Friday, July 13, 2007
News / Clout City Too many aldermen in the kitchen
Posted by Mick Dumke on 07.13.07 at 02:56 PM
Berny Stone, alderman of the 50th Ward, recently introduced an ordinance that would repeal the city's ban on selling foie gras, the delicacy made from the livers of force-fed ducks or geese. Several other aldermen have sponsored a separate ordinance that would also repeal the ban. Here's what happened when I asked Stone for an update on the measures this week:
So foie gras hasn’t come up in committee yet.
STONE: There’s two ordinances. One may be in Rules [the Committee on Committees, Rules and Ethics]. Mine is in Budget, because the committee’s name is Budget and Administration [actually, Budget and Government Operations]. And you’ve got to understand, the repeal of that ordinance has absolutely nothing to do with [the Committee on Health, which held last year's debate on the foie gras ban]. The question involved in Budget is whether the City Council had the right, the authority, really, to pass it. Because the reason I questioned whether we had the right to pass it was that we have the authority to pass matters that affect the health and safety of people, but do we have the authority to pass ordinances with respect to nonhumans?
There are other animal cruelty laws. Dog-fighting laws.
STONE: Yeah, but those have an effect on human beings. Basically we control in particular dogs and cats so we can control their effect on human beings.
There’s no city ordinance that when someone’s beating a dog with a stick they can be arrested? There’s no city ordinance—
STONE: Yeah, there is. There is, I’m sure. There’s animal cruelty ordinances—yes, there are.
But this is different, you’re arguing.
STONE: First of all, we have no business in everybody’s kitchen. I’m opposed to all these crazy ordinances my colleagues have been introducing, like the trans-fat ordinance. Why are we in people’s kitchens? Next thing I’m going to tell you what soap you can use in your bathroom, or what toothpaste you can use. I mean, that really shouldn’t be our—unless it’s poisonous and affects your health, we have no business in that area.
Well, I guess the argument with trans fats is that they are bad for your health and that they are essentially poisonous.
STONE: We don’t know that. How many times do the authorities tell us, "Bacon is bad for you and you can get cancer if it’s crisp bacon," then they come out and say, "Well, we were mistaken—it isn’t." Or, "Artificial sweeteners—we’ve experiemented and it killed the experimental animals." Of course what they didn’t tell you was that the amount of sweetener they gave the animal was the equivalent to a human being using 350 packages of Sweet 'N Low. [He turns to 40th Ward alderman Patrick O’Connor, who walked in with a new goatee.] Oh, I didn’t recognize you with the beard.
O’CONNOR: Yeah, it’s just a summer thing.
Comments (40)
Showing 1-40 of 40
I'm tired of the government telling me how I should kill myself. Its my choice I should eat what I want to eat, don't restrict me ... now that I've read this im going to eat 3 mchicken sandwhiches with extra mayo...ban that aldermen/women of chicago! good for stone!
like
dislike
How about Bernie doing something, for the first time in his long and ignoble career, that actually helps people, besides Bernie's people, namely, repealing the many, economically oppressive ordinances that pluck our hard-earned dollars out of our pockets 'daley'? No, that would be something only an honest person would do, and Bernie's never been known for his honesty. Now he's reached that point in his life where he'll be known for his senility.
Bernie Stone and Pat O'Connor are both ethically challenged. O'Connor has more relatives on the payroll than Fred Roti. Both are fat, ignorant, rude, tax eating idiots.
true true, but look at all the publicity Chicago got when we did ban foie gras...way more then having realatives on the payroll
MAYOR DALEY AND OUR ALLIES HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENRY IN MIND. JUST DON'T EAT THE DUCK LIVER, IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE REPEAL.I THINK TIFS ARE A GOOD THING SO WE CAN DEVELOP DEPRESSED SECTIONS OF THE CITY.CHICAGO IS A WORLD CLASS CITY SINCE WE CLOSED THE PROJECTS, AND REMOVED THE RIFF RAFF. PEOPLE CRY ABOUT CORRUPTION AND THE 11, 19, WARDS AND HDO BUT ALL THESE GROUPS PRODUCE HARD WORKERS, AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE UP.MAYOR DALEY IS A GENIUS FOR BRING HUBERMAN TO CTA, AND DUNCAN TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. IF WE GET CASINOS, MORE REVENUE WILL BE GENERATED, TO REDUCE TAXES. SORICH, AND AL SANCHEZ DID NOTHLING WRONG. WE NEED TO HAVE A FUND RAISER FOR THESE GOOD MEN. MC TIGUE HAD TO PAY THE PRICE, THAT BUSINESS
"MAYOR DALEY AND OUR ALLIES HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENRY IN MIND. JUST DON'T EAT THE DUCK LIVER, IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE REPEAL. I THINK TIFS ARE A GOOD THING SO WE CAN DEVELOP DEPRESSED SECTIONS OF THE CITY. CHICAGO IS A WORLD CLASS CITY SINCE WE CLOSED THE PROJECTS, AND REMOVED THE RIFF RAFF. PEOPLE CRY ABOUT CORRUPTION AND THE 11, 19, WARDS AND HDO BUT ALL THESE GROUPS PRODUCE HARD WORKERS, AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE UP. MAYOR DALEY IS A GENIUS FOR BRING HUBERMAN TO CTA, AND DUNCAN TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. IF WE GET CASINOS, MORE REVENUE WILL BE GENERATED, TO REDUCE TAXES. SORICH, AND AL SANCHEZ DID NOTHING WRONG. WE NEED TO HAVE A FUND RAISER FOR THESE GOOD MEN. McTIGUE HAD TO PAY THE PRICE, THAT BUSINESS"
MAYOR DALEY AND OUR ALLIES HAVE THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITIZENRY IN MIND. And what an amazing coincidence--it seems to align with the best interest of cronies and campaign contributors the vast majority of the time! JUST DON'T EAT THE DUCK LIVER, IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE REPEAL. Mayor Daley had an opportunity to veto the foie gras ban when the City Council originally passed it, but he did not do so. If this was such terrible public policy, why'd he wait until after the issue resurfaced to so vehemently oppose it? I'm sure petty revenge against a certain big-box ordinance (and foie gras ban) sponsor had nothing to do with it. The mayor is never petty or mean-spirited at all. Never ever ever. I THINK TIFS ARE A GOOD THING SO WE CAN DEVELOP DEPRESSED SECTIONS OF THE CITY. Like the Loop? The West Loop? The South Loop? Depressed eyesores, all of them. Who'd ever want to go, live, or do business there? PEOPLE CRY ABOUT CORRUPTION AND THE 11, 19, WARDS AND HDO BUT ALL THESE GROUPS PRODUCE HARD WORKERS, AND AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE UP. You're right, I do cry about the corruption. So much taxpayer money wasted and such poor services delivered in so many areas. You're right about the moving up though--the federal detention center downtown must have an elevator. MAYOR DALEY IS A GENIUS FOR BRING HUBERMAN TO CTA, AND DUNCAN TO THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. Good thing Daley succeeded whichever jackass appointed the spectacularly untalented Frank Kruesi to head the CTA! Oh wait.... IF WE GET CASINOS, MORE REVENUE WILL BE GENERATED, TO REDUCE TAXES. Money appears like magic, out of thin air! No one is a loser! It's just like a TIF. Cash rains from the heavens. And can you even imagine what would happen if you put a casino IN a TIF? Rainbows would burst forth in the sky, cascading to earth where their bases would be populated by hordes of leprechauns bearing cauldrons of gold doubloons for all the people! What are we waiting for??? SORICH, AND AL SANCHEZ DID NOTHING WRONG. Funny that, because a jury--you know, the element of our legal system which decides guilt or innocence in criminal cases, as established by laws and precedents stretching back centuries--thought otherwise in the case of Sorich. And another will weigh Sanchez's fate before long. WE NEED TO HAVE A FUND RAISER FOR THESE GOOD MEN. I'm sure some TIF-funded "consulting fees" can be arranged.
"You're right about the moving up though--the federal detention center downtown must have an elevator." It does.
ALderman OConnor better worry that the US Attorneys and the State Regulators don't look into the the real estate dealings of his wife Odishoo. Maybe she is just a hardworking real estate agent like Patti Blagojevich.
And that man who writes in ALL CAPS! I can just imagine Bernie Stone screaming these things. Screaming of course because he can't hear a thing.
Bilos, US Attorney Fitzgerald has turned into Ex-US Attorney Scott Lasser. He'll grand stand for Sanchez, Troutman,and Lombardo(120 years old). But the Daley Administration is teflon and IRISH...just like US Attorney Fitzgerald! How can low level suck-holes like Sorich, Angelo Torrez, Al Sanchez,Don Tomzak,John Kosiba, and John Roberson do what they do without the JUICE. The JUICE is Daley/Joyce/Degnan . I know and you know....But US Attorney Fitzgerald doesn't know? So except this Administration for what it is.....THE IRISH MOB Any other race would be in JAIL!
The Irish Rule by divide and conquer. The Italians had their day in the Sun, and they screwed it up. You were a victim of your own ambition and the vengence of the Irish. Lots of little people suffer--including unpolitically connected Irish. Pat O'Connor is not big time and could get indicted, Daley screwed him for State's Attorney in 92. O'Connor has a lot of dirt, nepotism, and his wife's real estate deals and quid pro qou.
It really doesn't seem like much of an issue. Here in Westridge, a lot the older folks and a lot of the immigrants remember taking live animals to the butcher to be slaughtered for friday night dinner. It is still a custom in many parts of the nation, especially in farming communities. It is only the younger, urban generation that thinks food magically appears in supermarkets. I bet none of those yuppies paying for organic food ever gave any real thought to the fact that those migrant workers harvesting that organic food don't have portapotties in the fields with them. Personally, I am a vegetarian, this foie gras issue doesn't affect me one way or the other. But I bet that most other people don't particularly care about it either, foie gras isn't a staple of middle or lower class cuisine, in America, at least. THat being said, I am in support of repeal. Nietzche once said that everyone wants to bend the world to their will. I would add, "Thank god there are those that would oppose them." The best government is that which governs least. (Another quote, I forgot from whom) Bernie is right in opposing the ordnance. The issue is not whether or not the law is well intentioned, few politicians are villains in their own eyes. The issue is that there is no need for the government to act, and therefore it shouldn't. There is no fraud or de mala acts here, anyone eating foie gras knows exactly what they are eating (at least to the extent that they want to know). Now if it turned out to be donkey meat disguised as foi gras, or melanin laced soybeans, that would be a different matter. I can understand the elected officials intentions in passing the act. It is a difficult and often thankless task maintaining a community like Westridge or Chicago, and sometimes hard or unpopular decisions need to be made. But even with so important and noble a goal as that, we always have to remember that it is a community of adults (well, technically adults, anyhow) and it is an unalienable right for adults to be able to make their own decisions about how they want to behave, provided the community is not endangered. No one, not even elected officials, has the right to treat the residents of our communities as though they were their children. For any of these laws to be supportable, it has to be shown that they mitigate a clear and present danger to the community. I can't see where any of them has passed that test. Granted, there may be some danger in, say, trans fats. But there is danger in everything we do, the world is safe only for the dead. Therefore the test of the validity of a law is not that it mitigates a risk of danger, but that it mitigates a risk of danger that would otherwise be unknown and a serious threat to the average potential victim. At best we might consider a warning label of some sort. That would allow foie gras consumers to make a knowledgeable choice about their eating habits, rather than having the elected officials making the choice for them.
Randy Gordon says: "Nietzche once said that everyone wants to bend the world to their will." and "No one, not even elected officials, has the right to treat the residents of our communities as though they were their children." Bernie Stone says: (Stone stood in front of a recent community meeting, which included many in the audience who THOUGHT they were on a TIF advisory committee, and told us,) "I don't know what you THINK you were appointed to do, but I appointed you, you serve at the pleasure of the alderman, and I'll let you know when your services are required." And Randy's a die-hard Stone supporter.
Thanks for trying to get Stone to answer some questions on the record, but I'm not sure which is a sillier, blatant publicity stunt: the ban or the repeal. Stone is chair of the buildings committee. Next time Stone seems alert enough for a few questions from the press, why not ask him when he is planning hearings into our Buildings Dept? Is he reading the same papers as us? What exactly is he waiting for before he decides Our Fair City might need some additional rules or other legislative controls to address the obvious systematic corruption problems? From the Trib, June 3, 2007: "The Daley administration already had been hit by a series of building-related scandals, including the collapse of a Lincoln Park porch that killed 13 people and the hiring of a teenage building inspector whose father was a top union official. Since late last year, 10 city employees have been charged with taking bribes or lying in connection with building permits and inspections."
Bernie's taking a nap and Randy's giving him a foot massage, so, we're gonna have to wait 'till they're finished 'bonding'........
People keep telling me how astute Bernie really is, but obviously he's kind of slow. It seems to take him about two years to figure out he got tricked into voting for something ... like the foie gras ban or that "illegal" (in his opinion) permit fee schedule that somehow got through HIS building committee and the full council.
Lindsey Lohan was released from rehab, Paris Hilton has turned a page, O'Conner is sporting a goatee... And these morons don't seem to understand that no one wants to pay their public servants nearly six figures to debate the merits of foie gras. The CTA is falling apart, school kids are being shot all too often, they can't pass a budget despite one party controlling everything in the statehouse, the county is loosing doctors, nurses, and qualified prosecutors while hiring anyone in Stroger’s family who can still walk and talk, and are police are out of control. Duck liver is high on my priority list! Way to go Stone - at least Randy Gordon will continue to defend our governance, when all those responsible should be ashamed of themselves.
It is not surprising that I share much of Bernies attitudes. As a Westridge alderperson, Bernies views reflect those of the community he serves. I am a member of that community, and my views shape (and are shaped by) the environment I live in, same as his. And one of Westridge's fundamental attitudes is tolerance and respect for other people and cultures. It is that attitude that is shaping the evolution of this law and it's repeal. If you respect those you serve, you don't make laws (or repeal them) lightly. I gather the original law was passed in a hurry, because of some perceived need. It takes time to evaluate the impact of such a law, and to decide whether it was warranted. You see, laws such as this, reflect the wishes and attitudes of the community to some extent. On the more obscure issues (such as foie gras) those attitudes are not immediately apparent. Elected officials are responsible to all the residents of the community they serve, but, for various reasons, there is usually a small group (called the "usual suspects) that are far more strident in their demands than the general populace. Fairness demands they be given due consideration, and it often takes some time to determine whether or not their attitudes actually represent anything more than their own personal issues. Obviously, Bernie has decided that the community does not care enough about the issue to warrant the law, and thus is acting to repeal it. A minor point about the Westridge community culture: Since Jews are one of the more represented ethnic groups in the Westridge community (though nowhere near what they once were), it is natural that they would influence the common culture to some extent. Indians are another culture that is heavily represented (mostly Northern Indians (as opposed, to say, Dravidians) and their influence on the culture is fairly strong also. What most people don't realize is that Indian and Jewish culture is very similar in their basic attitudes. This is not an accident, India is very near the Middle East, and there was so much traffic between the nations that the cultures have essentially the same roots (see "The Jewish Mind" http://www.amazon.com/Jewish-Mind-Raphael-Patai/dp/081432651X) and, via a Judeo Christian-Islamic heritage, so do most Western cultures. Actually did you know that Hindu devas (sometimes called gods) have a more or less 1:1 correspondence to Judeo - Christian angels? They were synchronized in the 12th century AD by Abraham Abulafia (a 12th century hippie type) who spent time in India and came back to spread the ideas to Western and Christian and Jewish thought leaders.
Of the many major problems in the 'Westridge' community I would have to say the sale of foie gras in it's thriving restaurants (LOL) has got to be at the top of the list, don't you think you piece of shit tool?
It's always amazing, how randy's posts usually come down to a handful of points that are verifiable bullshit, all enmeshed within a web of intelligent-sounding rigamarole. No wonder he and Bernie get along so well.
by randy's reasoning, since, e.g., pakistan is even CLOSER to the middle east than india, jews and muslims should have even MORE in common than jews and hindus as undoubtedly they do ...
Jews, Chrisians and Muslims all spring from the same well. Jews are those who trace their roots back to members of a tribe who rejected Jesus Christ as their scripture-predicted Messiah and are still awaiting His arrival. Christians are Jews who trace their roots back to the members of a tribe who accepted Jesus Christ as their scripture-predicted Messiah and are awaiting His return. Muslims are Jews who trace their roots back to the members of s tribe who were rejected by their fellow members, broke off into their own tribe, and created their own version of the original tribal scriptures, which were codified by one of their members, who was accepted as a sort of substitute Messiah / Prophet, and they are not waiting for anyone's arrival, as they accept the words of their Prophet to be sufficient. All three of these groups of human beings come from the same general, geographical area, thus, it is not surprising that their religious and social beliefs are related. The Vedantists, on the other hand, have nothing in their history to suggest they were, in any way, influenced by the tribal beliefs of the ancestors of Jews, Christians or Muslims. Their source of religious and social beliefs come from the Vedas, writings written in the Sanskrit language, and predating the writings of the Jews, Christians and Muslims. Randy Gordon's speculations are unfounded in fact, as is his custom.
Actually, the jury in the scientific community is still out about the relationship between the northern and southern Indian cultures, and their relationship to the middle east. If you take the scientific view, we really don't know enough about the early stages of Indian culture to make any definitive statements at all. AS a matter of fact, if you take the scientific view, the history of all religions is very tricky. Technically, Jews, for example, can be traced all the way back to 10,000 BC in Tell a Wadi, but those Jews aren't the same ones that were in the bible, and the Biblical Jews pretty much ended with the destruction of the second Temple, The modern, Rabbinic Jews are about contemporary with modern Christians in origin, and predate the original Moslems by only a couple of centuries. It really gets fun when you start tossing in DNA and language analysis, which tends to call all of history heavily distorted. And it doesn't matter if you are not a scientist. The age and origins of the Veda's is a political question in current Hinduism. Current scientific though t puts the Veda period as starting in the late Bronze age, about a half millenia after the Jews left Egypt., and arrived in India from the Middle East via routes the black sea area. But thats the scientific view. The religious (both orthodox and pagan) Hindu belief is that the texts are of pure Indian origin. I have never understood why the two views can't coexist peacefully. Although our current culture tends to think of science as "the only revealed truth" that trumps all others, thats not really true in practice. You have to take into account the purposes to which it is put. For satisfying the need for material goods and wealth, science is clearly superior, as evidenced by it's achievements. But human beings have other needs, and they are just as important. Religions are clearly superior in those areas, as evidenced by it's achievements. We are not fictional Vulcans, like in Star Trek, and the personal qualities of humans are as important (or more) to us as material goods. We don't choose leaders on the basis of scientific achievements. HInduism has produced some of the finest people I know, and thats all the evidence I think is necessary to support whatever they wish to believe about the world and it's history. If scientists believe otherwise, thats their right, also. Of all the unalienable rights we recognize in this country, the ability to walk whatever path you wish in life is one of the most paramount. There is no reasons science and religious beliefs can't coexist, even though they contradict each other. Most scientists (including almost all mathematicians) are highly religious, and manage to reconcile contradicting beliefs without serious difficulty.
You are so far out of your element, it's almost laughable. Jews, Christians and Muslims are of one source, if not ever of one mind. They all worship the same kind of Supreme Being, one created in their limited imaginations to serve their limited, material desires. Jews, Christians and Muslims have created their God in their own image. Thus, it's to be expected that all three of these groups engage in the many variations of violent, manipulative, lustful, malicious and malignant human behaviors, all in the name of the 'will' of their 'God'. Review the many wars, violent conflicts, horrific abuses and atrocities throughout history, you'll find that Jews. Christians and Muslims have played an active part in most every one of them, all in the name of the 'will' of their 'God'. Makes it obvious where the root of much insanity comes from.
I missed this one, but, it bears repeating: "The real story July 17th - 12:03 a.m. Lindsey Lohan was released from rehab, Paris Hilton has turned a page, O'Conner is sporting a goatee... And these morons don't seem to understand that no one wants to pay their public servants nearly six figures to debate the merits of foie gras. The CTA is falling apart, school kids are being shot all too often, they can't pass a budget despite one party controlling everything in the statehouse, the county is loosing doctors, nurses, and qualified prosecutors while hiring anyone in Stroger’s family who can still walk and talk, and are police are out of control. Duck liver is high on my priority list! Way to go Stone - at least Randy Gordon will continue to defend our governance, when all those responsible should be ashamed of themselves."
A couple of corrections of your statements. I am not defending anything, I feel no need for that. I am perfectly willing to tolerate opposing opinions. I am doing what I always do, which is trying to help. Mick indicated that posters were needed for the board, so I am posting. The posts are in "Straight Dope" style format, because, presumably, thats what those who read Chicago Reader like. (Besides, whoever Cecil is, I am extraordinarily envious. Writing the Straight Dope must be the most fun job on the planet.) Secondly, no one, least of all a history wonk like me, is denying that there have been some terrific evils done in the name of religion. There are terrific evils done in the name of just about everything in existence. But just because there is evil, does not mean there isn't good as well, and there have been a lot of good done in the name of religion. During Katrina, millions of faith based groups donated time, money and their homes to help the survivors, as they did during the South Pacific Tsunami earlier. Every day, faith based institutions throughout Chicago help the needy, counsel those in pain, and in general, make our world a better place to live. It appears you really don't understand religion, or it's relationship to science. Let me explain. It is well know that whenever human beings perceive anything, they have to match it up to a story, a metaphor as it were, in order to make sense of it (One of the leading proponents of this is Geroge Lakoff (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lakoff) who used these ideas to create the Democratic parties comeback. Religion is what provides us these stories, and thus provides us with a framework for understanding the world we live in. The three branches of religion (pagan, orthodox and scientific) are characterized by the stories they provide. The relationship between stories and religion is pretty obvious, but not for science. As it turns out, mathematics is based on axioms, the scientific equivalent of the "revealed truths" of religion, i.e. things you just have to accept as true without any proof. And it turns out that different sets of axioms can generate different kinds of mathematics, which are also true, in the sens that they explain things about the universe. The field of logic has also undergone a revolution in this area. We now know that "tru and false are not the only choices (it true, false, don't know and don't care)for even basic logic, and there are advances forms, like non monotonic logic, that don't even reference truth or falsity at all. It has only been in the past ten years that studies of logic, language and mathematics have converged. Combined with cognitive science *the study of how human beings think) we are on the verge of understand how the human mind works. My comments on Science and Religion are one such product of that research. "Where mathematics comes from" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Mathematics_Comes_From) is a popularization of the ideas, but these concepts have actually been floating around since prehistoric times. Much of what is in the veda's actually reflects this.
"But just because there is evil, does not mean there isn't good as well, and there have been a lot of good done in the name of religion." But just because there is GOOD, does not mean there isn't BAD as well, and there has been a lot of BAD done in the name of religion. How about you 'telling us a few stories' concerning all the BAD that hes been, is, and likely will be, done 'in the name of' religion? And the specific 'religious' basis for all this BAD? Instead of your typical 'head in the sand' excuse making? How about you sharing with us your definition of BAD? How about your sharing with us your 'understanding' of 'religion' and 'science'? And 'logic'? And, while you're at it, your 'understanding' of "axioms, the scientific equivalent of the "revealed truths" of religion, i.e. things you just have to accept as true without any proof."?
Actually, I just did share my understanding of religion and scinece. Try reading the URL's I mentioned if you want further details. I really can't give you the equivalent of a modern high school education in a blog post. However, since logic is apparently not taught in modern high schools, a surprisingly good popularization is "Logic for Dummies (http://www.amazon.com/Logic-Dummies-Math-Science/dp/0471799416) Frankly, I don't even know where to start on the other areas. What I have been writing is a distillation of many decades of intensive study; I pretty much spent my entire life learning this stuff. One of your questions does have a simple answer, though. Wolfram's Mathworld (one of the best math sites on the net) defines axioms as "An axiom is a proposition regarded as self-evidently true without proof" http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Axiom.html and then points you to further articles on specific sets of axioms. I have found understanding mathematics to be simple, if you have the right teacher, and impossible otherwise. A good history of mathematics helps a lot, since you can then understand why it is the way it is. Bridging to religion from mathematics, many of the Vedic texts you mentioned were actually mathematic textbooks. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_mathematics) in that it was believed that mathematics revealed the nature of God. Then you probably want to go into the sociology of knowledge. try reading the wikipedia articles and then go from there. Now that you are into sociology, you can start in on religion. Now, typing in "The origin of god" returns about 7200 books on Amazon. Over the years, I have read a considerable portion of them. The origin of Satan http://www.amazon.com/Origin-Satan-Elaine-Pagels/dp/0679731180, gives you a view of some of the origins of the bad side of religion, seem you seem fixated on that. To balance that, one good example of the good the medieval church did was "The peace of God" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_and_Truce_of_God which lead to most of todays ideas of social justice. There are tons of other examples, but I don't have space for them here. Most of my books on this subject are in storage (I have only about a hundred at home) and I don't have the mobility I once had to go get them. Anhow, space and time is runniogn short, so lets get to the heart of the matter, my comments on Paganism. I might recommend "A theory of Shopping" http://www.amazon.co.uk/Theory-Shopping-Daniel-Miller/dp/0745619460 as a good introduction to the ideas involved.
And yet, with all this self-proclaimed book knowledge, you can't 'seem' to put your own opinions into your own words. About what can be expected of you.
Back on point....foie gras, remember? The amusing part to me in all of this is the lead sponsor of this stupid waste of city council time...not to mention all the space in blogs everywhere. Who, you ask? None other than the bumbling self-important Alderman of the 49th--yep, Joe Moore. Why is it funny? Simple....given the sad rate of poverty and subsidized housing in this ward, most of his constituients can't even afford it...and thanks to his efforts to so invigorate the schools in this ward, they likely can't even spell it. Sheesh. Repeal it...and move on to more important issues. At least Stone, no matter how much of a loudmouth, does provide us all with amusement.
Yeah, but at what cost? We pay these elected shits to serve our needs, in the most efficient and economical ways possible, not to 'entertain' us, by doing what, picking our pockets 'till there's nuthin' left? I ain't amused.
Actually, the foie gras ban issue is just the tip of the giant iceberg of both Stone-style buffoonery and all the hanky-panky shell game shit the trained monkeys commonly called 'aldermen' engage in 'daley'. Whenever an article is written concerning Chicago and Crook County politics, limiting your comments to a single 'point' is like looking at only one star, ie., what did you buy that expensive telescope for, if not to observe the entire star filled sky? Or, if you prefer, when you hit the beach, do you restrict your gaze to a single bikini-clad lovely, or do you enjoy the wide variety of the panoramic view?
Hmmmmm. Well, Alderman O'Conner may not be making the big bucks in politics, but he makes certain his wife, Barbara O'Conner, the realtor, is making them rich with his politics. I say O'Conner is the corrupt one to look out for. What developer's are on his contribution list or which developers in his ward have "exclusives" with Barbara O'Conner?
