Below is a very rudimentary primer on Islam concepts and definitions for the average American who does virtually no research - without which most opinions are grossly uninformed - beyond mainstream newspapers and broadcasts.

It is essential to understand that Islam is a beautifully rich and spiritually lofty religion, whose precepts most Christians, Jews, and people of other faiths would gladly embrace because they have far more similarities than differences. Controversies arise from vastly different interpretations of small parts of Islam that take on epic proportions inside the Muslim community (Ummah) as well as the outside world.

Earlier this month when the General Assembly was in Springfield, House Speaker Michael Madigan called Senate President John Cullerton six different times to ask him to move the child-care-program-restoration legislation once it passed the House.

Yes, six times. The man is most definitely persistent.

As you probably already know, the deal cut with Governor Bruce Rauner's office by state Senator Toi Hutchinson (D-Olympia Fields) and others to mostly restore the draconian Child Care Assistance Program cuts Rauner made this past summer involved not voting on a bill that would've fully restored the governor's cuts.

Madigan wanted that bill to pass, however, and apparently believed through much of the day that his chamber would pass it, even though it seemed obvious that Representative Ken Dunkin (D-Chicago) had once again jumped into the political bed with the GOP governor. Some House Republicans were talking about voting for the bill, though, and that kept Madigan's hopes alive.

Because he thought it still had a shot, Madigan would not relent on Cullerton. And while the constant calls reportedly irritated Cullerton, they didn't work. Cullerton backed up his member's deal and the speaker was politely refused. Six times. The bill died in the House when all Republicans and Dunkin voted against the speaker.

Madigan's pressure on Cullerton was ironic considering that the speaker is sitting on several Senate bills. Cullerton's chamber has twice passed minimum-wage-increase bills that have gone nowhere in the House despite the fact that Madigan pushed a referendum last year to raise the minimum wage. Cullerton also passed a property-tax-freeze bill that provides more money for Chicago Public Schools and kills off the state's ancient school-funding formula. But that hasn't moved in the House, either.

On November 18, staff and residents at Vera French Pine Knoll, a residential facility for individuals with chronic mental illness, were notified that the Iowa Department of Human Services has proposed that residential facilities (regardless of the number of beds) will not be eligible to receive any Habilitation funds (federal Medicaid funds) after January 1, 2016. Without these funds, Pine Knoll will no longer be able to provide vital services to meet the needs of the residents. The current residents (currently more than 40 individuals) would have to relocate to other facilities or programs in or outside of the Davenport community. Due to the significant lack of residential placements for individuals with mental illness, these individuals will most likely be placed in the community, and may be subjected to a lack of necessary care and services. By placing an individual with mental illness at an inappropriate level of care, it can increase the possibility of hospitalization, homelessness, or incarceration, all of which potentially cost more than the current cost of allowing these individuals to remain in their "home" - which is Vera French Pine Knoll.

In less than a month and a half, more than 40 individuals - some of whom have not lived in the community for some time - will be forced out of their current home and mandated to seek alternative mental-health services. This extremely short notice does not provide enough time to relocate current residents to appropriate care settings. Therefore, these changes to Medicaid rules should not be applied. Currently, there is a lack of openings in community-based mental-health services in Davenport and throughout the state due to the limited number of mental-health providers. It is extremely important to note: The state of Iowa ranks 44th out of 50 states in the nation for mental-health provider availability. It is my belief that these immediate and significant changes are unethical and inhumane when there is already a dire lack of services. How would you feel if your loved one, diagnosed with a mental illness such as schizophrenia, was doing very well in their "home" - working, interacting with others - and they were told that in approximately 45 days they would be moving, possibly to a location quite far from their current home? They would have to quit their job and would lose all local social connections and support.

You may ask: "What can I do?" We all can have an impact on this issue, which can significantly impact individuals within our community. I urge you to advocate for individuals with mental illness in Iowa. You can make written comments on or before December 1 as follows:

• Write to Harry Rossander, Bureau of Policy Coordination, Department of Human Services, Hoover State Office Building, 5th Floor, 1305 E. Walnut St., Des Moines IA 50319-0114.

• Fax comments to (515)281-4980.

• E-mail policyanalysis@dhs.state.ia.us.

You are also welcome to attend a public hearing at the Scott County Administration Building Boardroom at 600 West Fourth Street in Davenport on Wednesday, December 2, from 1 to 3 p.m. to share your concerns.

For more information on this legislation, you can refer to "DHS Notice of Intended Action, ARC 2242C, items 24 and 25": https://rules.iowa.gov/Notice/Details/2242C and https://www.legis.iowa.gov/publications/search/document?fq=id:491097&q=habilitation#441.77.25

As Ghandi says, we all need to "be the change we wish to see in the world." I'm urging you to take action. Mental illness impacts one in four individuals; it may not be impacting you personally, but is likely impacting a coworker, neighbor, or friend.

Ashley Adams
Davenport

"He seems so done with it all," said one top Republican earlier last week about House Republican Leader Jim Durkin. "He hates this," said a close Durkin pal not long afterward.

The overtime session's constant battles with the House Democrats and super-strict marching orders from Governor Bruce Rauner were wearing Durkin down, said some folks who know him. "This summer was pretty nasty," he admitted to reporters last week.

But that changed by Tuesday. Asked to describe the progress of the previous few days on a scale of one to 10, a cheery Durkin replied, "Eight, nine, 10." He seemed back on his game.

Meanwhile, House Speaker Michael Madigan clearly had a very bad week.

The head is one of the leading communication tools a dog will use to let other dogs know what it's thinking and feeling. The head consists of several body parts and each one is used in conjunction with the others to send the memo about its intentions: the position of the head, what the eyes are doing, the position of the ears, what the dog's mouth is doing. In a wonderful book by one on my favorite authors, How to Speak Dog, Stanley Coren gives it to us step-by-step. When we learn to put it all together, we can understand what our dogs are telling us.

The mouth of a dog gives plenty of information on how the dog may be feeling. It can tell you if the dog is angry or fearful, if something is interesting, or "Hey, I am totally relaxed." A relaxed dog will have relaxed facial muscles with the mouth slightly open. Just the simple act of closing that mouth or a slight change in the head position and the dog is telling us it is interested in something else and evaluating the situation.

At some point, Americans are going to have to square with the resounding failure of our two-party political system by shedding the dysfunctional loyalty most voters have to either a Democrat or Republican affiliation. Why? Because neither party delivers anything resembling representative government any more. We elect politicians whose primary mission is continuity of government at our expense.

The allegiances to the modern American Democrats or Republicans are based on well-crafted illusion, disseminated by corporate media on behalf of the two-party political machine. It is brilliant in its simplicity. As long as voters are polarized, the status quo is guaranteed. What self-respecting Democrat will ever vote for a Republican, and vice versa? Couple this with a stranglehold on the primary system, including nonsensical gerrymandering to protect incumbents, and you have a control grid that is efficient and manageable. (See RCReader.com/y/primary.)

The minute voters decide that the candidates presented for election are unacceptable - and as a result cross party lines, or better yet abandon those lines altogether and choose third-party candidates en masse - things will begin to change in a hurry. Americans do not give enough weight to the desperate desire of politicians to be re-elected.

The concept of a public meeting on November 18 featuring the four Illinois legislative leaders and the governor sounds nice, but will it actually move the ball forward and break the months-long governmental impasse?

As you might know, a group of good-government types recently called on the state's leaders to sit down and talk about solving the state's budget issues. The four tops and the governor haven't met as a group since late May.

House Speaker Michael Madigan quickly accepted and then suggested that the meeting be held in public. The move has quite a few people scratching their heads, because nobody expects anything will be solved while the public is looking on.

So why bother?

A big reason is that the Democrats want the public to see what they've been seeing with their own eyes for months. They say the governor walks in, exchanges pleasantries, and then repeats the same basic talking points that he's been making since April.

For months now, Governor Bruce Rauner has said he won't negotiate a state budget unless his "Turnaround Agenda" demands are met. In the meantime, he has slashed funding for the child-care-assistance program, homeless services have been decimated, mental-health services are going without cash, universities are struggling, and even the Meals on Wheels service for the elderly is cutting back deliveries.

But one of the most important things missing from the debate over that "Turnaround Agenda" is how much money the governor's proposals would truly save state and local governments. Even for those who support the ideas, is it really worth all this pain?

There is simply no hard, reliable, trustworthy data out there because numbers from both sides of the debate on union-related subjects such as the prevailing wage are so steeped in ideology.

Among other things, the governor is demanding that local governments, including school districts, be allowed to opt out of paying the prevailing wage on construction and other projects. The amount is set by county, and all publicly financed projects must pay those wages. Unions say killing off the prevailing wage won't save much if any money because productivity will drop when inexperienced, low-wage employees are used to replace trained construction and trades workers.

But just for the sake of argument, let's say that's not true.

It is a common misconception that if a dog is wagging its tail, it will not bite. Our canine friends have a very complex set of body-language signals from the head to the tail that expresses clearly to another dog what his or her intentions are. Humans are just not very good at understanding this language.

That tail seems like a good place to start, and I'll go over some of the basics. By the way: Cats do not care what dog's tails are doing.

Reuters released a special report late last year that went largely under the corporate media's radar. Titled "The Echo Chamber," it exposed that at the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), "a handful of lawyers now dominates the docket."

"The Echo Chamber" examined 10,300 petitions before the Supreme Court from 2004 through 2012, triangulating the number of appeals filed, the names of attorneys and their firms, and the percentage of appeals accepted and heard by SCOTUS.

Some high points:

1) Sixty-six of 17,000 lawyers' appeals were at least six times more likely to be heard than all other lawyers' submissions combined in that same period.

2) These 66 lawyers account for less than 1 percent of lawyers who filed appeals with SCOTUS yet were involved in 43 percent of the cases chosen to be heard.

3) Fifty-one of these 66 lawyers represent corporate interests, turning SCOTUS "into an echo chamber - a place where an elite group of jurists embraces an elite group of lawyers who reinforce narrow views of how the law should be construed."

4) Twelve top firms had an 18-percent success rate in getting their petitions heard and were involved in a third of the cases before SCOTUS. Of the business-related cases accepted by SCOTUS, these top firms were involved in 60 percent.

5) Out of 8,000 firms doing business at the Supreme Court, 31 firms accounted for 44 percent of all cases heard by SCOTUS.

6) A group of eight lawyers accounted for 20 percent of all arguments made before SCOTUS in the past decade versus 30 attorneys in the decade before, demonstrating the diminishing circle of influence at the high court.

7) Demographically, of the 66 top lawyers, 63 are Caucasian and only eight are female. Thirty-one worked as clerks for SCOTUS; 25 worked in high-level positions for the U.S. Office of the Solicitor General, whose attorneys represent the government before SCOTUS; and 14 worked for both, making them "consummate insiders."

Pages