Letters to the Editor: Pritzker's ‘reckless' GOP attack shows he's no national leader
As the founder of Awake Illinois, a nonprofit advocating for ethical governance, I am compelled to condemn Gov. J.B. Pritzker's reckless remarks at the New Hampshire Democratic Party's McIntyre-Shaheen 100 Club Dinner on April 27. This letter adapts a statement from Awake Illinois, reflecting my personal concerns and outlook.
Pritzker's claim that 'Republicans cannot know a moment of peace' is a direct attack on free speech and civic engagement, endangering the principles that ensure open participation in public life. His call for 'mass protests, mobilization and disruption' threatens millions of Americans, including families Awake Illinois represents, with intimidation for their beliefs. This rhetoric risks inciting unrest, and his 'peaceful protest' defense does not undo the harm of his provocative words.
This hits close to home in Illinois, where my organization is fighting discriminatory practices. Awake Illinois recently filed two federal civil rights complaints against the Illinois State Board of Education: one under Title VI for race-based teacher programming and another under Title IX for permitting a male in female bathrooms (Valley View School District 365), compromising student safety and fairness in K-12 schools. Pritzker's inflammatory speech fostered a toxic environment, evident when a speaker likened me and Moms for Liberty to executed Nazi propagandist Julius Streicher, as noted in our X post on April 28. This vile smear wrongly demonizes advocates like me and trivializes the Holocaust, chilling free expression.
Pritzker's reckless comments and divisive rhetoric in New Hampshire are a critical misstep in his pursuit of national political ambition. As a parent and independent who successfully sued Pritzker in 2021 over his unlawful mandates, I have witnessed his radical governance firsthand. He also champions policies known as 'gender-affirming care' — policies other countries have halted and that many parents, including myself, have come to learn are actually mutilation and sterilization of vulnerable kids. He rejects Title IX protections and supports males in female private spaces and sports teams. His veer to the far left, alienating moderates and independents, has exposed the fragility of his national appeal. By doubling down on polarizing rhetoric and failing to unite Illinoisans, he is undermining his credibility as a viable national leader.
I doubt Pritzker will retract his comments, apologize or denounce the Nazi comparison. Illinois needs unifying leadership, not division. At Awake Illinois, our motto, 'We Cannot Be Cancelled,' drives our resolve to continue advocating. I invite your readers to join me in forging a future where Illinoisans' families and freedoms thrive, undaunted by Pritzker's intimidation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Speaker Johnson teases follow-ups to the ‘one big, beautiful bill'
The 'one big, beautiful bill' may not be so singular, after all. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is teasing follow-up legislation to the megabill of President Trump's tax cut and spending priorities that Republicans can push though using the same special budget reconciliation process that requires only GOP votes. That tool can be used once per fiscal year, with the current fiscal year ending on Sept. 30. So after Republicans are done with the 'big, beautiful bill,' the GOP trifecta has, in theory, two more shots to muscle through party-line legislation before the next Congress comes into power after the midterms. Johnson floated plans for a second reconciliation bill while rebutting concerns from deficit hawks on the budget impact of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — which includes an extension of tax cuts and boosts to border and defense funding, with costs offset in part by new requirements on low-income assistance programs like Medicaid and food aid. 'Everyone here wants to reduce spending,' Johnson said Friday morning on CNBC. 'But you have to do that in a sequence of events. We have a plan, OK? This is the first of a multistep process.' 'We're going to have another reconciliation bill that follows this one, possibly a third one before this Congress is up, because you can have a reconciliation bill for each budget year, each fiscal year. So that's ahead of us,' Johnson continued, also pointing to separate plans to claw back money based on recommendations from the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). 'We're also doing rescissions packages. We got the first one delivered this week from the White House, and that will codify many of the DOGE cuts.' The promise of another reconciliation bill is somewhat surprising given the crux of the debate that dominated the early weeks of the year: Should Republicans divide up their agenda into two bills, passing the first quickly to give Trump an early win on boosting funding for border enforcement and deportations? Or would putting all of Trump's priorities into one bill — which would contain both bitter pills and sweeteners for different factions of the razor-thin majority — be a better political strategy? Trump eventually said he preferred 'one big, beautiful bill,' a moniker that became the legislation's official title in the House last month. It's not clear what would be in a second piece of legislation. Multiple House Republicans who spoke with The Hill were unaware of plans for more reconciliation bills and were not sure what could be included in them. 'I think we need to see what's left on the table after the first one,' Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) said. And to muster through multiple reconciliation bills is a delicate prospect. If members know more reconciliation bills are coming, that complicates the argument that everything in the current package — even policies some factions dislike that others love — need to stay in one megabill. The Speaker declined to elaborate on what might be in such a package when asked in a press conference last week. 'I'm not going to tell you that,' Johnson said. 'Let's get the first one done.' 'Look, I say this is the beginning of a process, and what you're going to see is a continuing of us identifying waste, fraud, abuse in government, which is our pledge of common sense, restoring common sense and fiscal sanity. So we have lots of ideas of things that might be in that package.' Republicans had started planning for the current legislative behemoth months before the 2024 election so they would be prepared to quickly execute on their policy wish list if they won the majority. 'This isn't something we just drew up overnight. So, we'll go through that same laborious process,' Johnson said. But some members have ideas of what else they'd like to see. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) said that he'd hope a second bill would do more to tackle rolling back green energy tax credits and make further spending cuts. Ultimately, though, it will be Trump's call, Norman said: 'I know when the president gets involved, it adds a lot of value.' And Rep. August Pfluger (R-Texas) speculated that passing the 'big, beautiful bill' would inspire members to keep going with another bill. 'People like the feeling of winning,' Pfluger said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests
Congressional Republicans have offered a disturbing lack of pushback to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth suggesting that active-duty Marines could be sent to quell immigration enforcement protests in Los Angeles. 'I don't think that's heavy-handed,' House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said when asked about Hegseth's proposal on ABC News's 'This Week.' Hegseth raised the idea in a post on X Saturday evening, writing, 'If violence continues, active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton will also be mobilized.' His remarks come after President Donald Trump ordered National Guard troops to Los Angeles on Saturday, a move that's not typically made without the support of a state's governor, which he does not currently have. The White House has claimed that it took this step because it's addressing violence at these protests that targeted ICE offices and agents, while California leaders have said that they don't needthe troops. The deployment of active-duty Marines would be another major escalation and a move that's rarely employed by a president in response to protests. 'The deployment of active-duty troops under federal authority in response to civil unrest is a rare step, one that usually requires the president to find under the Insurrection Act that they are needed to enforce the law or restore order,' write The Wall Street Journal's Eliza Collins and Nancy A. Youssef. 'The George H.W. Bush administration deployed US Marines to help restore order after violent protests erupted in California in the wake of the 1992 acquittal of four police officers in the beating of Rodney King…[marking] the last invocation of the Insurrection Act.' During Trump's first term, Defense Secretary Mark Esper stated that active duty military should only be used to respond to protests in 'the most urgent and dire of situations,' and that 'we are not in one of those situations now,' breaking with the president. Rather than criticizing Hegseth's post about Marines, however, Johnson and other Republicans have either been open to the idea or declined to denounce it. 'You don't think sending Marines into the streets of an American city is heavy handed?' ABC News anchor Jonathan Karl asked Johnson. 'We have to be prepared to do what is necessary and I think the notice that that might happen might have the deterring effect,' Johnson responded. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) also declined to repudiate the idea directly, when asked about it on CNN's 'State of the Union.' Instead, he said 'it won't be necessary,' because the National Guard's response will be sufficient. And Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) downplayed the role of the Marines in a possible response without rejecting Hegseth's statement out of hand. 'Active-duty Marines are not going to be put into local law enforcement,' Lankford said on NBC News's 'Meet the Press.' 'They would be in support roles on it, as we have at the border. We have active-duty military at the border, but they're not doing law enforcement tasks. They're doing logistical tasks behind the scenes.' 'Local law enforcement should take care of this, but again when you're seeing burning cars and federal law enforcement and law enforcement being attacked on the streets…we want to make sure those protests don't spiral out of control,' Lankford said. Democrats have emphasized that Trump's use of the National Guard is only adding tension in Los Angeles, and have been incredulous at the possibility of active-duty military being sent in as well. 'The Secretary of Defense is now threatening to deploy active-duty Marines on American soil against its own citizens,' Gov. Gavin Newsom wrote in a Sunday post on X. 'This is deranged behavior.'
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DNC chair on leaked call says Hogg ‘essentially destroyed' initial credibility
Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin said in a recent party meeting that Vice Chair David Hogg has 'essentially destroyed' his chances of leading the DNC successfully, according to leaked audio obtained by Politico. Martin seemed to get choked up as he addressed Hogg, who rose to national prominence as a gun control activist and has pledged to primary Democrats he sees as ineffective in pushing back against President Trump and the GOP. 'No one knows who the hell I am, right? I'm trying to get my sea legs underneath of me and actually develop any amount of credibility so I can go out there and raise the money and do the job I need to, to put ourselves in a position to win,' Martin told other DNC leaders on the call. 'And again, I don't think you intended this, but you essentially destroyed any chance I have to show the leadership what I need to. It's really frustrating,' Martin said. Politico reported that the conversation took place on a Zoom meeting of DNC officers on May 15, a few days after the DNC recommended new elections on procedural grounds for seats held by Hogg and one other vice chair. Members will decide on Monday whether to hold new elections. In the recording, Martin told Hogg that he respected the progressive activist but said the intraparty drama has led him to question whether it's worth continuing in the post. 'I'll say, look, it has plenty of warts, and we're all trying to change those, for sure, but the longer we continue this fight, the harder it is for us to actually do what we all want to do, which is make a difference in this country again,' Martin said in the meeting. 'So I deeply respect you, David. I, too, was looking forward to working with you, but this has created a situation, and I'll be very honest with you, for the first time in my 100 days on this job … the other night, I said to myself, for the first time, I don't know if I want to do this anymore.' In a statement to The Hill, Martin said, 'I'm not going anywhere.' 'I took this job to fight Republicans, not Democrats. As I said when I was elected, our fight is not within the Democratic Party, our fight is and has to be solely focused on Donald Trump and the disastrous Republican agenda,' he said. 'That's the work that I will continue to do every day.' Symone Sanders Townsend, an MSNBC host and former Democratic adviser, came to Martin's defense in a post on the social platform X on Sunday. 'Ken Martin had a vulnerable moment w/his vice chairs & other leaders on a call. Someone recorded it + shared it. Seems to me THAT anonymous person has no business anywhere near the DNC,' she wrote. 'As a former DNC member, it's quite clear there are too many people currently in roles for the wrong reasons. From the outside looking in, I don't think Ken Martin is one of them.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
