By:
Ulysses Arn
The status quo at the College of DuPage cost the taxpayers dearly and has resulted in the states second largest school being embroiled in scandal.
The status quo is no more at the college thanks to a new board majority of reformers, several investigations(sadly, but needed), the ouster so far of two administrators, the pending dismissal of the college’s President, and more.
The status quo for twenty years in Dixon was to not pay any thought to what Rita Crundwell, the city’s comptroller, was doing whether at her job or in her extravagant lifestyle.
The status quo is no more in Dixon. Rita is in prison for nearly 20 more years. The city’s recouped most of the money, the governments sold most of the things so bought with the $54 million she stole from the city. The city council and Mayor are all brand new, heck the form of government is entirely new there(as permitted under the Illinois Constitution). New safeguards and transparency abound and local lawmakers have ushered in new laws to ward off similar misdeeds.
The status quo in Bloomington is one of not questioning the status quo. The spending and the taxing will continue.
Asking questions in Bloomington infamously got a local radio station personality threatened with a restraining order, because questioning the status quo isn’t allowed in Bloomington.
Keep reading: http://usofarn.com/2015/09/14/did-upsetting-the-status-quo-cost-ian-bayne-his-radio-show/
Prison time for bad government? Build it and they will come? Yeah, as they build a case for themselves they too may go.
His heart was in the right place, but there were things he said that were out there. The one I still remember were his thoughts on the elimination of trans fats and suggesting that nothing needed to be done because life expectancy was at high levels. To make a one-to-one causal link is ignoring the other factors that have lead to higher life expectancy despite health issues. I can respect someone for simply saying they don’t like something, but bringing information as if it were fact without clear evidence is disingenuous. The Rosa Parks one was off too. I mean go ahead and say you agree with Phil Robertson but then comparing it Rosa Parks and the civil rights struggle is pushing it.
Oh Brother, that’s what I love,
debate on an “entertainment” show facts,
Ever hear of satire.?..(highest form of humor)
And then take it to a science debate, as if once again
as the liberals say, “it’s settled science.”
At any given time in medicine 1/2 of what we know is wrong,
problem is, we do not know which half that is….
I got no satire from his show. Not sure how you did either. He took what he did seriously. They did have fun on his show, but not at the expense of the issues. But if that is how you want to explain away his less than finer points, then by all means, indulge yourself frequently and in great amounts. If Ian intended to just entertain, he would still have a job. The one thing I can respect him for, if at all is wanting to make sure people were informed. To say it was satire cheapens what he tried to do.