disagreements and strong objections to her interpretation of the facts and their sourcing,” Mr. Spain said.

Ms. Mayer, a staff writer at The New Yorker, presents the Kochs and other families as the hidden and self-interested hands behind the rise and growth of the modern conservative movement. Philanthropists and political donors who poured hundreds of millions of dollars into think tanks, political organizations and scholarships, they helped win acceptance for anti-government and anti-tax policies that would protect their businesses and personal fortunes, she writes, all under the guise of promoting the public interest.

The Kochs, the Scaifes, the Bradleys and the DeVos family of Michigan “were among a small, rarefied group of hugely wealthy, archconservative families that for decades poured money, often with little public disclosure, into influencing how the Americans thought and voted,” the book says.

Many of the families owned businesses that clashed with environmental or workplace regulators, come under federal or state investigation, or waged battles over their tax bills with the Internal Revenue Service, Ms. Mayer reports. The Kochs’ vast political network, a major force in Republican politics today, was “originally designed as a means of off-loading the costs of the Koch Industries environmental and regulatory fights onto others” by persuading other rich business owners to contribute to Koch-controlled political groups, Ms. Mayer writes, citing an associate of the two brothers.

Mr. Scaife, who died in 2014, donated upward of a billion dollars to conservative causes, according to “Dark Money,” which cites his own unpublished memoirs. Mr. Scaife was driven in part, Ms. Mayer writes, by a tax loophole that granted him his inheritance tax free through a trust, so long as the trust donated its net income to charity for 20 years. “Isn’t it grand how tax law gets written?” Mr. Scaife wrote.

In Ms. Mayer’s telling, the Kochs helped bankroll — through a skein of nonprofit organizations with minimal public disclosure — decades of victories in state capitals and in Washington, often leaving no fingerprints. She credits groups financed by the Kochs and their allies with providing support for the Tea Party movement, along with the public relations strategies used to shrink public support for the Affordable Care Act and for President Obama’s proposals to mitigate climate change.

The Koch network also provided funding to fine-tune budget proposals from Representative Paul D. Ryan, such as cuts to Social Security, so they would be more palatable to voters, according to the book. The Kochs were so influential among conservative lawmakers, Ms. Mayer reports, that in 2011, Representative John A. Boehner, then the House speaker, visited David Koch to ask for his help in resolving a debt ceiling stalemate.

“Dark Money” also contains revelations from a private history of the Kochs commissioned by David’s twin brother, William, during a lengthy legal battle with Charles and David over control of Koch Industries.

Ms. Mayer describes a sealed 1982 deposition in which William Koch recalled participating in an attempt by Charles and David to blackmail their fourth and eldest brother, Frederick, into relinquishing any claim to the family business by threatening to tell their father that he was gay.

David Koch has since described himself as socially liberal and as a supporter of same-sex marriage.

Monday, January 11, 2016

Rauner says he has plan to stop court-ordered spending

 

 

Gov. Rauner says he has plan to stop court-ordered spending, but offers no specifics

 

By Ivan Moreno and Ashley Lisenby, Associated Press 3 hours ago

 

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) -- Gov. Bruce Rauner said Monday he will outline a plan to get out from under court-ordered spending that's plunging Illinois further into debt during a seven-month budget stalemate.

Even without a budget, the state has been required to continue spending on things such as Medicaid and services for people with disabilities because of federal consent decrees and court orders.

Rauner said in an interview with The Associated Press that getting out from under those will "be a big part of our plan going forward," but he declined to offer specifics on his idea, which one analyst said would require court approval.

The new state legislative term begins Wednesday and the Republican governor is marking his first year in office Tuesday.

It's been a tumultuous year for the wealthy businessman who has battled with Democrats over the state's spending plan. It should've taken effect July 1.

Rauner has said a budget needs to include reforms he argues will help the state economy, such as curbing the power of unions and passing business-friendly laws. He also wants term limits and changes to how legislative districts are drawn every decade.

Democrats, who hold supermajorities in the Legislature, say they won't cave to some of Rauner's demands because it would hurt the middle class.

It's unclear how Rauner can get out of the court-mandated spending, which is running up a big tab on state expenditures. That's because the state is spending based on revenue levels from last year, when the individual Illinois income tax rate was at 5 percent, not the current rate of 3.75 percent. A recent report from the Governor's Office of Management and Budget says if the current spending levels continue without new taxes or the legislature cutting spending the deficit for the fiscal year ending in June will be $4.6 billion.

To get out of the court-ordered spending requirements, Rauner would have to show that the state is complying with spending for services the federal government has deemed essential, like caring for people with developmental and physical disabilities.

"He can't simply say we're not going to provide services people have a fundamental right to," said Ed Yohnka, director of communications and public policy for the American Civil Liberties Union in Illinois. Not having a budget will only make it harder for Rauner to show the state is complying with funding requirements, Yohnka said.

"If the governor has a magic wand he could wave today for the state to become complaint, we welcome him to use it. It doesn't exist," he said. "These are hard, persistent problems. You actually have to do it."

Rauner has said he's willing to discuss raising taxes, but only if lawmakers put some of his reforms in place.

"I have to be able to say to you, you're getting value for your taxes before I would ever discuss with you taking more of your money," Rauner said.

Rauner pinned the blame for the budget gridlock on Democrats who control the Legislature and said House Speaker Michael Madigan has been unwilling to compromise.

Steve Brown, spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan, said it was too early tell how Democrats would react to Rauner's idea of ending court-ordered spending. He took exception to Rauner's comments and noted Madigan has compromised, including as recently as last month when lawmakers and Rauner agreed to spend $3 billion from special funds. Some of that went to emergency dispatch call centers and 52 domestic-violence shelters.

"We have compromised. That's the point," Brown said.

Rauner also bemoaned the volume of insignificant bills passed by the Legislature, referring to the lawmaking body as a "do-nothing General Assembly." He criticized them for focusing on bills that don't deal with the state's problems, including addressing the state's $111 billion pension debt.

Lawmakers passed more than 500 bills last year, including one that Rauner signed into law making pumpkin pie the official state pie.

"Virtually none of them dealt with our problems," Rauner said of the bills. "And I love pumpkin pie, and I'm glad, I'm glad it's the state pie. I love it. But you know what? We have a pension crisis. They pass a pie bill. They don't pass a pension bill. Come on."

Brown also took issue with Rauner's comments, noting that some of the accomplishments the governor listed in a Sunday editorial in the (Springfield) State Journal-Register happened because of his collaboration with lawmakers.

"He contradicts himself," he said.

ABOVE IS FROM:  http://news.yahoo.com/rauner-says-plan-stop-court-000056331.html;_ylt=AwrBT8YDepRWKNkAOQ9XNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTByMjB0aG5zBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzYw--

What you need to know about Bernie Sanders

 

 

image

 

DEBORAH NISSLEY 2:13 p.m. EST January 10, 2016

I listened to one speech by Sanders and I knew this was a different kind of political race.

sby nissley deborah

Deborah Nissley (Photo: .)

130 CONNECTTWEET 5 LINKEDIN 6 COMMENTEMAILMORE

As I have a Bernie Sanders 2016 bumper sticker on my car, I often get approached by people who are either angry or curious. What I have learned is people on the Eastern Shore are not too familiar with Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and his political views.

•Most important to me is that Sanders is honest. Even his detractors say he is a man of his word. Listen to his speeches starting from the 1960s and you will see his philosophy does not change with the political wind.

•He is a man of the people. He raised $33 million in the last quarter of 2015, only $4 million less than Hillary Clinton. The big difference is the average donation to his campaign was $27.16, in contrast to Clinton’s Super PAC donations. One woman said after she paid her electric bill she had $3 left, which she donated to Sander’s campaign. This is typical of Sander’s donors.

•Bernie believes the Koch brothers shouldn’t own the political process. Did you know the Koch brothers want to do away with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, the Affordable Care Act and the minimum wage? Seventy-six percent of Americans do not want any cuts to Social Security; 81 percent of Americans do not want any cuts to Medicare. Sanders believes people who work a 40-hour week should earn a living wage.

•Sanders is an advocate for our environment. He promotes renewable energy policies.

•He has political experience, but he is not a typical politician. Sanders started his career by being elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont, for three terms. He was congressman and is now a senator from Vermont. He has the highest popularity rating of any senator. Actions speak louder than bombast.

•Sanders has worked tirelessly for better care for our veterans.

•People believe he can’t win against Hillary Clinton. But I believe that yes, he can. There is media bias toward Clinton. Sanders has a grassroots movement – look at the sheer number of contributions he receives. Polls show he can beat Donald Trump, too.

•Sanders is not looking for a welfare state. What he wants is to level the playing field, so people can become self-sufficient. He wants an end to corporate welfare. The gap between the wealthy and everybody else is wider than at any time since 1928, and Sanders wants to do something about that.

I am a voter, but have never before been excited about a presidential candidate. I listened to one speech by Bernie Sanders and I knew this was a different kind of political race.

What clinched it for me was a speech he gave to an ultraconservative college body, where he admitted that they would disagree with many of his views, but also said it was easy to talk only to people who agree with you, but it it is possible to find common ground in any gathering.

Deborah Nissley lives in Fairmount.