Home / Articles / Commentary / Letters to the Editor / Letters to the Editor
Print this Article
Wednesday, April 15, 2009 07:04 am

Letters to the Editor

Bridget and Chris Redman with their son, Brennan, in front of the Old Lux.


An interesting story, indeed, about the Old Lux [see “Realcuisine” by Julianne Glatz, IT, April 2]. It generally references the other east side restaurants, but you missed one of those east side notables. That is the Parkview, on Clear Lake across from Bergen Park golf course, run by Hank Shuey for many years in the ’60s, ’70s and into the ’80s or thereabouts.

His great specialties included French fried lobster tails and the biggest, truly huge baked potatoes with a unique cheese sauce, which brought many customers, such as my wife and I and friends and others, back for more for many years.

And, of course, the Black Angus, owned and operated by Gene Petrelli and Wally Poos on South Sixth Street (currently Gallagher’s), whose specialty included aged black Angus steaks, hand cut by Wally, and tasty, tasty eating.

James M. Henneberry



I am writing to commend Illinois Times for running Jim Hightower’s column, “Common Sense.” As George Orwell once wrote, “In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” I consider the inclusion of “Common Sense” in your newspaper, along with your other reporting, to be “a revolutionary act.”

For example, in his column, “Fighting back in America’s 30-year class war,” (3/19), Hightower points out that the proposal by the federal administration to raise taxes on the top 5 percent of the population to fund various social and infrastructure projects is but a reaction to 30 years of federal policies, which favored that 5 percent and has resulted in them controlling 60 percent of the nation’s wealth. The charges of “class warfare” and “socialism” that have been leveled at Obama are intended to politically position him to favor “economic growth,” which primarily benefits the richest 1 percent of the population.

Obama’s economic team is comprised primarily of proponents of “growth” who advocate for failed “trickle-down” strategies, such as having the government give a trillion dollars to financial institutions for worthless assets.

Yet these economic advisors cringe at the idea of the government giving money to people in need.

Lawrence C. Johnson



I want to commend my friend and colleague Erin Conley for her service to Springfield District 186 and the entire community. Erin spent countless hours over four years as a school board member and president working tirelessly to strengthen our district and schools. Over her four years, She had a strong record of accomplishment. She advocated for and helped secure additional high school social workers, alternative education options, expansion of gifted education programs, school safety initiatives and $88 million of district-wide facility upgrades.

Early in her tenure, she advocated for air-conditioning all schools in the district, dismissing calls that it could never be done. Now, District186 has a phased plan for air-conditioning all buildings. Furthermore, as board president, she led the transition of a new superintendent and worked closely with him to implement many reforms. She also helped negotiate fair teachers/staff contracts and pushed for active student, parent and community involvement, school recycling and much more.
Sheila Stocks-Smith



Corporations and unions have become an invasive species in the political process. If a person is ineligible to vote in a district outside their own, should that person still have the right to influence the outcome of a election in that district? Corporations and unions cannot physically punch cards inside voting booths (try asking for their voter registration card!), so why are they allowed to influence the outcome of an election by channeling campaign money to candidates running in that district? Shouldn’t the only people allowed to contribute money to candidates in that district simply be the citizens of voting age in that district and no one else?

I’m well aware of the argument about money equaling speech. But if “We the people” can show a compelling interest that limiting speech from outsiders is in our best interest, that speech can and should be limited. For example, I possess the cherished freedoms of speech, religion and assembly, but do I possess the freedom to physically enter and occupy your home to exercise those rights? Of course not.
Bob Smet

Log in to use your Facebook account with

Login With Facebook Account

Recent Activity on IllinoisTimes


  • Thu
  • Fri
  • Sat
  • Sun
  • Mon
  • Tue
  • Wed