Funding disclosure for the Olympics came right after we voted him in office. You think that was planned? No one complains when Daley spends billions in downtown Chicago,in the name of tourism. This City looks much better down town. Let the little guys have something. I agree with you.. not just anything that comes to Daley's mind. It always amazes me that we never have funds when our inner-city schools need books, pools or even a safe clean enviroment condusive for learning. Or affordable housing and social services for the homeless.Or when the streets on the south and westsides need to be fixed as to prevent a new car from sounding like crap within a year or two. It is amazing to me that these inequities exist and the Mayor won't go get some private funding to solve them. Oh, I could go on and on, I may aswell stop now, because I probably lost you when I mentioned inequities. No one wants to hear about that. The Olympics and every other major development project is all about the City contracts for family and cronies. Contracts is where the real stealing is gong on in this city...construction, constuction, construction. Didn't you know? The hired truck scandel, thats just a diversion. A closed game to the unconnected and the majority of minority construction companies. And... yes poor black people need a nice place to swim too!

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

I hate politics! Actually I love them, it doesn't do any good to curse politics without understanding the options. The first thing though is people have got to learn about city government. What is the deal with there not being enough school books? Is it that there's no money or that it's a choice between books for kids and an Olympic Village. It's not done that way. The system stinks, but don't criticize it unless you know what's wrong and why. To start, try reading the City budget ordinance and demand that your Alderman do the same. Then read Cook County's budget. BTW, you're right on this pool stuff. I'm pissed. What does Daley owe Ed Smith anyways? Does he do this to smooth things over or because he's giving away other people's money?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Jacketpotatoe, when you have to choose between that new jacket or a or a balanced meal, which would you choose? I'm would guessing you would choose the former. The point I was trying to make was that the Citys priorities should change. I know enough about politics to know that legislation should be changed so that funding is spent on the quailty of life for all it's constituents. We all should be the priority. Not the few! If leaders really cared about ALL of us they would concentrate on that. And oh yeah, there is always the option of getting PRIVATE FUNDING if they can't get the legislators to channel funds from one budget to the other. The real shameis that inequities isn't a priority for those with money. Most don't give unless they get a return. Daley is calling the shots here, the Olympics will be anywhere he see's fit. And if you knew anything about politics you would know that Daley has to a least pretend that he cares about the constituents in what ever wards the Olympics will take place. In this case the 28th ward Ambassordor/ Alderman is Ed Smith.Come... rest your jacket on that!

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

There's no maybe about it. I don't believe I'm overreacting when I say that the very future of freedom and democracy is at stake. To allow what has been passed off as true representative democracy to continue, year after year, decade after decade and generation after generation will leave quite an ugly and unpleasant legacy for our progeny. Because, while it is reasonable to argue that, in a very real sense, the ideals established in our Constitution and Bill of Rights have NEVER been substantially realized, at least not for certain groups of people who have been born, lived and died within the confines of our borders, these ideals are certainly more than just words to admire. Or to tolerate our 'leaders' paying only lip service to. They are, indeed, words to aspire to live by, and to expect and require and demand that all of our fellow citizens live by, ESPECIALLY those entrusted with the powers to set policies, make laws and interpret those laws. The inherent conflict of interest which has historically tainted our political and social condition is easy to see. Our elected officials determine how much we have to pay in taxes, what is taxed and what our tax dollars are spent for. They also make the laws we are required to comply with and, either appoint or slate for election those who determine what those laws mean and how they are to be applied and imposed upon us. Further, they make the very laws, and interpret same, which obstruct most citizens from becoming elected officials. They have the gall to repeat the lie that anyone is free to seek public office, always failing to acknowledge the myriad of roadblocks designed to impede all but the established network of the few from having any chance of success at election time. No wonder apathy abounds. The few occasions in our history when enough citizens demanded change are marked by exceptionally heinous wrongs having been suffered for unbelievably long periods of time, by the least able to object to said wrongs, until they just couldn't take it anymore, and a few heroic souls put their lives on the line and said 'no more, no more'. I need not point out that some of these heroes lost their lives far too soon. The methods employed, by those who hold true democracy in disdain, are an impressive variety of scare tactics, slight of hand, arrogant dismissals of citizens concerns, stonewalling and plain bold faced lies, usually coated in a thin veneer of truths. Whether one considers things on a local, state or national level, the norm is frustratingly consistent in discouraging the common man or woman from participating in their own governance. I believe it is worth trying to play the election game, not by the rigged rules of those in power, but by avoiding the many roadblocks entirely. That's what the WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT concept may be able to accomplish. Not that a permanent revolving door voting strategy is the complete and viable solution, but that it's the most effective means to stimulate the elements that must thrive, for a democracy to be more than a playground for those skilled at manipulation, deception and exploitation. Individuals need to experience the power and authority of their vote, if they are to have the confidence needed to make the effort to vote. They need to see that the vote they cast succeeded in electing a candidate, and not merely the candidate who the 'pundits' predicted would win, but, rather, the candidate(s) the pundits assured the public had no chance whatsoever to win. We love the underdog, because most of us ARE the underdog. What more encouraging experience is there then to know that your vote counted, and counted big time, for one of your own. The Retardicans and the Dumbocrats get to feel the thrill of victory and dominance all the time. They don't have to think about who they're going to vote for at all. All they have to remember, when casting their votes, is to vote a straight party ticket. So, why should the neglected many not have a similiar option? A similiar strategy? Thus, here is one to consider: * 1) Determine which candidates are the INCUMBENTS and DO NOT vote for any of them. * 2) If there are only two candidates running for any given office, all that the voter MUST know is which one is the INCUMBENT, then vote for the CHALLENGER candidate. * 3) If there are MORE than two candidates vying for a given office, determine if the incumbent is listed FIRST, and IF THIS IS SO, then vote for the challenger candidate who is listed LAST. * 4) If the incumbent is NOT listed FIRST, then vote for the challenger candidate who IS listed FIRST. * 5) If no incumbent is running for office, always vote for the LAST candidate listed. The rule to remember is: WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Hey! I'm on your side and I participate in elections. I told you I like your slogan, print it up and pass it out on or before the runoff.( keep it simple) " WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT." Good Luck and remember no less than 100 ft from the polling place.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Mr. David E. Neeley, you just leave clues all over the place. Stevie wonder would be able to tell that you go under several alias. Dude, you you must get over it. 1) Get the courage to try again. 2) Get a champaign manager and Attorney, thats right your are an Attorney, well get one anyway, you can't do everything. 3) Handle your business 4) If you don't win, move on and and run for something else. 5) Don't come to this or any other message board tripping on voters and things you can't change, WITH LONG POSTS. 6) Be fair to others on all message boards, You take the fun out of reading and posting messages.SHORTEN YOUR POST 7) WHEN IN DOUBT REFER TO STEPS 1-7

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

I'm beginning to get the drift that my Italian upbringing, with all the 'ball-busting' one would expect to find in same, has left me with a certain lack of appreciation that others might not understand that I take no personal offense to anything, ever. Also, that my vocabulary and way of speaking/writing may seem overly abrasive at times, though that is rarely my intention. Chalk it up to the hot blood I inherited from my parents. I've found that the first and most important trait to embrace is humility; not the false sense that one is not good enough emotion that passes for humility, but the real magilicutty, respect for others points of view, while retaining confidence that I've done my best to determine if my point of view is as honest, accurate and fair as possible. Feel free to bust my balls on any opinion I express. Just bring intelligence and honesty to the table and I'll be happy to engage in the conversation.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

No.. you engage me!

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

This website belongs to the Chicago Reader. They provide to opportunity for comments on each article that is written by their staff journalists and posted here. There is at least one Reader employee who's job responsibilities include moderating the comments posted. The questions that follow are addressed to that employee(s): The Chicago Reader has always seemed to be one of the few media voices willing to question the honesty and integrity, or lack thereof, of our 'elected' officials, whether city, county or state. Is this because the Reader is acting as a 'heat sink' for dissatisfied citizens? Or is the Reader sincerely dedicated to assisting the citizens in ways that have the potential to improve their lives? And do the individuals, who have the authority to determine what the Reader will, and will not, publish, have the freedom to publish whatever they choose, limited only by law? Will those in authority consider publishing an article, albeit subject to judicious/honest editing, on the following proposal to the voting public? "PROPOSAL FOR AN ELECTION EXPERIMENT This may not be the proper forum for this, but I will state my 'idea'/'proposal' anyway, and see if anyone is intrigued by my reasoning. I hold the opinion that it has been a very, very long time since we, the citizens of these United States, have truly and honestly been represented by our so-called 'public servants'. While it can be said that a certain small percentage of any given area's population is well and generously served by their elected officials,(at the financial and social expense of the area's 'common', politically unconnected citizens),for the most part, our elected officials are motivated by three basic principles: get power, keep power and use that power to gain wealth, for themselves and for those of like mind. I assert that the vast majority of voters are poorly served by the 'powers that be', in all areas of their daily lives. It is obvious that many 'public servants' define themselves as being those individuals who are served BY the public. This sad state of affairs is the result of simple mathematics. If one determines, in any given area,(ie. city, county, state and federal),the total number of citizens who are qualified to cast a vote, one finds that perhaps 50%, more or less, of that number are actually registered to vote; further,in any given election, one finds that typically between 50% - 60% of those registered don't even bother to make the effort to actually cast their vote(s). Thus, all that is required to win a 2 person race is 51% of the votes actually cast, effectively meaning that a mere 13% of the total number of citizens QUALIFIED to vote are determining who is elected to represent the interests of the remaining 87%! In a race of more than 2 contestants, the percentage needed to win becomes even lower than 13%. It is a puzzling mystery why the 2 major political parties, the Dumbocrats and the Retardicans, continue to strongly resist the establishment of additional political parties, though one sees occasional use of 'shill' candidates by both major parties. So, I propose a little experiment, to be conducted in both the smallest, local level elections, (ie. town, city, county, township, village,etc.), as well as in the larger level elections, (ie. state and federal), an experiment which is designed to accomplish several goals and answer several questions,(besides the obvious one, of seeing if enough people/voters will get off their butts and choose to participate in this experiment!). Basically, my question is this: what would happen if enough voters choose, in every election, both primary and general, to cast their votes by adhering to the following rules, completely disregarding all factors commonly used by voters to make their decisions on who to vote for, and simply casting their vote(s) by applying these rules/formula: * 1) Determine which candidates are the INCUMBENTS and DO NOT vote for any of them. * 2) If there are only two candidates running for any given office, all that the voter MUST know is which one is the INCUMBENT, then vote for the CHALLENGER candidate. * 3) If there are MORE than two candidates vying for a given office, determine if the incumbent is listed FIRST, and IF THIS IS SO, then vote for the challenger candidate who is listed LAST. * 4) If the incumbent is NOT listed FIRST, then vote for the challenger candidate who IS listed FIRST. * 5) If no incumbent is running for office, always vote for the LAST candidate listed. Remember to COMPLETELY DISREGARD all impulses to concern yourself with the specific persons who you are voting for and/or the specific persons you are not voting for and/or the specific incumbents who will, should enough voters in any given election participate in this experiment, be losing their jobs. Remember,also,that the issues don't matter, policies don't matter, individual candidates' personal charm/attractiveness does not matter..................... nothing matters other than adhering to the 5 rules stated above. If enough voters in any given election participate in this experiment, the result should be that a whole lot of incumbents will be voted out of office. What reaction(s), on the part of politicians and their cronies, will this stimulate? If enough voters CONTINUE to participate in this experiment during the next several election cycles, thus keeping any specific person from holding office for more than a single term, will those non-politically connected individuals who would like to sincerely serve their fellow citizens by holding public office, but have determined that their chances of being elected are slim-to-none, now find that they have a reasonably decent chance of succeeding in holding public office? Will the 'professional politicians' eventually find other lines of work and abandon trying to gain and hold power over their fellow citizens, (since it's difficult to establish power,influence and control in just a single term in office)? Will the majority of those citizens who do gain public office now be honest, ethical, fair-minded, hard-working and intelligent individuals, who seek office to actually serve the electorate, (since the traditional motivations of long-term power, influence and wealth will effectively no longer be available or at least substantially diminished)? Will these new, honest candidates, now encouraged to run for office, alter the usual dynamics of 'campaigning'? And in what ways? As the reader may surmise, this experiment is designed to disrupt the decades-old flow of bullshit, which has passed for so long as democracy; bullshit both by the politicians and bullshit by the voting public's failure to effectively participate in their own governing. The above experiment should be conducted in all political contests; Administrative, Executive, Legislative and Judicial. The rule to remember is: WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT. The 5 rules above are designed to mathematically ensure that the maximum number of votes are cast in such a way as to be effective in denying all elected officials more than one term in office; to prove, by the only means those smugly in power ever understand, that the voters actually determine who holds public office, and that those presently holding said office(s) have, for far too long, held the vast majority of their constituents in contempt, evidenced not by their words, but by their deeds. Keep in mind that this experiment I am proposing is not meant to be a final solution to our present social, economic and political disparities, but more as a catalyst for positive change in the attitudes of those who claim to represent ALL citizens' best interests, instead of the present predominance of their representing only the interests of the chosen few. To paraphrase one of our past presidents, who once said: * You may fool SOME of the people ALL of the time * You may fool ALL of the people SOME of the time * But you cannot fool ALL of the people, ALL of the time The sad reality is that you need only to fool just the right number of people, at just the right time, to attain power and control over the many." just asking.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Are you willing to place your proposal in news papers ads? Are you going to distribute your proposal at the polls?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

'My proposal' is an idea. Ideas are in the public domain and are, thus, free to any and all who wish to share them. Ads cost money. I am essentially an idealist and, as is often the case, idealists rarely accumulate wealth, nor do they wish to, knowing that life is a finite experience, not to be wasted on gathering that which one cannot keep for long. I do not own the ideas expressed in the 'PROPOSAL FOR AN ELECTION EXPERIMENT', anymore than a person can own 1+1=2. I invite anyone and everyone to express and share their ideas, anywhere and everywhere they can. As has been expressed elsewhere, all that those whose nature is to be hurtful, exploitative and heartless need to be able to do as they will, is for those whose nature is to be helpful, generous, fair-minded and reasonable, to do nothing. In my own meager way, I have presented an idea that, should it be shared and embraced by enough people, may be a bit more than doing nothing. Because, to try and track down every ant-minded, self-centered, pocket-picker would be as difficult and fruitless as trying to catch mosquitoes one bug at a time. Better to use the repellent method. The 'WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT' concept may be that repellent. It has the potential to, at the very least: 1) demonstrate to those discouraged non-voters that they do, indeed, have the power to control their own governance. 2) break the strong rhythm of 'you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' that has been, for so long passed off as democracy. 3) encourage those citizens of honest and fair-minded character to seek public service office. 4) stimulate sufficient interest, in the minds and hearts of our fellow citizens, to overcome the malaise and apathy so effectively imposed on them, by those so very accomplished in doing so. Would the Trib or Times accept my money, (if I had any), to print my proposed election experiment? Not likely. For obvious reasons. Will any other printed/web posted media share my ideas, in whatever honestly edited form? Probably not, but, as an idealist, hope burns eternally, tho I have learned not to hold my breath waiting. If you are familiar with the 'Bit Torrent' protocols, you'll understand that the most efficient means of distributing anything is found in nature. The apathetic non-voters need to believe that there is hope. They need to experience their significance at election time. They need to have confidence that their efforts are not futile. All that is needed to achieve this is, even just one time, in just one election, for most to all of the incumbents being voted out. Just once. Then the real work will begin. Then the people will have to embrace true participatory democracy, with all the thought and effort that it requires. Then all candidates for public service office will have to prove to the people that they not only deserve to be elected, but deserve, by their deeds, not merely their words, that they deserve to remain in public service office. A pipe dream? probably. But, that's essentially what our founding fathers were doing, some 230+ years ago. Spread the word, if you like what I've proposed.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

You just don't get it do you? Your posts are too long. Nobody wants to read your doom and gloom rants. I can't wait until Ben and Mike list and article for us to comment on that has nothing what so ever to do with bad poilitcas,there are a few good ones. You'll probably still babble and rant about bad politicans even when the subject matter is about tube socks. Ben and Mike please I'm begging you, give us something lite. As for you, Mr.David E. Neeley or who ever this frustrated back seat politican is, You know who you are. Lighten up won't you?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Another thought-provoking post from the ever erudite CS. If you yearn for lighter fare, I suggest you read the Trib or the Times. As for 'there are a few good ones', I'd certainly be pleased if more than a few more 'good ones' were to be successful in seeking public service office. 'Don't you get it' that that's what I've been encouraging? Or is it that you don't want to get it? Maybe the problem is that your posts are too short, too devoid of substance, too lacking in thoughtfulness, as in full-of-thought. Maybe if you'd appreciate this venue as a place to share ideas and not merely a place to amuse yourself, you'd invest more effort in participating in the conversation and less effort in babbling and ranting about same. If you give it some thought, you'll realize that you don't have to fear things changing anytime soon, your 'clout' job, contract, etc. is likely to be safe for some time to come. Because, like you keep repeating, 'nobody wants to read your doom and gloom rants'. Except, you keep reading them. And you continue to react and respond to them. I wonder why. It can't be that you approve of those 'bad politicians', can it? It can't be that you agree with their activities, burden the common taxpayer needlessly, can it? It can't be that you share their contempt and disdain for the majority of their fellow citizens they believe they succeed in fooling, year after year after year, can it? It can't possibly be that you want them to continue to waste our hard-earned money, paid in taxes, and distributed willy nilly to their favored few, can it? Well, can it? Say it ain't so, Joe.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Get off your arm chair or should I say computer chair and run for office yourself. How can you critize voters for not voting? If you think you know so much about what is good for all of us. why don't you run? You know you want to. Believe me we all get it,you don't need to keep saying the same things, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and AGAIN. Put your money where your mouth or I should say where your hands are.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

It's not about money, it's about purpose, and confidence in that purpose, being realized and acted on by all of the people. I don't believe in buying votes, whether by costly propaganda, doling out jobs and contracts, or by any other means, lawful or unlawful. The election game has been corrupted by money, and, until money is removed from the equation, the election process will continue to be corrupted by money. The people hold the quality of their governance in the palms of their hands. They only need to experience the reality of this fact. The question still remains. Will the people care enough about changing the things they can to spend the only thing they that's free, their time, to take the actions that will confirm their power? Namely, to: ==WHEN IN DOUBT, VOTE THEM OUT== Only fools play a game whose rules are controlled by their opponents. My suggested strategy negates those obstructive rules, and levels the playing field. Isn't a level playing field the 'American Way'?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Sometimes I wonder if those who don't vote or don't register to vote understand how much of their hard earned income is wasted by the gross mismanagement and misuse of the tax dollars we all are forced to 'pony up'. Property Taxes, (part of your rent, if you don't own property AND part of the price you pay for everything you buy, goods and services, 'cause the businesses you buy from pay the same or greater taxes than you do.) Sales taxes of all kinds. Income taxes, both state and federal. Licenses, Fees, Fines, Permits, etc. (also passed on to the consumers) Utility taxes, in addition to the sales taxes, which juice your utility bills. Mystery taxes you may or may not see, and couldn't know what they're for anyway. What's the calculation now, something like 40% - 45% of our GROSS income is taken from us in taxes. Every year we work from January 1st until mid May and ALL of our income earned during that time goes directly into the pockets of some government agency. Granted, many things that government uses our tax dollars for are beneficial to us all. Many, however, are not. Yet, year after year, decade after decade, there still seems to be a steady 70% - 80% of our fellow citizens who either don't vote or don't even bother to register. Our 'elected officials' pay lip service to 'getting more people to register', and only make efforts to do so that benefit their particular political party. WAKE UP, WAKE UP, SLEEPY VOTERS! Our fates are in our own hands.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Let's take a peek into the Political Hack's Playbook. "1) If telling the truth HELPS you, tell the truth. (however rarely this is true for an incumbent) 2) If telling the truth HURTS you, tell a lie, particularly a lie that is impossible to prove is a lie. 3) When lying, coat your lies with as much truth as possible, so the lie APPEARS to be true. 4) When confronted with your lies, vigorously assert that you're NOT lying and accuse those who say you are of LYING. 5) avoid lying about things that can be PROVEN to be lies, tho, you can ALWAYS challenge the honesty of those who present the proof of your lies. 6) Do your very best to keep some sort of track of your lies, so you don't waste energy lying when you are confronted with conflicting lies. 7) Whenever possible, always have OTHERS lie for you, so you can denounce them, if and when they are caught lying. 8) When caught in a lie, change the subject and focus on telling those lies that have, so far, not been proven to be lies. 9) Tell the truth sparingly, as, if the truth were helpful to you, you wouldn't have to tell so many lies in the first place." There's a lot more stuff in the Political Hack's Playbook, but I think this is enough for now, don't you?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Ben Joravsky! you are great!!! MAD PROPS from the Talbott/Kelleher fam!!

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Ben Joravsky! you are great!!! MAD PROPS from the Talbott/Kelleher fam!!

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike