Sun Mar 1, 2015, 02:45 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
A thread in support of ousting Third Wayer Rahm Emanuel
From Chicago government, and from all government, forever. It'll be a tough thing to do, but let's think good thoughts and help as we can.
Our ideas may be "#%^*ing retarded" Rahm, but at least we're decent human beings who don't seek to cheat, steal, lie or torture. And we'd like government that reflects those values.
|
137 replies, 12710 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | OP |
BlueCaliDem | Mar 2015 | #1 | |
leveymg | Mar 2015 | #2 | |
BlueCaliDem | Mar 2015 | #5 | |
leveymg | Mar 2015 | #16 | |
Scootaloo | Mar 2015 | #27 | |
cheapdate | Mar 2015 | #101 | |
hifiguy | Mar 2015 | #38 | |
Populist_Prole | Mar 2015 | #46 | |
ND-Dem | Mar 2015 | #81 | |
hifiguy | Mar 2015 | #134 | |
ND-Dem | Mar 2015 | #80 | |
merrily | Mar 2015 | #102 | |
ND-Dem | Mar 2015 | #103 | |
merrily | Mar 2015 | #104 | |
ND-Dem | Mar 2015 | #109 | |
merrily | Mar 2015 | #110 | |
Art_from_Ark | Mar 2015 | #106 | |
hifiguy | Mar 2015 | #135 | |
TheKentuckian | Mar 2015 | #84 | |
Joe Turner | Mar 2015 | #99 | |
LiberalArkie | Mar 2015 | #118 | |
Spitfire of ATJ | Mar 2015 | #66 | |
zentrum | Mar 2015 | #25 | |
Name removed | Mar 2015 | #59 | |
ND-Dem | Mar 2015 | #79 | |
Rockyj | Mar 2015 | #96 | |
marmar | Mar 2015 | #119 | |
BlueCaliDem | Mar 2015 | #122 | |
Segami | Mar 2015 | #3 | |
merrily | Mar 2015 | #6 | |
rhett o rick | Mar 2015 | #7 | |
merrily | Mar 2015 | #12 | |
leveymg | Mar 2015 | #18 | |
rhett o rick | Mar 2015 | #31 | |
appalachiablue | Mar 2015 | #51 | |
840high | Mar 2015 | #93 | |
HereSince1628 | Mar 2015 | #14 | |
whereisjustice | Mar 2015 | #41 | |
HereSince1628 | Mar 2015 | #42 | |
sendero | Mar 2015 | #56 | |
demwing | Mar 2015 | #4 | |
RiverLover | Mar 2015 | #17 | |
MineralMan | Mar 2015 | #8 | |
zipplewrath | Mar 2015 | #35 | |
whereisjustice | Mar 2015 | #97 | |
AllyCat | Mar 2015 | #100 | |
roguevalley | Mar 2015 | #9 | |
CaliforniaPeggy | Mar 2015 | #75 | |
roguevalley | Mar 2015 | #86 | |
Divernan | Mar 2015 | #114 | |
liberalhistorian | Mar 2015 | #95 | |
marmar | Mar 2015 | #120 | |
RiverLover | Mar 2015 | #10 | |
ReRe | Mar 2015 | #40 | |
KoKo | Mar 2015 | #43 | |
Agony | Mar 2015 | #55 | |
dreamnightwind | Mar 2015 | #107 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | #116 | |
Plucketeer | Mar 2015 | #124 | |
pscot | Mar 2015 | #133 | |
hrmjustin | Mar 2015 | #11 | |
RiverLover | Mar 2015 | #13 | |
hrmjustin | Mar 2015 | #22 | |
obxhead | Mar 2015 | #19 | |
obxhead | Mar 2015 | #15 | |
Tierra_y_Libertad | Mar 2015 | #20 | |
marym625 | Mar 2015 | #21 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | #49 | |
marym625 | Mar 2015 | #62 | |
SusanCalvin | Mar 2015 | #64 | |
mucifer | Mar 2015 | #77 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | #117 | |
Autumn | Mar 2015 | #136 | |
marym625 | Mar 2015 | #137 | |
libodem | Mar 2015 | #23 | |
Phlem | Mar 2015 | #24 | |
MyNameGoesHere | Mar 2015 | #26 | |
stillwaiting | Mar 2015 | #29 | |
grahamhgreen | Mar 2015 | #32 | |
americannightmare | Mar 2015 | #28 | |
gregcrawford | Mar 2015 | #30 | |
Divernan | Mar 2015 | #113 | |
gregcrawford | Mar 2015 | #33 | |
LWolf | Mar 2015 | #34 | |
bigwillq | Mar 2015 | #36 | |
Ichingcarpenter | Mar 2015 | #37 | |
whereisjustice | Mar 2015 | #39 | |
GoneFishin | Mar 2015 | #44 | |
Skidmore | Mar 2015 | #45 | |
mucifer | Mar 2015 | #78 | |
Tom Ripley | Mar 2015 | #47 | |
bahrbearian | Mar 2015 | #48 | |
Zorra | Mar 2015 | #53 | |
ybbor | Mar 2015 | #57 | |
sendero | Mar 2015 | #58 | |
QC | Mar 2015 | #82 | |
Divernan | Mar 2015 | #115 | |
msanthrope | Mar 2015 | #50 | |
KittyWampus | Mar 2015 | #60 | |
msanthrope | Mar 2015 | #76 | |
blkmusclmachine | Mar 2015 | #52 | |
Android3.14 | Mar 2015 | #54 | |
Stuart G | Mar 2015 | #61 | |
MineralMan | Mar 2015 | #71 | |
Stuart G | Mar 2015 | #73 | |
MineralMan | Mar 2015 | #74 | |
Jack Rabbit | Mar 2015 | #63 | |
MissDeeds | Mar 2015 | #65 | |
Stellar | Mar 2015 | #67 | |
Name removed | Mar 2015 | #68 | |
democrank | Mar 2015 | #69 | |
cantbeserious | Mar 2015 | #70 | |
silvershadow | Mar 2015 | #72 | |
Cryptoad | Mar 2015 | #83 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | #87 | |
Cryptoad | Mar 2015 | #88 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | #90 | |
Cryptoad | Mar 2015 | #92 | |
MannyGoldstein | Mar 2015 | #89 | |
kimbutgar | Mar 2015 | #85 | |
L0oniX | Mar 2015 | #91 | |
Blue Owl | Mar 2015 | #94 | |
cheapdate | Mar 2015 | #98 | |
NuttyFluffers | Mar 2015 | #105 | |
nikto | Mar 2015 | #108 | |
AtheistCrusader | Mar 2015 | #111 | |
Enthusiast | Mar 2015 | #112 | |
wolfie001 | Mar 2015 | #121 | |
Borchkins | Mar 2015 | #123 | |
closeupready | Mar 2015 | #125 | |
Jamastiene | Mar 2015 | #126 | |
fredamae | Mar 2015 | #127 | |
salib | Mar 2015 | #128 | |
cascadiance | Mar 2015 | #129 | |
BlancheSplanchnik | Mar 2015 | #130 | |
cyberswede | Mar 2015 | #131 | |
RationalMan | Mar 2015 | #132 |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 02:49 PM
BlueCaliDem (15,438 posts)
1. Rahm isn't a "third-wayer". He's a Republican in Democratic clothing. Period. eom
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #1)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 02:52 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
2. Aren't they all?
Response to leveymg (Reply #2)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:00 PM
BlueCaliDem (15,438 posts)
5. No. Not really, as I understand the definition of "third-wayer". eom
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #5)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:33 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
16. Ok. What IS the difference between a 3rd-Wayer and a "moderate Republican"?
Response to leveymg (Reply #16)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:55 PM
Scootaloo (25,699 posts)
27. The fact that someone claled "BlueCaliDem" votes for them, of course
How can you, with your not-at-all-obviously-liberal name presume to question the authority of someone named BLUE! CALI! DEM!
If someone with a great, heart-thumpingly liberal name tells you that the right-wing democrats who campaign on republican platforms, attack the president, and then lose every race to the Republicans aren't actually Republican ringers, well, who are you to question? Come back when your name is LibLeftNYCkerry08, and we'll talk <guffaw, guffaw> |
Response to Scootaloo (Reply #27)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 11:42 PM
cheapdate (3,811 posts)
101. Do you know who BlueCaliDem votes for, or
are you just talking trash about something you don't know shit about? There's a lot of that around these days. Just curious.
|
Response to leveymg (Reply #16)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:33 PM
hifiguy (33,688 posts)
38. The Turd Way crowd can basically be summed up as
Business Republicans - or what used to be called Rockefeller/moderate Republicans - who became "Democrats" because they can't stand the sight and sound of the anti-science Jebus wheezers who took over the Repuke party. They are still economic royalists, corporatists and war hawks.
|
Response to hifiguy (Reply #38)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:01 PM
Populist_Prole (5,364 posts)
46. That's a good practical "working" definition of them
But as I've read, their actual formation was not so much of moderate republicans repulsed by far-right social values, but of a mindset that stated that the traditional championing of the labor/working class base was no longer viable, from a financial standpoint...a 'Democratic party Inc' type viewpoint.
Of course it sure didn't help when a lot of the old base turned into "Reagan Democrats". It's like they abandoned each other. Now it seems they are too beholden to corporate money to go back. |
Response to Populist_Prole (Reply #46)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:11 PM
ND-Dem (4,571 posts)
81. "a mindset that stated that the traditional championing of the labor/working class base was
no longer viable, from a financial standpoint"
is exactly who they are: it cuts into the profits of their sponsors in the financial industry, just as it cut into the profits of the republicans' sponsors in the resource extraction industries. so now we have two parties devoted to taking bread out of the mouths of ordinary people in the interest of superprofits for elites. |
Response to ND-Dem (Reply #81)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 05:35 PM
hifiguy (33,688 posts)
134. Yep, and the ever-opportunistic Clintons, seeking to feather their own nest,
sold most of the party to the neo-fascists lock stock and barrel. Now HRC wants to finish the job by giving them the few crumbs they do not yet have.
|
Response to hifiguy (Reply #38)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:07 PM
ND-Dem (4,571 posts)
80. Ike was a business republican and he was better than third wayers. Didn't want to ship jobs
overseas, for one thing.
Under the Republican Administration, as our country has prospered, so have its people. This is as it should be, for as President Eisenhower said: "Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America." The Eisenhower Administration has brought to our people the highest employment, the highest wages and the highest standard of living ever enjoyed by any nation. Today there are nearly 67 million men and women at work in the United States, 4 million more than in 1952. Wages have increased substantially over the past 3 1/2 years; but, more important, the American wage earner today can buy more than ever before for himself and his family because his pay check has not been eaten away by rising taxes and soaring prices. The record of performance of the Republican Administration on behalf of our working men and women goes still further. The Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen's compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees. In addition, the Eisenhower Administration has enforced more vigorously and effectively than ever before, the laws which protect the working standards of our people. Workers have benefited by the progress which has been made in carrying out the programs and principles set forth in the 1952 Republican platform. All workers have gained and unions have grown in strength and responsibility, and have increased their membership by 2 millions. Furthermore, the process of free collective bargaining has been strengthened by the insistence of this Administration that labor and management settle their differences at the bargaining table without the intervention of the Government. This policy has brought to our country an unprecedented period of labor-management peace and understanding. We applaud the effective, unhindered, collective bargaining which brought an early end to the 1956 steel strike, in contrast to the six months' upheaval, Presidential seizure of the steel industry and ultimate Supreme Court intervention under the last Democrat Administration. The Eisenhower Administration will continue to fight for dynamic and progressive programs which, among other things, will: Stimulate improved job safety of our workers, through assistance to the States, employees and employers; Continue and further perfect its programs of assistance to the millions of workers with special employment problems, such as older workers, handicapped workers, members of minority groups, and migratory workers; Strengthen and improve the Federal-State Employment Service and improve the effectiveness of the unemployment insurance system; Protect by law, the assets of employee welfare and benefit plans so that workers who are the beneficiaries can be assured of their rightful benefits; Assure equal pay for equal work regardless of Sex; Clarify and strengthen the eight-hour laws for the benefit of workers who are subject to federal wage standards on Federal and Federally-assisted construction, and maintain and continue the vigorous administration of the Federal prevailing minimum wage law for public supply contracts; Extend the protection of the Federal minimum wage laws to as many more workers as is possible and practicable; Continue to fight for the elimination of discrimination in employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, ancestry or sex; Provide assistance to improve the economic conditions of areas faced with persistent and substantial unemployment; Revise and improve the Taft-Hartley Act so as to protect more effectively the rights of labor unions, management, the individual worker, and the public. The protection of the right of workers to organize into unions and to bargain collectively is the firm and permanent policy of the Eisenhower Administration. In 1954, 1955 and again in 1956, President Eisenhower recommended constructive amendments to this Act. The Democrats in Congress have consistently blocked these needed changes by parliamentary maneuvers. The Republican Party pledges itself to overhaul and improve the Taft-Hartley Act along the lines of these recommendations. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=25838 Even though some of the stuff in this 1956 statement may be hot air, the fact that they were even saying it is telling. How times have changed. |
Response to ND-Dem (Reply #80)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 11:49 PM
merrily (45,251 posts)
102. Eisenhower and Nixon need to be viewed in the context of FDR's massive victories and
massive coattails.
FDR was President for 12 years, from 1933 to 1945. It would have been more, but he died soon into his last term. Then Truman took over from 1945 to 1953. It took a World War II hero (running against a brilliant, but not very charismatic Stevenson) to end that 20 year reign. Meanwhile. FDR's coattails and legacy gave Democrats control of Congress for the better part of 40 years. (Some say longer, though I would guess many would say it has finally ended.) Someone who wanted to be elected President-and then get re-elected--back then probably felt he had to at least talk a good game of level playing field. Additionally, it was mostly Democratic Congresses that passed the things for which Eisenhower and Nixon get credit. They did not veto them. I am not saying Democrats were perfect then. I am saying Republican politicians, especially those with Presidential aspirations, were cognizant of how people were voting. |
Response to merrily (Reply #102)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:05 AM
ND-Dem (4,571 posts)
103. like i said; that may well be, but the republicans of the time had to talk democratic, and
to some degree pass democratic legislation.
yes, republicans then were cognizant of what people would vote for. and turn out for in high numbers. unlike today. it should come as no surprise that we have seen seven years of declining voter participation. Nor should it come as a surprise that the decline has been disproportionately concentrated among the young, the non-wealthy and the non-white. |
Response to ND-Dem (Reply #103)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:30 AM
merrily (45,251 posts)
104. On the one hand, it's no surprise who feels most like voting does not matter. On the other hand,
wealthy white people who are old enough to have attained a degree of power and influence least need to vote because they'll do fine no matter who wins, which was the plan.
Influence on Bill Clinton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley Don't stop thinking about tomorrow, indeed. wiki makes a lot of Quigley's fascination with secret societies. However, I found his own work, Tragedy and Hope, a lot more instructive. That, together with Quigley's influence on the President most closely associated with Third Way and triangulation. For those who are not familiar, but interested, excerpts are available on youtube. (The background music tends to be distracting to me, so I muted and read.) The gist of the excerpts is that having political parties be very similar works best for financial markets because changes in administrations don't rock Wall Street and Wall Street doesn't react well to being rocked. Well, not his exact words. That's just my three penny summary. Whether there is a secret global elite or whether the same things tend to be good for rich people around the world is much less fascinating to me than the message of Tragedy and Hope. ' The existence of Bohemian Grove was not a conspiracy theory. Whether it was also literally a secret society or not may have interested rich Ivy League frat boys of its heyday a lot more than it interests me. Ditto the Bilderburg Group, the Carlyle Group, ALEC, etc. We know they exist. We know they have common interests. We know they have money and power and therefore influence on governments, usually to the detriment of the 99% (though, in some nations, 56 cents an hour and OSHA is a big step up). Whether they also have a secret handshake is irrelevant to me. |
Response to merrily (Reply #104)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 01:35 AM
ND-Dem (4,571 posts)
109. i don't understand. is this a response to my post or just a general comment?
Response to ND-Dem (Reply #109)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 01:44 AM
merrily (45,251 posts)
110. Probably me,
doing the message board equivalent of thinking aloud, spurred by your post about who does and does not vote. Or, doing the message board equivalent of conversing.
I am not trying to rebut, negate or disagree with anything you said, if that is what you are wondering about. |
Response to ND-Dem (Reply #103)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:51 AM
Art_from_Ark (27,247 posts)
106. Also, Eisenhower was not a dyed-in-the-wool Republican
In fact, both the Democrats and Republicans had been courting him as a potential presidential candidate, before he made the decision to join the Republicans.
|
Response to ND-Dem (Reply #80)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 05:37 PM
hifiguy (33,688 posts)
135. Ike was well to the left of the Turd Way, in terms of economic policy.
WELL to the left.
|
Response to hifiguy (Reply #38)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:26 PM
TheKentuckian (23,947 posts)
84. Knocked it out of the park and rang a church bell with it a 100 miles away!
Response to hifiguy (Reply #38)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 10:49 PM
Joe Turner (930 posts)
99. That is a highly accurate description of the 3rd Wayers
in the Democratic party.
Kick/ |
Response to hifiguy (Reply #38)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 09:18 AM
LiberalArkie (14,858 posts)
118. That is probably a good definition. In Arkansas we went from conservative Democrats to
Win Rockefeller. Compared to the Democrats we had, he was a raging liberal. He brought in vocational education, state parks, a lot of new schools and a lot of big businesses. Really back then he was seen as a liberal with all the reformation and social programs, but today he would have been seen as a moderate probably.
|
Response to leveymg (Reply #16)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:38 PM
Spitfire of ATJ (32,723 posts)
66. A "moderate Republican" will do something for the People....
A 3rd-Wayer really doesn't care. They're only interested in raising money from the rich and telling Liberals to STFU.
|
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #1)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #1)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:58 PM
ND-Dem (4,571 posts)
79. I thought that's what 3rd way meant, in reality-land.
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #1)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 10:24 PM
Rockyj (538 posts)
96. RAHM IS A NEOLIBERAL JUST LIKE the CLINTON'S
Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #1)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 09:41 AM
marmar (75,194 posts)
119. Sadly, there's a whole bunch of them in today's Democratic party.
Response to marmar (Reply #119)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 10:06 AM
BlueCaliDem (15,438 posts)
122. Especially in California. Republicans run as Democrats but vote consistently Republican in the House
and in our State legislature. They know that the majority in California would never vote for a Republican, so what's a Republican to do? That's right. Infiltrate and work from the inside. Teapartiers (or as I call them, Neo-Confederates) are doing this now within the Republican Party. It's a tired and true Republican tactic.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 02:54 PM
Segami (14,923 posts)
3. To think this weasel,..
..had the President Obama's ear for the first two years of his presidency..........
![]() |
Response to Segami (Reply #3)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:01 PM
merrily (45,251 posts)
6. Obama nominated Rahm to have Obama's ear--and then some--as chief of staff
It's not as though Obama did not know what Rahm was like.
|
Response to merrily (Reply #6)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:12 PM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
7. I wonder who is behind this Chicago Gang. I know Penny Pritzker is involved, but
what other big corporitists are behind Rahmbo.
|
Response to rhett o rick (Reply #7)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:26 PM
merrily (45,251 posts)
12. Dunno. Old School Daley machine meets Third Way elites?
Response to rhett o rick (Reply #7)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:34 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
18. Exelon - nuclear industry.
Response to leveymg (Reply #18)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:11 PM
rhett o rick (55,981 posts)
31. Thanks. I have to look them up. nm
Response to merrily (Reply #6)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:41 PM
appalachiablue (37,771 posts)
51. A Chicago thing. +big donor Penny Pritzker of Hilton (& Superior Bank), Wall St., Rubin et al.
Response to merrily (Reply #6)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:57 PM
840high (17,196 posts)
93. Of course he knew.
Response to Segami (Reply #3)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:28 PM
HereSince1628 (36,063 posts)
14. more of a ferret than an ordinary weasel, note the dark mask around the eyes
![]() ![]() |
Response to HereSince1628 (Reply #14)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:43 PM
whereisjustice (2,941 posts)
41. ferrets don't brag about fucking over their own core voters after we elect them, so
Ferrets +1, Emanuel 0
|
Response to whereisjustice (Reply #41)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:50 PM
HereSince1628 (36,063 posts)
42. Tenacious and go for the throat...
Ferrets +2, Emanuel +1
|
Response to Segami (Reply #3)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:53 PM
sendero (28,552 posts)
56. One of our first clues..
... that Obama had no intention of acting as he campaigned he would.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 02:56 PM
demwing (16,916 posts)
4. Senator Obama on Rahm Emanuel
Response to demwing (Reply #4)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:34 PM
RiverLover (7,830 posts)
17. Dark Comedy Rahm Roast
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:16 PM
MineralMan (144,945 posts)
8. Do you live in Chicago?
If so, you can vote there. If not, I doubt there's much you can do to influence that local election, somehow. You could donate a pile of money to an opponent, of course, if you wanted to.
Me? I don't live in Chicago, and nothing that happens there is anything I'm really familiar enough with to comment on candidates for office there. I think I'll focus closer to home. We have elections here in St. Paul this year, too. Those elections actually affect me. |
Response to MineralMan (Reply #8)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:23 PM
zipplewrath (16,523 posts)
35. WE don't have any elections right now
No local or state elections going on here right now (or soon) so I've got the time. And there's alot of money and support coming from outside the state for Rahm, and Dean's outfit is working against him, so there's alot of out of state work being done here. I suspect the teacher's union will probably be involved as well. I suspect there will be alot of opportunities for people who can't vote in the election to help the candidate of their choice.
|
Response to MineralMan (Reply #8)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 10:28 PM
whereisjustice (2,941 posts)
97. Feigning ignorance about conservatives running for office, I suppose that's a Third Way to do it.
|
Response to whereisjustice (Reply #97)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 11:33 PM
AllyCat (13,873 posts)
100. Hey, if it's not in your backyard, leave it for the people who can buy it, no?
As for me, I'm donating to two locals for city council and CHUY GARCIA BABY!
BTW, your pun rocks. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:24 PM
roguevalley (40,656 posts)
9. anyone who hates teachers this much is a
bastard, manny. thanks for your threads. I find them most interesting.
![]() |
Response to roguevalley (Reply #9)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:26 PM
CaliforniaPeggy (144,516 posts)
75. Your post was alerted on, and here are the results:
AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message On Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:13 PM an alert was sent on the following post: anyone who hates teachers this much is a http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6296485 REASON FOR ALERT This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. ALERTER'S COMMENTS We don't seem to let bitch stand. Let's see how we do with bastard. It is a sexist word but I'm sure it will be allowed in this instance. You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:21 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT. Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: Bastard isn't sexist. It's parental-marital-status-ist, originally. I guess. But this is just some stupid fucking MRA-lite whining, and frankly deserves some sort of false-alert penalty if there were one. Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: An opinion. Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: I don't have a problem with either word...... The definition of bastard is 1 archaicderogatory a person born of parents not married to each other. synonyms illegitimate child, child born out of wedlock; More datedlove child, by-blow; natural child,son,daughter he had fathered a bastard 2. informal an unpleasant or despicable person. "he lied to me, the bastard!" I'm leaving this. Especially since it was directed at a DU'er Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: Bastard is no where near the same comparison as bitch, a bitch is a female dog. A bastard is an illegitimate child born out of wedlock. I am sad you alerted on this and you should be sad too. Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: If you're sure it will be allowed, why do you waste our time alerting? Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT Explanation: No explanation given Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE Explanation: To alert on the word "bastard" is going too far, IMHO. There is nothing wrong with this post, for crissakes. Leave it alone. (I was juror #7) |
Response to CaliforniaPeggy (Reply #75)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:37 PM
roguevalley (40,656 posts)
86. Thank you, California Peggy. I am shocked that
it was but again, you never learn about things unless you are shown. Someone believes its offensive. Others don't. Thank you, jury. I also won't be using it again. I don't wish to cause offense and I am sure I can do better expressing my point of view. Also, the comment was not directed at Manny. I enjoy his posts.
I am old enough to be better than this. Thank you. ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to roguevalley (Reply #86)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 04:21 AM
Divernan (15,480 posts)
114. Ah, that alerter wasn't offended by the word, but by criticism of a 3rd wayer.
Talk about faux outrage! And as the judge says in trial court, when overruling an objection, the objector "opened the door" to a comment. Specifically, when Rahm described fellow Dems as "fucking retarded", his supporters cannot be heard to object to Dems calling Rahm a bastard.
Hope Obama sits this one out and doesn't make another bogus trip to Chicago for an opportunity to boost Rahm's campaign. Perhaps someone can remind him that Hispanics and teachers and unions are valued members of the Democratic party and deserve a level playing field when running in a primary. An interesting question to me is what will Rahm do if he loses, i.e,. next career step. Certainly if he is available, Hillary would snap him up for her campaign staff. Hell, he could end up back in the White House as her chief of staff. That could happen even if he wins the run-off - resigning from elected office to get back to DC where all the real action is, baby! Or he could follow the Clintons' example of starting a boutique "charity" to launder corporate "donations" while simultaneously lobbying his political connections AND skimming off a healthy chunk of said "donations" to fund a five star life style. Manny makes the point it would be best if Rahm were out of politics forever. That is so true. But Rahm is like the legendary rattle-snake, which keeps snapping lethally even after it's head has been cut off. He will always be a source of hubris, arrogance and self-interest wherever he ends up. |
Response to CaliforniaPeggy (Reply #75)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 10:06 PM
liberalhistorian (20,773 posts)
95. Love the comment
from juror one, lol! What a stupid, petty bullshit alert.
|
Response to CaliforniaPeggy (Reply #75)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 09:43 AM
marmar (75,194 posts)
120. OMG. That one belongs in the Pathetic DU Alerts Hall of Fame.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:24 PM
RiverLover (7,830 posts)
10. Heck yeah, I'm in!
(repost)
by Bill Curry Salon 3/1/2015 ...In 1995 I came to work in the Clinton White House and for a time dealt with Rahm on a daily basis. For a White House staffer he seemed strangely inarticulate. (It may explain some, though obviously not all, of the profanity.) When he spoke it was almost always about tactics; almost never about policy.
Two things about him stood out. One was the contempt he heaped on unions and liberals. I thought if he were ever caught on tape it would seriously damage the president and be the end of Rahm. Some later claimed to regard these rants as performance art but even at close range they seemed real enough to me. In any case I never heard him say an unkind word about the rich. Most striking was the viciousness of his personal attacks, often over trivial things. He famously sent a pollster a dead fish wrapped in a newspaper— in lore a mafia death notice— for being late with a report. ...In Congress he hewed right on economic and fiscal policy and was a hawk on defense. As Obama’s chief of staff he purged Clinton-era liberals, which resulted in a team of economic advisers more conservative than that of any Democratic president since Grover Cleveland. Whether following their advice or his own instincts, Obama ditched ethics reform, aid to homeowners with bad mortgages, a minimum wage hike and the public option; a disastrous set of choices from which he never fully recovered. Through it all Rahm cultivated his image as a ruthless operative. By the time he got to be mayor of Chicago he was the Keyser Soze of the Democratic Party, shrouded in legend, a guy who if you crossed him would slit your throat as you slept. It was a reputation he relished.... ...The race confuses Washington. It’s a colorless town and for years Rahm was its most colorful figure, a source not just of news but of dark comic relief. Reporters imbibe the views of politicians who think the rules of the game immutable. This week even the astute E.J. Dionne compared Rahm to Bill de Blasio, “a hero to progressives,” calling it “mildly ironic” that “left of center voters” would give Rahm such a hard time. Many progressives don’t get it either. If you put them all on Sodium Pentothal and asked if grass-roots politics can still beat big money, my hunch is they’d say no. Many pray the party will reform itself. Obama’s late awakening fans that flame. But if you want to know how likely that is, peruse the numbingly vacant report the DNC issued last week allegedly laying out its vision. Frederick Douglass said it best. Power concedes nothing without a demand. On April 7 pay-to-play politics goes on trial in Chicago. The voters will be the judges. Crowell says holding Rahm accountable was a victory in itself, but she knows now it’s a fight they can win. For sure it’s an uphill climb, but then just last week it was impossible. http://www.salon.com/2015/03/01/rahm_emanuels_moment_of_reckoning_how_he_ended_up_in_a_fight_for_his_political_life/ We have to kick this dirty rethug to the curb. Then follow it with kicking the rest of the rethugs who've infiltrated the Democratic party OUT. We just have to demand it. |
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:42 PM
ReRe (10,597 posts)
40. Great post and link!
I agree with every bit of it.
|
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:53 PM
KoKo (84,711 posts)
43. Thanks for that link...
I met Rahm briefly (hand shake greeting as he looked past me to the next person) at a Dem function in my state back in '04 when I was serving as Precinct Vice Chair in my district. He reeked of self aggrandizing attitude and entitlement. The speech he gave to us about "Dem Politics in an Election Year" was filled with sports analogies and "winning the game." He smirked his way through the speech and left as soon as he finished it leaving the Q&A to our House Representative to deal with. Too busy to deal with the "peasants" it seemed.
Bill Curry's quote is exactly spot on: "When he spoke it was almost always about tactics; almost never about policy" |
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:51 PM
Agony (2,605 posts)
55. grass-roots politics CAN beat big money.
fuck that noise
|
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 01:05 AM
dreamnightwind (4,775 posts)
107. Our greatest challenge
"Many progressives don’t get it either. If you put them all on Sodium Pentothal and asked if grass-roots politics can still beat big money, my hunch is they’d say no"
I think we can beat big money, but that it is a social science in its infancy, unlike the social science of manipulation, deprivation and fear, which is far advanced and well-funded by the usual suspects. Learning to beat big money is, in the end, what it's all about. There's no other way to reform our party or our nation. I have long thought the acceptance of money from these sources could be used against them, to delegitimize any candidate accepting such "donations", and that a well-conceived social networking or just web-based approach would be able to make the stigma stick to the recipients. I still hope it happens. I've seen a few good attempts to do this (C.R.E.W., OpenSecrets, etc.), but so far nothing that gets into the consciousness of enough voters to make the difference. Part of the problem, of course, it that the big-money politicians have to be beaten in the primaries, with a non big-money alternative winning, it makes little difference if the alternatives are also funded by big money. |
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 05:53 AM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
116. Excellent article
Thanks for sharing it!
|
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 10:37 AM
Plucketeer (12,882 posts)
124. Reinforces the ASSessment
I'd developed against Rahm years ago. Thanks for posting. While I'm not a Chicagoan, this nemesis needs to be purged from his "public" self-service.
![]() |
Response to RiverLover (Reply #10)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 03:41 PM
pscot (21,005 posts)
133. This should have its own thread
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:25 PM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
11. I wouldn't vote for him if I live there but that is up to Chicago residents.
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #11)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:27 PM
RiverLover (7,830 posts)
13. This thread is more to support Chicago residents in kicking him out of office.
I'm pretty sure Manny knows how voting works.
|
Response to RiverLover (Reply #13)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:38 PM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
22. I understand that.
![]() |
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #11)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:34 PM
obxhead (8,434 posts)
19. I don't understand.
He mimics the ideology of national politicians you actively fight for. Why the change of heart with this politician?
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:32 PM
obxhead (8,434 posts)
15. How dare you!
We have been ordered to support the status quo indeffinately.
How dare you stand against a D in name only. He is the ONLY one that can win! |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:35 PM
Tierra_y_Libertad (50,414 posts)
20. But..but..he's "Not as Bad" and we must support him.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:35 PM
marym625 (17,997 posts)
21. K&R!
From Chicago
|
Response to marym625 (Reply #21)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:35 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
49. Anything we can do to help?
Besides thinking positive thoughts?
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #49)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:15 PM
marym625 (17,997 posts)
62. Just keep doing what you do best
3-way-Manny
![]() The more people that know the truth about Rahm, the better ![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #49)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:27 PM
SusanCalvin (6,592 posts)
64. Well
I sent Garcia $10 (from Texas) as soon as I heard there was going to be a runoff. I may send more. This election *does* affect me, indirectly - if Rahm loses, maybe that will send a loud message to our dear leaders. Kind of a forlorn hope (both the loss and the message) , but where there's life....
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #49)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:55 PM
mucifer (22,088 posts)
77. You can check out Chuy's website and
maybe make calls and/or donate money:
http://chicagoforchuy.com/index.html I gotta say LOTS of people here in Chicago hate Rahm. |
Response to mucifer (Reply #77)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 07:17 AM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
117. I donated at ActBlue
Go Chuy!
|
Response to marym625 (Reply #21)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 05:37 PM
Autumn (42,303 posts)
136. Hey marym. I donated to Chuey
![]() |
Response to Autumn (Reply #136)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 05:55 PM
marym625 (17,997 posts)
137. Good for you! Glad to hear that!
I wish I could. I'm flat ass broke and need a job.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:51 PM
libodem (19,288 posts)
23. I'm starting a Conga-Line
Leading to the Lounge. The drinks are on me.
Bu-bu-bu-bu-bu! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:53 PM
Phlem (6,323 posts)
24. That guy had to go the day he
was introduced.
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:55 PM
MyNameGoesHere (7,615 posts)
26. What like a coup or assassination?
Please elaborate.
|
Response to MyNameGoesHere (Reply #26)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:01 PM
stillwaiting (3,795 posts)
29. Rahm has been forced to a runoff Dem primary for Mayor against Jesus.
May Jesus kick his ass.
Jesus "Chuy" Garcia that is. |
Response to MyNameGoesHere (Reply #26)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:14 PM
grahamhgreen (15,741 posts)
32. Like a quarantine.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 03:59 PM
americannightmare (322 posts)
28. You're either for corporations...
or for addressing the needs of human beings and the planet upon which we rely for our existence. That's all of the GOP and, unfortunately, an unacceptably large number of Democrats. It's no longer about ideological purity, it's no longer a matter of opinion, it's not about being "right." It's about not just considering alternatives to our way of life, but beginning their implementation. At the very least, that means mitigating the effects of climate change so that its impacts on the economies of scale might be smaller as we transition away from said economies.
|
Response to americannightmare (Reply #28)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:10 PM
gregcrawford (2,382 posts)
30. NAILED IT!
Response to americannightmare (Reply #28)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 04:16 AM
Divernan (15,480 posts)
113. Well stated. Extremely well stated.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:16 PM
gregcrawford (2,382 posts)
33. Emanuel is a malicious, self-serving little...
... prick, whom no one can stand to be around for more than a few nanoseconds. His incredibly abrasive personality has negated what little good, if any, he has ever done. Good riddance.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:19 PM
LWolf (46,179 posts)
34. I'll support that every day of the week, all year long, every year, and twice on Sunday.
Which is today.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:24 PM
bigwillq (72,790 posts)
36. I support Rahm's ouster.
Can't stand him.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:31 PM
Ichingcarpenter (36,988 posts)
37. here's what you can do now
the bill moyers journal story I posted has tons of links of newspaper stories to back up their story........... write comments in the ones you can it helps to get the message out.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026295747 |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:38 PM
whereisjustice (2,941 posts)
39. Centrists claim it's simply pragmatic to call torture a noble expression of patriotism, after all
it's not like we have a problem with police state brutality and corruption or anything.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:56 PM
GoneFishin (5,217 posts)
44. K & R
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 04:58 PM
Skidmore (37,364 posts)
45. Let's let the people of Chicago go vote.
Ir really is up to them right now.
|
Response to Skidmore (Reply #45)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:57 PM
mucifer (22,088 posts)
78. Yeah but feel free to send Chuy money if you want to remember
Rahm is getting tons of out of state and big corporation help:
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/chicagoforchuy |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:04 PM
Tom Ripley (4,945 posts)
47. K&R
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:19 PM
bahrbearian (13,466 posts)
48. This is the Democratic Underground , We support Dem's Here What do you want Ted Cruz for Mayor?
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #48)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:45 PM
Zorra (27,670 posts)
53. Wait...Rahm Emanuel is...a Democrat?!? Well, I'll be darned.
He sure had me fooled!
|
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #48)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:55 PM
ybbor (1,468 posts)
57. He's running against another Dem
Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, Democratic Cook County Commissioner.
I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic or not. And hell no, I wouldn't wish Cruz on the inhabitants of Texas! |
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #48)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:56 PM
sendero (28,552 posts)
58. Rahm is a Democrat..
... like I'm the King of Siam.
|
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #48)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:15 PM
QC (26,371 posts)
82. Manny wants Sarah Palin!!!
![]() |
Response to bahrbearian (Reply #48)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 04:26 AM
Divernan (15,480 posts)
115. Took me a sec to realize you were being sarcastic.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:39 PM
msanthrope (37,549 posts)
50. How about a thread supporting protection of the franchise. ...so the citizens of
Chicago can make their own choices?
|
Response to msanthrope (Reply #50)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:01 PM
KittyWampus (55,894 posts)
60. How about a thread attacking elected Republicans for a change. Funny how the OP'er never does that.
Response to KittyWampus (Reply #60)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:45 PM
msanthrope (37,549 posts)
76. I don't recall one, that's for sure. ntn
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:42 PM
blkmusclmachine (16,149 posts)
52. Yes.
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 05:47 PM
Android3.14 (5,402 posts)
54. Well, since you put it that way
I'm in.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:12 PM
Stuart G (36,298 posts)
61. Rob needs to be put out for good...nt
Response to Stuart G (Reply #61)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 07:56 PM
MineralMan (144,945 posts)
71. Rob? Rob who?
Response to MineralMan (Reply #71)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:06 PM
Stuart G (36,298 posts)
73. My mistake, Rahm, Not Rob...I was in a hurry, sorry....nt
Response to Stuart G (Reply #73)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:14 PM
MineralMan (144,945 posts)
74. Ah... the names are so similar, huh?
Rob...Rahm...
Oh, well... |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:22 PM
Jack Rabbit (45,984 posts)
63. Ah, thanks for this opportunity, Manny
Unfortunately, like many Chicago mayors of the past, the dead will no doubt rise from their graves to vote for the crook.
K/R |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:36 PM
MissDeeds (7,499 posts)
65. Excellent post, Manny
Big K&R
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 06:40 PM
Stellar (5,644 posts)
67. Two people that I absolutely hate in Chicago politics...Rahm
and Rauner!
![]() Right-wing union buster Bruce Rauner is actively supporting Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/02/27/1367462/-Right-wing-union-buster-Bruce-Rauner-is-actively-supporting-Chicago-Mayor-Rahm-Emanuel#comments |
Response to Stellar (Reply #67)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 07:39 PM
democrank (10,386 posts)
69. Out with Rahm
for Chicago`s sake.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 07:56 PM
cantbeserious (13,039 posts)
70. DLC - Third Way - Rahm Emanuel - Hillary Rodham Clinton - A Pox On Their Houses
eom
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 08:05 PM
silvershadow (10,336 posts)
72. Rock on, Manny. nt
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:19 PM
Cryptoad (8,254 posts)
83. You have nothing positive to say
about his opponent ? Funny how that works
|
Response to Cryptoad (Reply #83)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:40 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
87. He's not Rahm?
That's about all this Bostonian knows about him.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #87)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:46 PM
Cryptoad (8,254 posts)
88. sounds about right
Sad yall have nothing to say about the positive attributes of Garcia..... doesnt speak well or him or yall.....
|
Response to Cryptoad (Reply #88)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:51 PM
MannyGoldstein (34,589 posts)
90. Statistics.
What are the odds of any given Democratic candidate being worse for the 99% than Rahm? Much less than 1%.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #90)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:54 PM
Cryptoad (8,254 posts)
92. very slim
but there still that chance that Garcia,,,,, fact
makes me wonder since nobody is talking about this attributes and plans for Chicago. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Reply #87)
MannyGoldstein This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:29 PM
kimbutgar (18,161 posts)
85. He is the reason president Obama was timid in his first two years
If he had gone progressive the tea party might not have gained that many seats. After the sumpreme court turned our country over to corporations the democratic controlled congress should have put in strict campaign finance laws. I'm sure Rahm discouraged him.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 09:51 PM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
91. Why do you hate Democrats?
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 10:01 PM
Blue Owl (43,538 posts)
94. RAHM -- an anagram for HARM
n/t
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Sun Mar 1, 2015, 10:43 PM
cheapdate (3,811 posts)
98. I don't care what anyone says, this is the Rahm I'll always remember:
[URL=
![]() ![]() I'm not into tearing down Democrats, even when I disagree with them. I am perfectly willing, however, to make a persuasive argument for my point of view, or to support better candidates. But I will not draw lines between "decent human beings" and a Democratic leader over disagreements about public policy. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:41 AM
NuttyFluffers (6,811 posts)
105. chuy is a real progressive opportunity.
he has some solid history bona fides. go chuy!
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 01:15 AM
nikto (3,284 posts)
108. Rahm would make a great GOPer...
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 03:39 AM
AtheistCrusader (33,982 posts)
111. Currently the poll results are a dead heat, so naturally Rahm by a landslide.
"It is not my doing, I merely foretell."
The more things change... Well, you know. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 04:00 AM
Enthusiast (50,983 posts)
112. Kicked and recommended a massive amount!
Purge the asshole criminals! (from both parties) Hey, think of it as a jobs program.
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 10:05 AM
wolfie001 (1,619 posts)
121. Yes!!!
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 10:41 AM
closeupready (29,503 posts)
125. Amen.
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 10:42 AM
Jamastiene (38,174 posts)
126. I'm not too "#%^*ing retarded" to K&R
and agree wholeheartedly with a thread to oust him.
![]() |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 10:51 AM
fredamae (4,458 posts)
127. I sent a donation to Chuy
I don't live Anywhere near there........
As a member of the Democratic Wing apparently makes me "Fkg Retarded" I won't forgive this "pseudo dems" remarks Ever. He has hurt so many in Chicago. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:14 PM
cascadiance (19,537 posts)
129. Stop the Rahmper Room corruption of Chicago's schools!
GET HIM OUT!!!! Put him OUT of any political office where he'll be doing damage!
|
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:28 PM
BlancheSplanchnik (20,219 posts)
130. he's my alma mater's most famous graduate.
I hope they stop bragging about him in the alumni newsletter.
Heeeyyyyyyyyy, while I've got you here.....you planning on answering my last reply? It would be a courtesy. |
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 12:49 PM
cyberswede (26,117 posts)
131. Kickaroo. nt
Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)
Mon Mar 2, 2015, 01:07 PM
RationalMan (96 posts)
132. I don't believe Emanuel can be an effective mayor or other elected official........
He wasn't effective as Obama's Chief of Staff but he was cut from Illinois and Chicago Democratic politics and as such he came in with the Obama waver.
For that matter I don't believe Obama has necessarily been well served by any of his chiefs of staff although they can be highly instrumental in effectuating the Executive's political agenda. I believe Rahm is good at cut-throat politics and isn't afraid to get down and dirty when needed. I'm not sure how well that works rolled out into an effective governing style. |