Digg this
| 
Post to del.icio.us
| 
E-mail to a friend
There was an Olympic rally on the south side this morning, but it wasn't like the rallies staged by Mayor Daley.
Instead of bringing in out-of-town celebrities to join the mayor's chorus -- Olympics good, Olympics good -- the newly formed coalition Communities for an Equitable Olympics raised the possibility that maybe, just maybe, staging the games in 2016 wouldn't be such a hot idea for Chicagoans.
It was a glorious sunshiny morning, and many of the leading south-side community organizations were there: the Kenwood-Oakland Community Organization, Action Now, Centers for New Horizons, the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless, and the Brighton Park Neighborhood Council.
Facing a horde of reporters and camera crews, they stood on the steps of Michael Reese Hospital, at 2929 S. Ellis, which the city -- as busted as it is -- is preparing to replace with a 37-acre development that could serve as the Olympic Village.
Think about this for a moment. The city's $400 million in the red, we're in the midst of a crisis in low-income health care, and the condo market's soft. But the mayor's gearing up to sink $85 million into a 7,500-unit condominium complex that will take the place of a hospital.
For the moment the activists are playing things diplomatically. "We're not here to hurt the Olympic bid," said Denise Dixon, a member of Action Now. "We're here to enhance it."
The coalition wants to force the city to sign a "legally enforceable benefits agreement" that would, among other things, guarantee that as much as 20 percent of the units in the Olympic Village development would be affordable for working-class and poor people who currently live in the area.
At the risk of sounding like the jaded old coot that I am, I don't know why they would trust any promise that the city makes when it comes to affordable housing. As best I can tell the whole point of the Olympics -- other than putting an international spotlight on the mayor -- is to move the poor people out of the south side.
I can only hope that if the city turns down the residents' demands they'll move to plan B: opposition. I say the sooner they get there the better. Until Mayor Daley can show how he would pay for the games -- other than with property tax dollars -- we shouldn't be spending millions to try to have them, 'cause we can't afford them.
When I think about it, there should have been people from the north, northwest, southwest and west sides at today's rally as well. After all, tax dollars are coming out of their pockets too.
That's China.
A country.
A fucking huge country.
So, why is it, than, that there is any, serious expectation for a single city, Chicago, to be able to afford hosting the Olympics?
Why is it that an individual city is, apparently, expected to foot the bill for hosting the Olympics, when the entire fucking country of China is paying for this year's Olympics?
Could it be because China is a pseudo-communist dictatorship?
And is our illustrious mayor seeking to learn how to manage our city as a pseudo-communist dictator?
*
Break curfew.
*
Call City Hall and ask if their Shakman Decree is running.
*
Rename Northerly Island "Meigs Field."
*
Paint the Bean black.
*
Bulldoze the Children's Museum.
*
TP the Hancock.
*
Elect a real city council.
*
Hello, Peotone!
*
Solve the city budget crisis with the help of some Nigerian pals we just met online.
*
Let all his plants die.
*
Boot his cars. Every wheel.
*
Hire Patrick Fitzgerald as a janitor and send him to City Hall to clean the mayor's office.
*
Finish Block 37.
*
Make fun of Bill Daley.
*
Recall Todd Stroger.
*
Call City Hall and tell them you want Amanda Hugginkiss.
*
Change Olympic bid documents to 2017.
*
Seize the radio stations first as we liberate the city.
"People are taking their hatred of government out on us,the police.
They see the first line of government represented by the police and focus all of their gripes and hate of the system upon us.
We need to educate the populace about how we feel, we feel the same way they do.
Keep up the good work SCC!
8/08/2008 04:29:00 AM"
From the fine folks at:
http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/
Come visit and be amazed.
Yes, there are cops who are certified assholes.
You can read all about how the 'real police' feel about the certified assholes on the SCC blog.
ALL of these certified assholes are the CPD version of patronage hires.
These shitheads are referred to as 'merit hacks', 'clouted fucks', 'house mouses', etc., and are as much despised by the 'real police' as by the average citizen.
The real problem, as you must know, isn't the assholes posing as authentic Peace Officers, it's the assholes who make these Mickey Mouse laws.
And who is responsible for empowering these assholes?
REGISTER TO VOTE
VOTE IN EVERY ELECTION
HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT
Presumably because these 'some people' you refer to place a higher value on the commonalities you have enumerated than on retaining more of their earnings for them to decide how and for what to spend them.
So, if your premise is true concerning the casting of votes in elections, is it also true in other areas of these some people's lives?
For example, if any one of these 'some people' were to observe an individual, possessing one, or more, of your listed commonalities, enter their home, uninvited, and proceed to collect several valuable items, belonging to said 'some' person, would you expect that 'some' person to say, "Hey, buddy, you possess one or more of the qualities I possess, so, it's okay if you now choose to take my valuable property. After all, we are so alike, perhaps of the same race, or same gender, or same ethnicity, or same religion, or same sexual orientation or same political party; why, I'd be wrong, just plain wrong, to object to your removing the things I've bought with my hard earned dollars."?
Or would you expect that 'some' person to say, "What the fuck do you think you're doing, muthafucka!!! Get the fuck outta my house!!!!"
Apply the same analogy, replacing personal property with gross earned income.
Now consider that practically ALL of those reelected Incumbents are responsible, by acts of commission or omission, for the net income you receive for your labors is significantly less than the gross income, to the tune of close to 25%+ on just your payroll deductions alone. Factor in the various other tax liabilities you have to pay, once you cash that net payroll check, and the total tax burden the average working American is paying approaches 40%+ or more.
And your theory, or observation, if you will, is that there are more than enough 'some people' to ensure that the Incumbents, who are taxing the economic life out of the working people of this city, county and state, will reliably be reelected, time and time again, is it not?
Implied in your theory is the assumption that there are NOT enough 'other people' willing to place a lesser value on your enumerated commonalities than on the contents of their pockets remaining their's to control.
Perhaps it's just a question of enough people realizing that their own, individual interests are best served by placing a higher value on those interests than on the commonalities you have listed.
So then, your theory is that people will accept an ass-fucking, as long as it's being done by other people who present themselves as being the same "....gender, race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality and political party.", right?
Is that your perspective on "...today's reality."?
Another gem from the comments section of:
http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/
"Off Topic, but this comment needs to be placed where it can be read by all your readers.
Your contract:
Please do not fall for the gimmicks being offered to buy your "loyalty," such as new color schemes for our squads, new Tahoes, etc. The city can find money for this stuff, but cannot find money for your contract?
Come on guys and gals, wake up!
What is wrong with our current color scheme? How much is it going to cost to redo all the Department's vehicles?
Recently, an Order came out wherein Overtime for CAPS was canceled. I'm sure soon you will see all Overtime canceled, because of the budget, except for court related Overtime.
But, the Department keeps creating new positions.
Just announced, a Personal Assistant position was assigned to the Bureau of Strategic Deployment.
Come on people! A Personal Assistant!
In addition to the new Personal Assistant, the Bureau of Strategic Deployment has a Deputy Superintendent, an Assistant Deputy Superintendent, a Chief of Homeland Security, and a Deputy Chief of Homeland Security.
The Department has 2 CAPS Exempts: Chief of CAPS, and the Director of CAPS Implementation, who by the way, should be in jail because of his involvement with the GD's.
Why do we need 2 Exempts doing essentially the same thing?
We have a Superintendent's Policy Group. Why can't Research and Development handle policy suggestions; after all, policy falls under their purvue.
In IAD, there is a Chief, and a Director of Investigations, which will soon be filled by another FBI Special Agent who recently retired.
Look at the Personnel Division, a civilian heads Personnel now. Also, the Department has a Director of Marketing; again, isn't this a responsibility of Research and Development?
If these new spots and some existing spots were eliminated, think of the savings that could be used for your contract. At the very least, you are talking about 2 million dollars.
Let me talk about morale. They want you to be aggressive, yet you are told you will be fired if you disclose an illegal aliens status.
They have already proven that they will go after you in other ways if the Cook County justice system doesn't suffice.
Also, they tell you they have your back, but what does the Supt do, he hires an FBI Special Agent to be Director of Investigations in IAD.
What message is this sending?
Nepotism. The Supt said at one of his first meetings that he was going to eliminate clout on the job, but what does he do, he hires his Best Man, and another Fed, and now another Fed.
If you really need these positions, how about filling them with officers from within our ranks.
You mean that you couldn't find people qualified within our ranks instead of going outside the Department. A slap in your faces.
Outsiders: Deputy Superintendent of Professional Standards, Chief of Homeland Security, Director of Investigations for IAD, Director of Marketing, Director of Petrsonnel.
Not one person within our ranks is qualified to fill these spots?
Getting rid of good bosses before you even got to know them.
Hiram Grau - had the trust of the rank and file - was part of the Violence Reduction Initiatives that worked!
John Risley - knew how to handle major events - also part of the Violence Reduction Initiatives that worked.
Michael Chasen - like him or not, he was the right man for police shootings.
George Rosebrock - held 019 up to standards.
Yes the other dumps were on target: Kohlman - O'Donnell - Chizewski.
How about the fact that the Cmdr of Management and Labor Affairs was inept but was laterally moved.
M. Bonds. Terrible representative of the Department. Has done more damage than good.
Manpower. How about assigning SWAT members to Districts on all three watches. Provide them with cell phones. If a call comes out, you already have SWAT personnel working who can respond from their assigned Districts within minutes.
More manpower and less time waiting for SWAT to assemble.
Time Due. Watch Commanders are looking at your activity to base whether or not to approve your time off. They are playing favorites as well.
Guys and Gals, this is just a few things you need to look at.
Keep doing what you are doing. It is not worth loosing your job.
To the FOP, you should seriously look at a no-confidence vote.
8/10/2008 10:34:00 PM"
I just want to point out something. In the last election 30% of the city voted and daley got about 70% of the vote. So that means daley only got 21% of the entire city to vote for him? Sounds like we have a ruling class that benefits off of people's laziness and unwilligness to vote. I love how white "liberals" in Chicago will knock george bush for benefiting from people's lethargy throughout the country but they can't criticize daley for the same thing.
Maybe if there were some real alliances between various neighborhoods of chicago who are fed up with the "business as usual" politics of Chicago then maybe we could vote the incumbents and get that 21% of the city that votes for daley to wise up.
Whites, blacks, lations, and asians fed up with being kicked around by this city government need to put race behind them and unite.
One more thing, no, we won't vote for daley. Only selfish sheep like you will.
Actually, that 30% who voted was 30% of the roughly 50% of all potential voters who bothered to register.
That is to say, of all residents of this city who meet the qualifications to vote, barely 50% are registered.
So, 30% of 50% means that less than 20% of all city residents who could vote, did so.
And 70% of that less than 20% voted for Daley.
So, barely 15% of all city residents who could have voted in the last election approved of Daley and voted for him.
As in less than 1 out of every 7 city residents wanted Daley to remain the mayor, with the other 6 out of 7 residents either voting for the shill Brown or the shill Walls or, primarily, not voting at all, whether they were registered to vote or not.
Imagine what would happen if every resident qualified to vote were registered, were to vote in every election and were to not vote for any incumbent office holder.
That 70% of the 30% of the 50% looks pretty pathetic, doesn't it, and far from a vote of confidence.
In fact, the citizens of this city and county could rid themselves of every crooked incumbent in one election, just by:
REGISTER TO VOTE
VOTE IN EVERY ELECTION
HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT
Real Change You can Believe In
Real Change the Incumbents Pray You Never Vote For.