General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA 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.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)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>
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)are you just talking trash about something you don't know shit about? There's a lot of that around these days. Just curious.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)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.
Populist_Prole
(5,364 posts)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.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)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.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)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.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)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 countrythey 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.
merrily
(45,251 posts)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.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)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.
merrily
(45,251 posts)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
In his freshman year in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown, future U.S. President Bill Clinton took Quigley's course, receiving a 'B' as his final grade in both semesters (an excellent grade in a course where nearly half the students received D or lower).[2]: 94, 96
Clinton named Quigley as an important influence on his aspirations and political philosophy in 1991, when launching his presidential campaign in a speech at Georgetown.[2]: 96 He also mentioned Quigley again during his acceptance speech to the 1992 Democratic National Convention, as follows:
As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy's summons to citizenship. And then, as a student at Georgetown, I heard that call clarified by a professor named Carroll Quigley, who said to us that America was the greatest Nation in history because our people had always believed in two thingsthat tomorrow can be better than today and that every one of us has a personal moral responsibility to make it so.[17]
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.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)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.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)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.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)WELL to the left.
TheKentuckian
(25,023 posts)Joe Turner
(930 posts)in the Democratic party.
Kick/
LiberalArkie
(15,708 posts)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.
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)A 3rd-Wayer really doesn't care. They're only interested in raising money from the rich and telling Liberals to STFU.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #1)
Name removed Message auto-removed
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)Rockyj
(538 posts)marmar
(77,067 posts)BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)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.
Segami
(14,923 posts)..had the President Obama's ear for the first two years of his presidency..........
merrily
(45,251 posts)It's not as though Obama did not know what Rahm was like.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)what other big corporitists are behind Rahmbo.
merrily
(45,251 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)appalachiablue
(41,118 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)Ferrets +1, Emanuel 0
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Ferrets +2, Emanuel +1
sendero
(28,552 posts)... that Obama had no intention of acting as he campaigned he would.
demwing
(16,916 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)MineralMan
(146,284 posts)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.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)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.
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)AllyCat
(16,174 posts)As for me, I'm donating to two locals for city council and CHUY GARCIA BABY!
BTW, your pun rocks.
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)bastard, manny. thanks for your threads. I find them most interesting.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,580 posts)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)
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)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.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)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.
liberalhistorian
(20,815 posts)from juror one, lol! What a stupid, petty bullshit alert.
marmar
(77,067 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)(repost)
by Bill Curry
Salon
3/1/2015
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 Obamas 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. Its 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 dont 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 theyd say no. Many pray the party will reform itself. Obamas 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 its a fight they can win. For sure its 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.
ReRe
(10,597 posts)I agree with every bit of it.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)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"
Agony
(2,605 posts)fuck that noise
dreamnightwind
(4,775 posts)"Many progressives dont 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 theyd 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.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Thanks for sharing it!
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)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.
pscot
(21,024 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)I'm pretty sure Manny knows how voting works.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)obxhead
(8,434 posts)He mimics the ideology of national politicians you actively fight for. Why the change of heart with this politician?
obxhead
(8,434 posts)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!
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)From Chicago
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Besides thinking positive thoughts?
marym625
(17,997 posts)3-way-Manny
The more people that know the truth about Rahm, the better
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)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....
mucifer
(23,522 posts)maybe make calls and/or donate money:
http://chicagoforchuy.com/index.html
I gotta say LOTS of people here in Chicago hate Rahm.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Go Chuy!
Autumn
(45,042 posts)marym625
(17,997 posts)I wish I could. I'm flat ass broke and need a job.
libodem
(19,288 posts)Leading to the Lounge. The drinks are on me.
Bu-bu-bu-bu-bu! Bu-bu-bu-bu-bu! Bu-bu-bu-bu-bu!
Phlem
(6,323 posts)was introduced.
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Please elaborate.
stillwaiting
(3,795 posts)May Jesus kick his ass.
Jesus "Chuy" Garcia that is.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)americannightmare
(322 posts)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.
gregcrawford
(2,382 posts)Divernan
(15,480 posts)gregcrawford
(2,382 posts)... 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.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)Which is today.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Can't stand him.
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)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
whereisjustice
(2,941 posts)it's not like we have a problem with police state brutality and corruption or anything.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Skidmore
(37,364 posts)Ir really is up to them right now.
mucifer
(23,522 posts)Rahm is getting tons of out of state and big corporation help:
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/chicagoforchuy
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)He sure had me fooled!
ybbor
(1,554 posts)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!
sendero
(28,552 posts)... like I'm the King of Siam.
QC
(26,371 posts)Divernan
(15,480 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Chicago can make their own choices?
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Android3.14
(5,402 posts)I'm in.
Stuart G
(38,414 posts)MineralMan
(146,284 posts)Stuart G
(38,414 posts)MineralMan
(146,284 posts)Rob...Rahm...
Oh, well...
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)Unfortunately, like many Chicago mayors of the past, the dead will no doubt rise from their graves to vote for the crook.
K/R
MissDeeds
(7,499 posts)Big K&R
Stellar
(5,644 posts)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
democrank
(11,092 posts)for Chicago`s sake.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)about his opponent ? Funny how that works
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)That's about all this Bostonian knows about him.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Sad yall have nothing to say about the positive attributes of Garcia..... doesnt speak well or him or yall.....
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)What are the odds of any given Democratic candidate being worse for the 99% than Rahm? Much less than 1%.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)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.
kimbutgar
(21,111 posts)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.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Blue Owl
(50,347 posts)n/t
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/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.
NuttyFluffers
(6,811 posts)he has some solid history bona fides. go chuy!
nikto
(3,284 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)"It is not my doing, I merely foretell."
The more things change... Well, you know.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Purge the asshole criminals! (from both parties) Hey, think of it as a jobs program.
wolfie001
(2,225 posts)Borchkins
(724 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)Jamastiene
(38,187 posts)and agree wholeheartedly with a thread to oust him.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)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.
Everyone can too:
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/chicagoforchuy
cascadiance
(19,537 posts)GET HIM OUT!!!! Put him OUT of any political office where he'll be doing damage!
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)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.
cyberswede
(26,117 posts)RationalMan
(96 posts)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.