On January 10th, Sheriff Mark Curran clearly lost a debate with me regarding his support for driver’s licenses for illegal aliens. In a strange twist, he tried to cover-up the fact that he lost the debate by saying it wasn’t a “debate.”

This so-called “controversy” is absurd. It is like saying that Notre Dame didn’t lose to Alabama because it wasn’t a football game. Only a Democrat would try to spin that the event wasn’t “supposed to be a debate.”

I shouldn’t be surprised – Curran, until recently, was a Democrat.  He told “Frontline” last year that America has “lured” illegal aliens here under false pretenses, that “there is no rule of law” and that he “thinks the Democrat Party is right on many issues.” Curran has spoken about this driver’s license issue for months and testified on behalf of the bill – the only member of law enforcement to do so. For him and a few of his friends to suggest that he wasn’t “prepared” to debate is also absurd.

Curran had been criticizing me in the Illinois Review so I challenged Sheriff Curran to a debate at the RALC on January 10th back in December.  The challenge was sent out as press release, posted extensively in social media, listed on GOP USA’s calendar, etc.     The sheriff sent me an email accepting this specific debate challenge two days later.

The email stated:

Hi Bill, regardless of differences on this issue (driver certificates), I do respect you and did not speak bad of you at Libertyville Township meeting. You do a lot of great things for the party and I will debate you on the drivers’ certificates anytime.

Mark Curran's email to me accepting the debate challenge at the RALC meeting on January 10th
Mark Curran’s email to me accepting the debate challenge at the RALC meeting on January 10th

I told Ray True that Curran had accepted the debate. Sheriff Curran contacted RALC to say that he was coming and Ray and I discussed the debate on a number of occasions. In fact, Ray was looking forward to moderating the debate “PBS” style and said he would try to get two podiums because he only had one.

Now if the Sheriff wants to engage in revisionist history – that is his prerogative as untruthful as it may be. Or maybe he has a selective memory. If that is the case, he should get that checked out.

I wasn’t going to argue the absurdity of the debate-discussion “controversy” at the meeting. But the video reveals the truth: that a debate was intended and expected – until Curran decided differently at the end of the event.

The full video and my rebuttal to Curran’s remarks and stated inaccuracies about this bad bill are available here. 

Unfortunately, this is what Democrats do – they attempt to divide and conquer conservatives by distracting us from the real issues: in this case, that the sheriff broke an oath of office to defend the Constitution and our laws to side with the pro-amnesty open borders coalition and support a law that encourages lawbreakers to come to our state.

At the RALC meeting, I saw and heard the outrage against another former Democrat-turned-Republican named Pat Brady after he refused to support the GOP party platform on gay marriage. Brady is now being called upon to resign or be fired. It is about time. But supporting and encouraging illegal immigration is also against the GOP party platform. Many Republicans are just as outraged about this violation of the GOP party platform as they are about Pat Brady and I am one of them.

Mark, in your email response to me, you said you would debate me on the “driver’s certificates anytime.”

Mark, name the time.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s