<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>




































































  <rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
      <title>Comments On: Under Daley&apos;s skin, or under his thumb?
    
      by Mick Dumke</title>
      <link>http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb</link>
      <atom:link href="http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/Rss.xml?oid=941390&amp;id=comments" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />      <description>Comments On: Under Daley&apos;s skin, or under his thumb?
    
      by Mick Dumke</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2009 Chicago Reader. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Chicago Reader readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Chicago Reader.</copyright>
      <webMaster>wil@desert.net (Chicago Reader Webmaster)</webMaster>
      <pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0600</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:00:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>Foundation</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
      
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#973368]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#973368]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[re 'last' reply]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Apparently, 'last reply' wants to avoid intelligent discussion of any ideas or concepts he doesn't agree with, for whatever his reasons.
    
    The mark of a truly 'open' mind.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by re 'last' reply]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:13:34 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#970593]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#970593]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Willie Cochran Represents
    
    The Reader identified his "Patrons" as "local powerhouses Bishop Arthur Brazier and Reverend Leon Finney." Let's see if we can detect the Revs' agendas:
    
    A rebate of garbage pick-up fees for a condo association
    
    http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=22
    
    Permission for ten (10) earth retention systems for the University of Chicago
    
    http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=44
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:31:27 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#956004]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#956004]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[That's why...]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[That's why, in my previous posts, I've included the statement that one should make exceptions rarely and thoughtfully.
    
    Vote FOR whoever you choose to, just remember that incumbents, especially long term incumbents, have an incredible advantage over challengers, because, most voters are accustomed to believing that a challenger candidate should be required to convince voters to vote them INTO office, but the incumbents don't have to convince voters to ALLOW them to REMAIN in office.
    
    It's a fundamental difference in perspective and voter attitudes.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by That's why...]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 12:06:22 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#950122]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#950122]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Last reply]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[If you follow your proposal, you&acirc;&#128;&#153;re going to loose the 25% of fresh voices, and likely replace with more polluted hacks.  Some of those incumbents are worth keeping and merit support - most don't - but at least 25% do.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Last reply]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:47:29 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#953048]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#953048]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Thanks]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Thank you, sincerely, for your honest and respectful opinions concerning my humble attempts and concepts.
    
    I may have a greater estimate of the effectiveness of this comment board, in reaching people interested in social, economic and political changes, than either you do or is warranted.
    
    The difficult part of cleaning up our currently polluted governments seems to be in inspiring enough citizens to take action, and this is why I've suggested what is, to me, the least difficult means, namely: 
    
    just remember to vote for only challengers, regardless of party affiliation 
    
    if presented with the option, vote for candidates from any 'party' BUT the Dumbocrats and Retardicans 
    
    concentrate your votes in multiple candidate races by using the formula - 
    
    If incumbent is listed FIRST, vote for challenger listed LAST 
    
    or 
    
    If incumbent is NOT listed first, vote for challenger who IS LISTED FIRST
     
    seek to fire as many incumbents as possible and deny retention to all offices you have the opportunity to 
    
    shake things up in the simplest way possible 
    
    avoid getting distracted by personalities and mud-slinging, the typical techniques used to manipulate and deceive
    
    by-pass the usual behaviors exploited so effectively by those in power
    
    force those in power to choose between respecting the will of the voters or denying the validity of the election results, thus showing themselves to be what they effectively are, dictators disguised as public servants
    
    One wouldn't bother to drip drops of clean water into a glass filled primarily with urine, one would empty the glass, wash it thoroughly, then fill it with clean water
    
    repeatedly voting out all Dumbocratic and Retardican  incumbents will, in time, open up the door to those 'clean water' candidates we so badly need
    
    refusing to continue to be fooled is the only way to no longer be fools
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Thanks]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 11:29:53 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#953358]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#953358]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Re: WCF]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[I think that our current governmental system is a lot like glass #1, and I don't think we have the ability or patience to allow it to become clean drinkable water.
    
    Look, I don't want to discourage you from challenging the current two party system - I want you to challenge it.  But do it by organizing your neighbors.  You standing up for what you believe on a blog as one voice, as opposed to an organized opposition who represents hundreds of voices is like your drops of water.  The challenge is to get enough drops of water into one glass, and it doesn't have to be drinkable, just 51% water to really start making a difference.
    
    Good luck, you have no idea what you&acirc;&#128;&#153;re up against.  Cleaning up pollution isn't easy my friend.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Re: WCF]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 10:13:05 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#969486]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#969486]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[What comes first?]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[While I think you've said enough for me to understand your perspectives, bear with me for a few more questions, to clarify a few things.
    
    Are you saying that a mass 'firing' of incumbents, by utilizing the focussed strategy of HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT, would result in no meaningful or effective changes in the ways in which both the voters and potential candidates perceive and utilize the electoral processes?
    
    Are you saying that continuing to conform to the established political norms will better serve the purposes of getting us out of the "world of hurt" we are in?
    
    Are you saying that you believe citizens will be more likely to begin to participate, in greater numbers, and with much improved consideration, in the political processes by potential candidates acting in the same, general ways in which those in the two major parties do?
    
    Are you saying that you've considered and rejected the concept of the voters removing from office the majority of politicians currently responsible for our "world of hurt", because you do, indeed, fear the possible consequences, as you imagine them to be?
    
    What do you believe would likely be the consequences of, say, 70% - 90% of current incumbents, on all levels of government, city, county, state and federal, being voted out?
    
    What do you believe would be the effect of same on the voters who chose to do so?
    
    On those citizens who have, so far, not sought public office, but who would, if there was a chance of success?
    
    Do you disagree with this analogy:
    
    Picture two glasses, each containing a liquid.
    
    Glass #1 contains 75% urine and 25% pure, clean drinking water.
    
    Glass #2 contains 100% pure, clean drinking water.
    
    How many drops of pure, clean drinking water will have to be added to Glass #1, before you would consider drinking from it?
    
    How many drops of urine would have to be added to Glass #2 before you not consider drinking from it?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by What comes first?]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 09:29:41 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#967407]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#967407]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Re: Apparently]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Let me know when you try and get on the ballot and run.  You can start circulating petitions for state rep seats in August - start using your name so we know who you are and help get more citizens participating, thinking, questioning, engaged... And don't you give up.  
    
    Get on the ballot and then watch just how unprofessional our professional politicians really are.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Re: Apparently]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 07:54:54 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#962203]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#962203]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Apparently]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[I think that the essence of what you are saying comes to this:
    
    1) Even if most all citizens were to vote and even if there were people of 'merit' to vote for, the greater percentage of voters wouldn't recognize, appreciate and vote for those candidates of 'merit'.
    
    2) You don't agree or support the concept of 'shaking things up' or breaking up the organized political monopoly enjoyed by both 'major' parties.
    
    3) You believe that my strategies to dismantle these two parties stranglehold on the electoral processes to be devoid of the concept of merit.
    
    4) You believe in the possibility of 'winning' the 'game' of politics by 'playing' the 'game' by the rules written by these same two dominant parties.
    
    5) You omit acknowledging the many unwritten rules by which these two parties play the game.
    
    6) You appear to believe that my strategy can't possibly achieve it's desired effect, for reasons unspecified, but implied in your statement "I will never pick someone to act on my behalf by voting with numbers or voting against someone simply because they are an incumbent.".
    
    7) You also imply that by voting using the traditional reasons, you have a chance of electing someone who will act on your behalf.
    
    
    I question every traditional assumption and premise and I encourage others to do the same.
    
    I invite any who wish to share their thoughts and conclusions to do so.
    
    What we don't need is "less of a democracy".
    
    What we do need is more.
    
    More citizens participating.
    
    More citizen thinking.
    
    More citizens questioning.
    
    More citizens engaging in conversations about essential ideas and ideals.
    
    And fewer citizens giving up.
    
    Fewer citizens allowing themselves to be distracted by the minutia, so they don't see anything close to the bigger pictures.
    
    Ever hear of the "Kansas City Shuffle"?
    
    Our professional politicians are experts at it.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Apparently]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:30:57 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#959544]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#959544]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Re: Well]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[We've had this conversation before.  I have more courage than you might think, but I don't have a lot of faith in your system.  I suggested to you before that you take all your energy and ideas and start organizing, registering voters, create a website dedicated to tracking reps votes and campaign donations, and getting an alternative on the ballot.  
    
    I will never pick someone to act on my behalf by voting with numbers or voting against someone simply because they are an incumbent.  
    
    As far as our founding fathers and their legacy, I have had too many experiences to believe that it is going to be a simple change.  We're in a world of hurt, and unfortunately it is going to have to get a whole lot worse before your fellow Americans wake up and get involved.  But I wish you all the luck.  And I hope that you start focusing on the notion of a meritocracy and less of a democracy, it doesn't really exist.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Re: Well]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 23:22:29 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#965770]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#965770]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Well....]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA["But I don't have the broad brush you have - I need an alternative to vote for."
    
    And THAT'S the crux of the problem.
    
    Sort of the political version of inertia.
    
    I have suggested that the political answer to overcoming this inertia is to engage in a strategy of voting out ALL incumbents, making very few exceptions, to stimulate public  and media interest, as well as encourage those "most decent people" to believe that they've got a chance to get elected.
    
    The objection to this strategy  that I've read the most is the fear of electing "someone so inexperienced", but I find that we can't afford to let the reality of "...we need them replaced by decent people, and no decent person would participate in such a corrupted process." to enable this inertia to continue.
    
    We, as citizens, have to take the chance of voting out practically all incumbents, if only for the effect this will have on both inspiring the voters to participate and encouraging those citizens who want to run for office to do so.
    
    Changes can't happen overnight, but the beginning of change can.
    
    All it will take is a concerted effort on the part of enough citizens, both those who are registered, but rarely vote and those who haven't bothered to register, because of the reasons you've stated, ie., few people worthy of being voted for.
    
    If you truly want to effect changes, you'll have to have more faith and courage, and take a chance on cleaning out all of the incumbent, political hack 'professionals', as 'risky' as this might appear to you to be.
    
    Our founding fathers took far greater and substantial risks to create a country of rights and freedoms, we owe it to their legacy to do a lesser version of the same.
    
    We're blessed with the opportunity to do so WITHOUT the need for bloodshed, so, why don't we just do it?
    
    HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT may seem extreme, but, in reality, what we've accepted as government is truly the 'extreme' reality.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Well....]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:27:37 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#957112]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#957112]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Re: So...]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[My state Sen. isn't up for reelection but I wouldn't vote for them and would consider an alternative.
    
    Doubt anyone is going to run against my rep, and even if they did, they wouldn't be in any better position to change those things I care about, so I will probably voter for them.
    
    It certainly is an important branch of government, and I follow some recommendations on voting for judges, but I don't like the idea of partisan justice or races disgust me and I wish it was reformed to an appointed position.
    
    I won't vote for my congressional rep or for Durbin, but I don't know if I will vote against them either - if the Dems nominate Biden, Richardson, or Clinton - I am likely to vote for them.  If Bloomberg steps in as an independent, I may vote for them.  I think Obama will flame out soon, but I would never vote for someone so inexperienced for Pres.
    
    I think it is fine to advocate for reform, but if you want people to take you seriously, you have to get on the ballot so people can have an alternative.  I know I wouldn't want to go to work everyday with the current crop of reps we have, and I don't think most decent people are interested in working with such screw ups - Its a catch 22 - we need them replaced by decent people, and no decent person would participate in such a corrupted process.  Sad state of affairs.
     
    But I don't have the broad brush you have - I need an alternative to vote for.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Re: So...]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 18:24:01 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#948893]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#948893]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[So....]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA["...but if they can't pass a budget, fund our schools, fund their pensions, come up with a sensible transportation capital budget program that funds CREATE and public transportation improvements, or reform our election laws and redistricting process - get rid of them."
    
    Well, most all in the state legislature have been there for more than one term, and, THEY are the ones who've gotten us to this state of affairs we're in now.
    
    They haven't been able to fix what they've broken yet, and they won't likely do so before the next election, so, will you "get rid pf them", when you get the chance?
    
    ".....don't know a whole lot about that branch." 
    
    And that's the problem.
    
    The judicial branch is the authority that determines how the laws that the legislative branch creates are applied onto the citizens and what, in each, specific situation, the laws mean.
    
    Kinda an important branch of government, don't ya' think?
    
    And, yet, we don't generally know much of anything about those individuals who are put up for election, or appointed, to the district, circuit and supreme court positions.
    
    What we do know is that they are, like the legislative and executive branches, primarily from either the Dumbicratic party or the Retardian party.
    
    Do we really believe that the problems we experience in our daily lives come from everywhere BUT the activities of our three branches of government?
    
    Said governments consisting primarily of Dumbocrats and Retardicans.
    
    Does it make you think, just a little?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by So....]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 17:46:29 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#947936]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#947936]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Re S,R:H]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Should Wag & Pat be advocates for reform and serve their constituents during the next four years, yes, I would reelect them.  Of the remaining Alderman, I would wait for four years to see what their records are with the exceptions of Stone, Banks, MA Smith, Schulter, Burke, and Pope.  All serve in Wards that have outgrown them and need new leadership.
    
    There are way too many in the state legislature that I can't comment on them in this blog, but if they can't pass a budget, fund our schools, fund their pensions, come up with a sensible transportation capital budget program that funds CREATE and public transportation improvements, or reform our election laws and redistricting process - get rid of them.
    
    I LOATHE BLAGO - BIGGEST FRAUD THIS STATE HAS EVER HAD - AND CAN NOT WAIT FOR HIM TO BE INDICTED.
    
    Don't think Ann Burke should be a State Supreme Court justice, but don't know a whole lot about that branch.
    
    Some should be reelected - most shouldn't, but few decent people want to work with these people - and I can't blame them.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Re S,R:H]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 17:05:06 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#964083]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#964083]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[so, re: hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[i take it that you'd choose to reelect both Wag & Pat, should they both exhibit the qualities you desire in your representative.
    
    What is your opinion of the remaining aldermen and alderwomen?
    
    And the folks in the state legislature?
    
    And the state executive branch?
    
    And the state judicial branches?
    
    Should any, some, most or all of the above be reelected?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by so, re: hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:21:54 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#954219]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#954219]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Re: Hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Thanks for sitting on the sideline and criticizing Wag and Pat as they get a crew together, set up an office, and try to attend to their constituents concerns without any effort of their predecessors helping in a responsible handover of bad buildings, pending development, parking concerns...
    
    Your great expectations of reform should have come first.  Rome empowered their senate and debated reforms prior building the great city&acirc;&#128;&brvbar;right?  Or were they debating the merits of democracy while the emperor AND the senate did nothing to address the common mans concerns while the city fell apart (playing a fiddle while the city burned, or something like that).  Any way, you need to get a perspective on what these new alderman are attempting to do.  And you need a little patience.  
    
    Thanks again.  You're such a help.  What would we do without you?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Re: Hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:15:06 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#963363]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#963363]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[uh, hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Would you like to be more specific, or is it a secret?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by uh, hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:14:25 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#957659]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#957659]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[you can't build Rome unless you start
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:49:28 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#954210]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#954210]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[no, it's not the counter]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[It's not the counter.
    
    It's the content of the following posted comments that someone at the Reader isn't fond of.
    
    I wonder why?
    
    
    "5 vs 45 = business as usual
    June 15th - 1:45 p.m.
    
    So, Hugh, do you approve of the following:
    
    
    "The simple, and incredibly effective beginning of a solution, to our present, political morass, is, amazingly, one that seems to be beyond our ability to appreciate and act on, namely, FIRE THE BASTARDS, and deal with those who replace them in the same manner, should THEY prove to be no better.
    
    1) REGISTER TO VOTE
    
    2) Determine who the INCUMBENTS are and make a list of same before every election.
    
    3) Bring this list with you when you GO TO VOTE on election day
    
    4) With few exceptions, DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY INCUMBENT
    
    5) If there are 2 or more CHALLENGERS listed for a given office, cast your vote according to this formula:
    
    a) If the INCUMBENT is listed FIRST, vote for the CHALLENGER who is listed LAST
    
    or
    
    b) If the INCUMBENT is NOT listed first, vote for the CHALLENGER who IS LISTED FIRST
    
    In the beginning of this 'house cleaning' process, don't concern yourself about who the challengers are, focus on voting out basically ALL INCUMBENTS, as the incumbents are the people who have brought us to the present sad state of affairs.
    
    Don't waste your time, efforts and hearts on buying into the false premise that those presently in public office can be 'persuaded' to do anything substantially different than what they have been doing, they've proven themselves to be both incompetent and dishonest 'employees' and deserve only to be fired.
    
    If you must reelect any given incumbent, think long and hard about your reasons to do so, compel that specific incumbent to give you those reasons, by studying their past actions, the effects and effectiveness of same and demanding they provide believable proof that they will not continue the failed and harmful activities of their fellow, soon-to-be former 'public servants'.
    
    Talk is cheap and plentiful.
    
    Feeble excuses abound.
    
    We will always have the government we deserve, and what we deserve will always be the result of the efforts we choose to make, or fail to make."
    
    
    Well, buddy, does this 'sound like a plan'?"
    
    and 
    
    
    "re amr & bkray
    June 18th - 5:49 a.m.
    
    Thank you both for your thoughtful comments, as thought-full comments are what I am seeking to encourage.
    
    amr has provided us with many, specifically helpful and practical suggestions, albeit they are not easy ones to implement.
    
    Without, in any way, suggesting that his ideas are beyond the capacity of many citizens to accomplish, my proposed 'election experiment' is designed to BEGIN the process of steps it will take to reach the point where amr's suggestions can, and will, and must, be effective.
    
    Before effective organizing can be seen as possible and attractive to many potential voters, there must be the broad sense that there is hope for success.
    
    Most citizens do not see much hope for success in 'taking on the political establishment', at least not in the traditionally futile manners.
    
    What better way for this to be achieved, than for the many disenfranchised to experience the real power they possess in their individual votes, united in a simple strategy that every citizen can easily remember and execute?
    
    The essential weakness in people insisting on voting only FOR a candidate they like is the obvious lack of worthy candidates.
    
    My suggested strategy by-passes this weakness and focuses on concentrating our votes for ANY single challenger, for the purpose of voting OUT incumbent candidates for reelection, thus, disturbing the 'flow' and continuity of their political power structures.
    
    Sort of a 'divide-and-conquer' strategy applied TO those who have been using it to remain in control of our governance for so very long.
    
    I would greatly appreciate it if those who are thought-full would be so kind as to think about the elements of my strategy, and comment on same.
    
    Imagine what might happen if enough citizens hear about this strategy, decide to give it a try, implement it and see that a majority of entrenched incumbent, political establishment office holders have been voted out of office, even if just on a local level.
    
    I'm sure that such an occurrence, here in the bastion of established political clout, would have an interesting effect on politicians state-wide, if not nation-wide.
    
    Because, as I have stated, perhaps to some, too many times before, my suggested strategy is designed to decimate the foundations these control freaks have built, for the sole purpose of keeping themselves in control of our governance.
    
    The theory of representative democracy has been subverted by exploiting it's weaknesses, namely those mentioned by bkray, so, why not exploit the weaknesses of the established political control-freaks?
    
    Don't limit yourselves to thinking that the only weakness is independent, honest candidates running for office.
    
    The major weakness in the strategies of the entrenched incumbents is that they have yet to figure out how to deny citizens their right to vote, though they have done a pretty good job at discouraging many from bothering to do so.
    
    By-pass those factors that discourage voting and implement a strategy that encourages voting, if for no other purpose than to enjoy the feeling of firing those unworthy of holding public office, namely, most all of the incumbents, on every level of government.
    
    I await your observations."
    
    They may be a bit wordy, but, so are some less thought-provoking comments that remain.
    
    So, why were they removed?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by no, it's not the counter]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 13:17:25 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#964403]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#964403]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[OK Now am I the 100th?]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[The counter must be off - and 'trained mosquitoes' is fine with me - trained monkeys if you think he finds them entertaining.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by OK Now am I the 100th?]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 12:38:54 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#953379]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#953379]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[101st]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[You should have said 'trained mosquitoes', or fleas, they're almost all so talented at sucking up.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by 101st]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:44:26 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#959555]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#959555]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[100th]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Not much to add - just wanted to be the 100th commentator to this entry.  
    
    Their all under thumb - Patrick Fitzgerald gets under his skin, which is about the only thing that will bother him, any real threat to his power.  Aldermen are like mosquitoes to this mayor, slightly less irritating than the press or the residence of this city.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by 100th]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:42:06 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#971632]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#971632]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Well...]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[It's the OCD.
    
    At least, when hugh's at the keyboard, he's not scratching his arms raw.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Well...]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:36:00 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#971771]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#971771]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Thanks Hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[For giving us example after example of why we can not build Rome in a day!  If only these 7 new faces could have accomplished what you have done at one meeting, all our problems would be solved.
    
    Shame on them - the audacious dolts!
    
    Keep up the good work of going over the minutia of council journals to point out that these new alderman are doing their jobs of servicing the constituents who elected them.  And to think, we could have had such accomplished leaders like Matlak and Tillman instead of the likes of Wag and Pat who have proven that all the promise won't be lived up too by their record of one month.
    
    Thank you.  What would we do with out Hugh?
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Thanks Hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:25:00 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Under Daley's skin, or under his thumb?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#957029]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2007/06/14/under-daleys-skin-or-under-his-thumb/#957029]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Hugh]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Pat Dowell's Opening Legislative Blitzkrieg
    
    Designated the Official One to Watch by certain pundits, the most likely freshman to lead the revolution. Surely in her legislative initiatives we will detect the future direction of the New Vanguard.
    
    All the toil & sweat & speechifying has lead up to this:
    
    Three (3) handicapped parking spaces
    
    http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=5
    
    Two (2) repeals of "No parking" zones
    
    http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=14
    
    Two (2) rebates of garbage pick-up fees for condo associations
    
    http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=21
    
    Her campaign promise? &acirc;&#128;&#156;I won&acirc;&#128;&#153;t be Dorothy.&acirc;&#128;&#157;
    
    Being alderman: How hard can it be? Tillman did it for years! This is EASY!
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Hugh]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2007 10:14:31 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
      
    </channel>
  </rss>




