I see that columnist John Kass has noticed the same thing about the video of the execution of Laquan MacDonald that I did:
Rahm sat on the video, and kept sitting on it, all the way through his re-election, as black ministers and other African-American political figures rallied to his side to get out the black vote and deny that vote to Jesus ‘Chuy’ Garcia. … If the video had come out during the election campaign, Rahm Emanuel would not be mayor today.
I think I’ve mentioned the situation I experienced with my then employer, a Fortune 500 company. A scandal involving the manager of a regional organization was discovered. Headquarters send in a team of investigators. One of one all of the managers in the regional organization was called before the investigators and asked just two questions. Did you know? Could/should you have known? Unless the manager could make convincing arguments that he didn’t know and there was no way he could have known, he was terminated right then and there. Very few managers kept their jobs.
Something of the sort needs to happen in Chicago. Neither the mayor nor the police are “at will” employees. It’s practically impossible to get rid of them. The state probably has the authority to conduct a tribunal of the sort described above but even if such a thing were legal the state’s officials are probably just as corrupt as the city’s and, indeed, may well be involved in the cover-up as well.
And yet people keep re-electing them. Despite the corruption trials that have been going on for most of my adult life. It’s not a hopeful situation but rather one that ends with guillotines in the town square.
And yet people keep re-electing them.
Why are you surprised? You do this yourself. It’s called “voting for the lesser evil.” And when the party in power is able to convince everyone that every alternative is worse, you end up with Chicago. Or Illinois. Or the United States of America.
Ice, Voting for the “lesser of evils” is governed by one’s political definition of who that is. In the case of the 2012 election, I couldn’t see how anyone could possibly reinstate Obama to the job of POTUS, considering his lackluster, lousy, controversial record. But they did!
Also, did anyone see similarities between the foot dragging and lies regarding Benghazi, leading up to the Illinois-based candidate seeking reelection to POTUS, and the current release of a sensational police shooting video a year after someone else from Illinois was seeking reelection to his job as mayor of Chicago? What do they say about “Birds of the same feather flocking together!”
Furthermore, voting 3rd party, or not at all, only nullifies one’s vote, while giving more weight to the choices of those who blindly vote party line — no matter how inept, unethical or unlikable their party nominee may be. The case study to watch for this behavior will be Clinton’s presidential run, and how many loyal democrats will march to the voting booths and cast their’s for her! And, voting 3rd party or skipping that box entirely will not deny her the chance of becoming the next POTUS.
Ironically, republicans tend to be far more judgmental of their candidates than dems do. However, maybe, 2016 will prove to be an exception, as frustration and contempt for the left is growing, leading more people on the right to be saying, “Ah, what the He**,” as they support the nomination of a divisive figure such as Trump. He certainly seems to be the revenge candidate birthed from Obama’s tenure in office.
” lies regarding Benghazi”
What lies? I have read pretty extensively on this now. All of the investigations, including the GOP ones have come to the same conclusions. Every statement made by an Obama admin person was made with qualifiers. They were using the official talking points generated by US intel. The lying going on seems to coming from your side, including the stand down lie and the cover up lie.
“I couldn’t see how anyone could possibly reinstate Obama to the job of POTUS, considering his lackluster, lousy, controversial record.”
Are you the real Pauline Kael?
Steve
Steve, you see what you want to see. I’m not going to go into the Full Monty of explanations that you then will discount or deny. The WH, however, did everything they could to scuttle and thwart the Benghazi investigations, while extending rhetoric regarding their “full cooperation.” HRC’s butt — vis a vie emails etc. — were protected for years. Her State Dept was excused from inexcusable security infractions. And, her lies and conflicting statements have been all but shrugged off. Such a cover-up charade, though, does not appease everyone, and this is why her numbers have tanked in people trusting her. Also, there is the POTUS, who mystically disappeared during the Benghazi fire fight, and whose time has never been accounted for. But, there’s been such a volume of misinformation successfully generated from this WH that it muddies the waters and just makes heads spin when trying to make any logical sense of it.
You have always been 100% behind Obama’s so-called record of achievements — especially the PPACA. However, your undying support does not make such a record golden. Others — many others — see it from an opposing POV.
@jan
When Secretary of State Kerry slipped up and blamed Charlie Hebdo for the terrorist attack, he opened the curtains into the progressive mindset. They believe that Muslims are a special group of people who will become enraged at the smallest slight including an internet movie none of them have seen.
What is happening at the college campuses is the younger generation refusing to be polite. They are expressing the same thing, but their elders have enough sense to keep their mouths shut.
” blamed Charlie Hebdo for the terrorist attack”
And here I thought you had reading comprehension skills.
Steve
“The WH, however, did everything they could to scuttle and thwart the Benghazi investigations”
That is interesting. Let me suggest you look up the number of your Congressman, or at least the nearest Republican Congressman and let him know about this. Their investigation, just like the Senate investigation, just like the other 6 investigations failed to show what you claim. Heck, if they were trying to scuttle things and there were still 8 investigations, they must not have been trying very hard. (Life in the bubble……..)
Steve
@steve
And here I thought you had reading comprehension skills.
I and the non-progressive listeners heard Secretary Kerry quite clearly, and he blamed Charlie Hebdo for the terrorist attack on them. He quickly realised it was the wrong thing to say among a mixed crowd, but one does not accidently blame the victim.
I see that President Wilson is being dragged out of the closet and exposed as a racist. It will be interesting to see how the Black Lives Matter crowd and other minorities react when they learn about the origins of Progressive ideology regarding minorities.