The Blog

Here's is another position - on the Joe Moore campaign literature fiasco and his lack of regard for the citizens of the 49th Ward. Column available at: http://andthatsmyopinion.com

My website "andthatsmyopinion.com" is down for unknown reasons. The essay "Cupidity and Stupidity" re: campaign literature is available on http://howardwatchers.blogspot.com/ as a temporary measure until I get my site up and running again.

What this proves is that Joe Moore didn't read his own campaign bullshit. 'Cause Joe definitely knows who Craig is. If Joe doesn't read his own lies, why should we?

I kind of wish Joe was in that movie called "The Grifters." He could be John Cussack's older, annoying and more clueless brother. Actually, I wish the entire Chicago City Council were in it. But then it would turn into "The Sting."

Moore: "People who didn't know the ins and outs of the ward wouldn't even recognize him." This is a very telling remark. Moore's whole schtick, his legislative agenda, his campaign fund raising, even his campaign literature, is targeted to those OUTSIDE the ward.

Site back up and running. To read "Cupidity and Stupidity", thoughts on campaign literature in the 49th Ward, go to: http://andthatsmyopinion.com

What I like about his literature, is that HE takes credit for the Lakefront Referendum Passing in November. Citizens to Elect Don Gordon, along with members of the community, worked hard all summer to get the signatures required to get it on the ballot, then paid for the flyers that were distributed on election day. Moore states he protects the lakefront, then when the community, students, and some faculty were against Loyola building a new building in the greenspace on the lakefront area of the campus. After hearing all of the complaints, he went downtown and got the building approved, which is looking a lot like the rest of his development approvals, still a big gaping hole in the ground.

Of course, Don Gordon claims to have brought the marina issue to the community's attention, when in truth, Don learned about it the same way everyone else did: from *Jim Ginderske*, who actually went to the meeting on the South Side. Don seems to have learned Joe's tricks quite well.

focus, Tom

Ald. Frank "the Invisible Man" Olivio did the same thing in Ward 13. He sent out a brochure showing pictures of Chicago cops. How odd, because we have no cops out here. Beford Park, Summit and CCSO roll through here all the time when my zip code is Chicago. In Ward 13, we're all chipping in to have Ghostbusters track down Olivio since you never see, hear from him, and he doesn't do jack for our community. If Ghostbusters can save New York from the Stay Puft Marshmello Man, then hopefully they can help us too!!

Joe Moore has taken credit for everything taken place from the Stone Age to today in the 49th Ward! If it were not for the community effort to push forward with projects we would still be living in isolation. He is well aware of Craig, Toni and others who challange him in the Blogs and the Press. The only winners in this ward are the developers who obtain special alderman approval for their projects after community objections. Others have tried to bring serious complaints to our man Joe only to find him hiding in his back office fearing he might have actually met one of his unhappy ward members face to face. After the cover-up in the tragic fire deaths, he supported his slum lord friend (Jay Johnson)and the mysterious apperance of smoke alarms after the Fire Investigators found none, Joe Moore should be removed from this office now. MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT VOTE MOORE OUT

It's distressing to see the Reader host such a dishonest portrayal of one of our cities finest, most progressive Alderman. Joe Moore is one of the few brave and independent council members we have. I am thankful everyday for his leadership. And what is this piece about? Some stupid picture? That's what you've got against Joe Moore? Ben Javorsky, you have been pounding the beat for TIF reform for how long now? You've expressed a great many times your dismay over LaSalle Street TIF - and who voted against it? Joe Moore - along with our other 2 independents: Ric Munoz and Toni Preckwinkle. And the other 47 could give a damn about it. People like Don Gordon and others beholden to big business interests insist that working towards a Living Wage is a waist of time for an Alderman. Respected Professor, and former Alderman, Dick Simpson credits the recent raise in the minimum wage in large part to Joe Moore and others who have worked so tirelessly on this issue. And Jim Ginderske has been flipping homes to make a quick profit for the last couple of years. It's that sort of abuse of the housing market that in part gives rise to the lack of affordable housing we see in our city, it's almost criminal. I think you all need to re-examine what kind of world you want to live in. If you in any cherish the liberal principles of freedom, equality, human dignity, tolerance, and the celebration of diversity, and believe that our common wealth should be used for the common good, then you should be, you need to be, supporting Joe Moore.

> Joe Moore is one of the few brave and independent council members we have. May I ask, what is the evidence for this? > Joe Moore - along with our other 2 independents: Ric Munoz and Toni Preckwinkle. And the other 47 could give a damn about it. Moore, Munoz, Preckwinkle, and the other 47 all vote EXACTLY THE SAME WAY 99.999% of the time. > LaSalle Street TIF ... who voted against it? Joe Moore Moore has voted "yea" on about a hundred TIFs in his 16 years. > I am thankful everyday for his leadership. What are you referring to here? Of the aldermen with the same or more seniority than Moore, only Moore, Shiller, and Preckwinkle are not the chairman or vice chairman of a City Council committee. What is the Moore the leader of?

Hugh, Are you still peddling that same discredited 99.999% statistic here as well as having repeated it so many times at PrairieStateBlue that you began to annoy people? It's a useless statistic. You're counting every pothole vote. Dick Simpson has the only real statistics and they show Joe Moore in the top third of independent aldermen. Yours is worse than useless it's totally misleading.

Jeff - Stay foucused and on topic here Jeff. We're talking about Alderman Moore and his poor ethics here. FYI: This is a independent, open communication website like mine - where anyone can say anything they want with the legal limits of the law. Unlike your closed minded site, it's more in the vain of what American values and freedom of speech is about. No time outs here for posting quality information and wanting a solid, TRUE answer. Your colors are showing with this post Jeff. True blue Moore, no matter what the truth. I've never seen you around our neighborhood at any meetings much before this election. Much like that bozo - Tomblogger #2. (see, no restrictions) Take a strool down Morse Avenue or Howard a few Friday night's after dark and see how our neighborhood is under our Alderman. Now, stay on topic Jeff and tell us what you think about Alderman Moore using a photo of a group he didn't have anything to do with, then turn it into a group he wants the voters to believe is his very own? From how I read the story, even Ben doesn't believe Alderman Moore.

I'm an average citizen and I've decided not to vote for Joe Moore. Here's why: http://www.rogersparkneighbors.blogspot.com/

wow thanks for a great post, neighbor but I must disagree with the "average" thing

> You're counting every pothole vote. You should really invest some time spinning up on the Chicago City Council if you want to comment on it. Here's some recommended reading for you: http://council.forum49.org/ The Chicago City Council does not vote on potholes. Yes, the City Council does vote on honorary street signs and senior sewer rebates, but they also vote on * massive public subsidies to developers, * ruthless redirections of property taxes away from our schools and hospitals, * hundreds of millions of dollars in debt foisted on our children and grandchildren in the form of bond sales, * operating and capital budget plans, * settlements of claims, * and thousands of other issues that no sane person could wave off as "potholes." The characterizations of the Council workload as minutia is a myth promulgated by incumbents to distract the public from the outrageous FACTS of their rubber-stamp voting record. I understand you need some powerful myths to convince yourself Joe Moore is a reformer or progressive. > ... Joe Moore in the top third of independent aldermen. FACT is, there are no independent aldermen in the Chicago City Council. The difference between the voting records of the most and least independent aldermen you can think of is on the order of 0.001%. You can look it up.

Why is it that every comment besides Randall's comment is so vague? Even Hugh's attempt to be informative is impenetrable crap: who's going to download and read all of those PDFs on the forum49.org site? FACT is nobody knows what the heck you are taking about Hugh, "0.001%" If you weren't trying to distort the truth, you would tell people that Dick Simpson admits his roll call vote tallies are a weak indicator because the Council makes relatively few decisions by roll call. Instead you made some stuff up to seem like you know what you're talking about. It's a good bet nobody will call you out because nobody has enough free time to "invest some time spinning up on the Chicago City Council" down the rabbit hole you want to lead them. I am disappointed in the quality of criticism here. It's time to put up or shut up. Whether you are for or against a candidate, good criticism helps get your interests advanced no matter who wins. There are a lot of people pretending to be issues oriented Moore detractors, but they're fooling themselves. They have nothing to offer to others needing help in their ballot decisions but fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD). You're hurting the process spreading FUD, and you're promoting the dark backroom decision making that you pretend to hate. It's fake, and it's hypocritical, it is unethical and that makes accusations of Joes' ethical problems hollow. It doesn't require any special knowledge of 49th ward or Council politics to see that all of this anti Joe Moore ranting is hot air. Is there anyone to make me eat crow? Everyone have an agenda? Who's willing to bring theirs into the light?

I am a 16 year resident of the 49th ward. I support Joe. It's interesting to me that you guys who blame him endlessly for what you claim doesn't get accomplished in the ward, will not allow him credit for anything that does - small things made of brick and mortar like schools and libraries, firehouses and community centers. As to dedication to principles of openness and inclusivity, how many other incumbent aldermen have agreed to ANY candidate forums? Joe is attending SIX! 49TH WARD CANDIDATE FORUMS Sponsor: Northside POWER Date & Time: January 28, 2007 at 2:30 pm Location: Good News Community Church, 7649 N. Paulina Sponsor: Rogers Park Community Council Date & Time: February 1, 2007 at 7:00 to 8:30 pm Location: Loyola Park Fieldhouse, 1230 W Greenleaf Sponsor: Rogers Park Community Action Network Date & Time: February 3, 2007 at 10:00 am Location: United Church of Rogers Park, 1545 W. Morse Sponsor: Organization of the Northeast/League of Women Voters Date & Time: February 7, 2007 at 6 pm Location: United Church of Rogers Park, 1545 W. Morse Sponsor: Rogers Park BizArts Date & Time: February 14, 2007 at 7:30 to 9:30 am Location: No Exit Cafe, 6970 N Glenwood Sponsor: Howard Area Alternative High School / Howard Area Seniors Club Date & Time: February 14, 2007 at 10:00 - 11:30 am Location: Good News Community Church, 7649-51 N. Paulina "

Revenons a nos moutons... Maybe Craig should not have posed for a picture with Joe Moore if he didn't want to be portrayed as someone who would work with him. This is just whining. *sob* How can I keep appearing contrary if stuff like this comes out? *sob* Joe Moore is stealing my thunder! *sob* This is factual evidence that for all of the vitriolic hyperbole in his blog, Craig Gernhardt actually has at least once some time in the past had some political common ground with Joe Moore. Why not admit it? It really amounts to very little: doing a community cleanup event together once. Can we have some grownup participation in the political dialog please?

Look at the photo - Moore is NOT in it, therefore, Craig did NOT pose for a picture with Joe Moore.

> Dick Simpson has the only real statistics and they show Joe Moore in the top third of independent aldermen. That's one way to make a decision: appeal to an authority. Ask a college professor. Or the IVI-IPO. Or ask Joe Moore. Another way is to look at the facts and use the head god gave you.

> ... the Council makes relatively few decisions by roll call ... State law requires all decisions of the City Council to be approved by a recorded vote. 65 ILCS 5/3.1‑40‑40 Vote required. The passage of all ordinances for whatever purpose ... shall require the concurrence of a majority of all members then holding office on the city council. ... The yeas and nays shall be taken upon the question of the passage of the designated ordinances, resolutions, or motions and recorded in the journal of the city council. > who's going to download and read all of those PDFs If you are pressed for time, read one. You will see that our aldermen vote in mindless lock-step 99.999% of the time. Its not exactly news. Where have you been? Most people who know one thing about the Chicago City Council know it is a rubber stamp. Do you know one thing about the Chicago City Council? Or go to a Council meeting, if you dare. It might disturb your world view to see your home town's legislature in action. There's another shot before the election Wednesday, February 7th, 2007 at 10:00 a.m.

Craig Gernhardt has - by his actions - declared his support of Alderman Joe Moore (49 Ward, Chicago) in his bid for reelection. Over the past number of weeks, Gernhardt has published scathing stories about all of Moore's challengers. Often, these stories have been outright lies. Although Gernhardt has not come right out and openly declared his support for Joe Moore, his actions by his blog site have the effect of providing aid and comfort for Joe Moore. Gernhardt thrives on attention, and the aldermanic races (this one and previous ones) are always grat fodder for a blogger (this one included). But Gernhardt has a vested interest in seeing Joe Moore retain his seat: If Moore loses, it would mean a better man would be our alderman, and with a good alderman Gernhardt would have much less to write about. If, suddenly, a Don Gordon or a Jim Ginderske were to start cleaning up the neighborhood and doing a decent job of looking after the ward, Gernhardt would have virtually nothing to write about. So congratulation to Alderman Moore, the DFA, the DNC, the IVI-IPO: Not even the CIA could run a better operation than the agent provocateur you have in Craig Gernhardt.

As an average mope homeowner, two fundamental questions matter to me: 1) Is Alderman Moore responsive to his constituents? 2)Does Alderman Moore deliver on the little things? And from where I'm standing (far right in photo at http://www.pioneerlocal.com/newsstar/index.html) the answer is "Not so much".

Michi said....> I am a 16 year resident of the 49th ward. I support Joe. Thank goodness you're only 16.

The so called liberals like Larry "tobacco and tax man" Suffredin and Bob "I am the wife to Jan the Man" Cramer are the real hypocrites and crooks.

Sorry, is there something wrong with my grammar? Is there anything that meets your high standards? I am a 16 year resident. Is there a hyphen missing? Is "I am a 16-year resident" better? Either way, your analysis that I am "only 16" is not supported. I wonder if you have a problem with other interpretations of the world around you. By the way, is "only 16" an ageist comment?

This is in response to Ming's comment. I read the article about the speed bump on your street and the accompanying editorial. I thought it was telling that the editorial had to defend it's making a big deal out of this incident by saying it was Joe's actions that made it a big deal. Eighteen months is a long time to get neighborhood satisfaction. But, clearly, not everyone was on board - someone wanted it out. We had a down zoning on our block. It took time. There were some hold outs. Eventually, Mike Land helped settle the thing by drawing the objecting property out. We have peace on the block and we have down-zoning. Meanwhile, the ward office gets 500 calls a week. Folks have no heat in their apartment or the water-main broke. Nobody goes to Pioneer Press with a story that the alderman's office got that worked out. What's interesting to me about the speed bump story is the concept that after having heard from the neighborhood for 18 months that they wanted this speed bump, arranging the necessary meeting with IDOT, spending the discretionary funds for it, that somehow, the alderman would be complicit in allowing it's removal. I know you all don't think much of Joe, but come on. Now, I know, the article and the neighbors do not state that accusation, but it seems to be the undercurrent. No, the article only describes the lack of prompt response as the problem. So, yes, prompt response would be the best, even during the holiday period within which I gather this all occurred. But, if this is the best story Pioneer Press could find to attack Joe with, then gee, it kind of seems desperate on their part.

> Eighteen months is a long time to get neighborhood satisfaction... What about the years and years it took to get the Gale Field House - started? The neighborhood was 'on board' - the captain was on another boat!

Michi - It's not you. Craig is mildly retarded, poor boy. Read his blog and you'll see that he probably doesn't even know what a hyphen is.

I rest my case about Hugh. If you've read this far you can see for yourself that he is obsessive in his criticism of Joe Moore. He is what I would call a "monologue troll". He does not respond intelligently to responses to his comments and he leaves repetitive posts, one after the other without engaging in dialog. At PrairieStateBlue.com we have the ability to hide comments that are uncivil. We considered Hugh (HughD) to have crossed that line. I have unhidden his posts at this article. See for yourself: http://www.soapblox.net/chicago/showDiary.do?diaryId=2606 PrairieStateBlue.com

Shoot the messenger, way to grab the high road guy. You should really try to learn to discuss an elected official's record without getting personal if you want to get involved in politics. Clearly you would rather make me the issue rather than take a look at Joe Moore's record. I don't blame you.

Thanks for unhiding my posts and linking to them! Why don't you hide them again and I'll repost again? The prose gets a little tighter each time. If you keep trying to suppress critical examination of Joe Moore and the City Council, I'll probably get a Pulitzer eventually.

> "monologue troll" sorry if you reactivate my SoapBlox acct, I promise my first post will be about my cat.

> I rest my case I bet you don't.

Oh, look! Moore's goodhearted friend Michi Scheulenberg is standing in with stats that only the ward office could know: the number of calls weekly. How sad that so many people still try in vain to get a response from that effort. While you're providing official responses, how about Joe's decision to open the liquor moratorium for a campaign contributor? What's the story on the lack of public comment? Why did Joe call Jim a "liar," when actually we were absolutely accurate? Where is Joe's retraction and apology? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93RoKJUQse8

That 500 calls a week comes from the aldermans auto-reply email. He's swamped with issues. Where what the Alderman when the Ramirez family went to his office for help. Where was the Alderman when the neighbor needed to know why speed bumps were removed? And Tom, your campaign has questions to answer. Who funded the political flyer that was illegally stuffed in the Chicago Tribune Red Eye box Thursday January 18th at the Morse Anveue El stop? And why wasn't the person who funded this political advertising discloused listed at the bottom of the document? And where was the union bug, from Mr. Union? Jim Ginderske slander campaign, just another Joe.

View video here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm2YacZi66w&eurl=

Westgard, explain this. http://morsehellhole.blogspot.com/2007/01/dci-furniture-says-ginderske-printed.html

I posted this comment which I am pasting below on a community blog after reading Craig Gernhardt's blog. His behavior here reinforces my opinion of him. ***** I haven't met the infamous Craig Gernhardt yet either but I saw one of the flyers for his blog with which he's littered the neighborhood and decided to have a look at it. My first thought was "How old is this guy? 10?". He may be an obnoxious drunk. More likely he's frozen at a childish level of development. I spent a snowy Sunday afternoon reading his blog and the comments from the first posting to the most recent. It makes a fascinating novel. The perspective one gets from reading everything from beginning to end is different from which you probably get reading things episodically or at random. The picture that emerges is not a pretty one. I don’t understand how he can have any credibility in the neighborhood after some of the things he has written. In the comments on one thread Craig is threatened with physical harm by one of the neighborhood gangbangers. He’s quick to use this to make himself out to be both some sort of martyr and a freedom fighter. The thing is, the “gangbanger” is pretty clearly a troll who is out to get a reaction from Craig. Mr. Gernhardt cannot see this as the troll has cleverly manipulated Craig’s heroic self image in order to make him look foolish. In another thread Craig claims to have been stabbed in the abdomen in Duke’s bar. This generates much sympathy for him among his regular readers. However, a couple of people who witnessed the event posted comments stating what actually happened. Craig was drunk at the time, was being rude toward other bar patrons and got into a confrontation with another equally inebriated customer and might have even been threatened with a knife but was never stabbed. Craig is a great exaggerator and even outright liar. I was also struck by his blatant hypocrisy. He castigates the local politicians for covering every available surface of the 49th Ward with fliers while he does the same to publicize his blog. Apparently his rantings and ravings are enough of a public service to justify littering. Another recent example of his hypocrisy happens when he takes a friend of Jim Ginderske to task for using mild profanity. This gave me a laugh as Craig uses strong profanity and made no objection when a commentator directed the very same profanity at Jim Ginderske. I gather that Craig was picked on as a child because his father was gay. Rather than getting over it and moving on with his life Craig seems to have chosen to turn the tables and bully anyone who might get in his way while using an environment which he controls to make himself out to be some sort of hero. Calling the police because you witness a break in? Bah! I have done that on more than one occasion myself and that doesn’t make me a hero. It makes me a citizen doing my civic duty. I am new to Rogers Park. I am glad I have friends in the neighborhood, have gotten to know my wonderful neighbors and have begun to patronize some great local businesses. If all I knew of Rogers Park was the Morse Avenue Hellhole I would have a very different and very negative perception of the community. It’s not the reports of crime and allegations of political corruption that would give me a negative impression of Rogers Park. It’s that Craig Gerhardt’s blog makes everyone look like an idiot. Some might say that Craig is doing a service to the neighborhood by providing a forum in which to discuss common issues. I don’t agree. Craig controls all discussion and is very biased. Comments which he doesn’t like get deleted in a seemingly arbitrary manner. I myself tried posting a naïve “newbie” question on his blog. It was quickly deleted along with a lecture from Craig that belittled me but told me nothing of what I did wrong. Those of us who care about our community need a forum with a fair moderator who sets and enforces clear standards in which we can discuss issues in a calm and rational manner. The hysteria of the Morse Avenue Hellhole is not the place to do so. The big irony that struck me is the similarity between Craig Gerhardt and Joe Moore. Even before I moved to Rogers Park I heard about Joe Moore from his fois gras ban. I thought it was nothing more than an attention grab on the part of an ambitious politician. Craig strikes me was being just like Joe; willing to do anything for attention.

Craig and Joe have another thing in common - their personal demeanor in conversations. Both Joe and Craig are about 47 years old, both are about 6'2", and both speak very loudly. Both invade your personal space and interrupt constantly in a conversation. Walking away from a conversation with either one, you have a sense that you didn't so much participate in a two-way discussion as provide Joe/Craig a chance to spout.

Rhonda Ramstein is really Tom Mannis, who is in charge of spreading slander for the Ginderske campaign along with Tom Westgard. Mannis can be found under a half dozen phony screen names like this: Kathy LeRoy Tsai rogersparkbooster brad weeeler Anyone who doesn't agree with them they dig up every bit of juicy dirt on your private life they can find, then twist the ways that suit their needs. Nice to see Westgard, who once supported Alderman Moore has learned some of his tricks.

Maybe Tom Mannis is actually Rhonda Ramstein. Maybe Rhonda Ramstein is actually George Bush. Maybe Craig Gernhardt is actually Joe Moore. We'll never really know, will we?

And I'd be sure to bet, Rhonda_On_Ashland, oops, I mean Mannis spends a great deal of time at this ip address doing all the internet hunting? This ip address spends upwards to 1 and a half a day on my site. Mannis, you have any connection to UIC or does the Ginderske campaign have a intern doing the dirty work? bslc015a-x86-a.bsd.uchicago.edu (University Of Chicago)

Example: VISITOR ANALYSIS Referring Link http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=craig gernhardt idiot drunk Host Name bslc015a-x86-a.bsd.uchicago.edu IP Address 128.135.217.175 Country United States Region Illinois City Chicago ISP University Of Chicago Returning Visits 19 Visit Length 28 mins 45 secs

If you have any questions about why Rogers Park is the way it is, read the above comments in this thread. Only in Rogers Park. The crackpots in my neighborhood are why we have someone like Joe Moore to begin with. They almost outnumber the crackheads. The few community meetings I've attended are filled with people like Hugh and Craig spewing venom and yelling at the top of their lungs. The Alderman and his friends either ignore the residents or explain why they can't do anything to fix simple problems. Moore claims he is doing something while he really does nothing. Moore's staff is so incompetent they can't even get correct information when you ask. Look at how poorly written his foie gras bill was. Dude was a lawyer? I should have moved to Andersonville.

> ... people like Hugh and Craig spewing venom ... Let's try and cut through the noise with some facts. Some facts appropriate for Clout City. Here's some facts on leadership in the Chicago City Council and Moore: http://morsehellhole.blogspot.com/2007/01/joe-moore-senior-back-bench-alderman.html Here's some facts about the opening roll calls in City Council and Moore's commitment to his job: http://morsehellhole.blogspot.com/2007/01/city-council-opening-roll-calls.html

All I can say is "Wow!" I live about as far away from Rogers Park as you can while still living in the city. And after reading the stuff above, I'm really glad. I don't doubt that each of you has a visceral need to make your neighborhood better - or a hidden political agenda. But to a casual observer, you all look like a bunch of blithering talking heads. No one could possibly wade through all the babble that you guys churn up and make it make sense. I truly suggest you tone it down if you want to really reach people. However, since that's quite unlikely, I predict people will just close their doors and either ignore you (and the polls) or start house hunting somewhere else. If I lived in Rogers Park, I'd move.

I live in Rogers Park and I am not embarrassed for my neighbors. They are good people. The crackpots who shout at the community meetings are not representative of the people I know in the neighborhood. Every village has its idiot (or in our case two or three or four...) but these are not the great neighbors and friends who I interact with on a daily basis. The people involved in the above shouting match speak for no one other than themselves.

those who sit silent and let jomo ruin the neighborhood are the crackpots not those who ask whats behind the real curtain allan is a moron

This very weird. I woke up this morning only to learn that I am actually Rhonda Ramstein!!! Really, though, for my response to Gernhardt's libel, please see http://rogersparkbench.blogspot.com/2007/01/i-am-walrus-but-i-am-not-rhonda.html. Thanks.

You mean this poorly read website? http://tracksy.com/public-stats.cgi?host=t;usr=tmannis;site=02

You confuse quantity with quality. My blog is only 3.5 months old. You may say that - at this point - my site is "poorly read." At least it is not poorly written.

I think the debates are the real opportunity for people to learn about the candidates and where they stand on issues. Mr. BrokenHeart deletes my comments. He's not as open-minded as you might want to believe. He also seems to sling accusations with very little factual proof to back up his statements. I think my blog is much more accurate: www.aldermansintern.blogspot.com

Hi, this is in response to Michi's note from January 19 (in response to my post). My name is Anthony (my nickname is Ming) and I live at the corner of Chase and Wolcott, 200 feet from the missing speed hump. You noted that Moore's office receives 500 calls a week. The mark of a good alderman is not how many calls he gets but how many are answered - and, ultimately, addressed. Forgive me if I've misinterpreted your post, but you seem to suggest our concern is relatively unimportant and that our neighborhood has been both impatient and ungrateful in light of the work the Alderman did to get the speed hump in the first place. I don't believe you were involved in that process so I'd like to set the record straight. Traffic safety is important to us. We've had countless hit and run accidents at this intersection. Wolcott is swarming with kids on their way to the park. We want to prevent a tragedy. Much of the 18 months it took to get the speed hump was spent simply trying to get the Alderman to respond to our concern and to take (and follow through upon) action, as this type of improvement has to be run through his office. Unfortunately, then as now his office was not proactive and was/is notorious for not returning calls and emails. Its inexcusable. Perhaps thats not been your experience but its most certainly been ours.

I've lived in rogers park for 39 years and Joe's right, I have no idea who craig is. Is he the guy with the afro?

get out once and a while you moron, that's not craig

If you're going to slander Tom Mannis, spell the name right...

==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 26% of the total number of citizens qualified to vote are determining who is elected. In a race of more than 2 contestants, the percentage needed to win becomes even lower than 26%. 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, hard-working and intelligent individuals, who seek office to actually serve the electorate, (since the traditional motivations of power, influence and wealth will effectively no longer be available)? 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 way 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 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..Get your affairs in order for the next election David E. Neeley!