Sorry, Rahm!

[Tom]

Rahm Emanuel has been ruled ineligible to run for mayor of Chicago.


Looks like he will have to do it the old fashioned way - buy it! :lol:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/court-rules-rahm-emanuel-ineligible-mayor-chicago-residency/story?id=12749064

[JustRalph]

Thousands of votes from dead people just got stopped in the mail

[bigmack]

I can only imagine the expletives stampeded around the Emanuel household after hearing this news and telling his kids - "Nevermind the dead fish on the dining room table, go study your Hebrew."

[HandyKapper]

The Illinois Supreme Court will over-ride the decision and allow him in. Unfortunately, it is how politics work nowadays.

[illinoisbred]

The Illinois Supreme Court will over-ride the decision and allow him in. Unfortunately, it is how politics work nowadays.
I don't think so. Rahm is confused regarding the difference between serving the country and political service. Working for Obama is not the same as serving in the military for 2 years.

[Robert Goren]

Why does anyone outside of Chicago care? If he doesn't get on the ballot, then former US senator Carol Moseley Braun will probably win. She has called a lot of things, but Tea Party Republican is not one of them.

[Robert Goren]

I don't think so. Rahm is confused regarding the difference between serving the country and political service. Working for Obama is not the same as serving in the military for 2 years.Politicians of all stripes get confused about that all the time. The term "Life Dedicated to Public Service" is a polite way of saying "Career Politician".

[BlueShoe]

He could always crawl back to his old boss and ask for a job. Am sure that oBowma would welcome a man with his talents back with open arms and would find an appointment for him. After all, incompetent, vicious, self serving men are a key part of the BO adminstration, and Rahm fit right into that mold nicely before he left.

[Spiderman]

Laying 6-5 that he gets on ballot. Bet open to midnight, January 25th.

[illinoisbred]

The ballots are being printed today without Rahm's name included. One would think they'd wait a day or two,but they're spending taxpayers money so what the hell.

[boxcar]

Rahm Emanuel has been ruled ineligible to run for mayor of Chicago.


Looks like he will have to do it the old fashioned way - buy it! :lol:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/court-rules-rahm-emanuel-ineligible-mayor-chicago-residency/story?id=12749064

A mere temporary setback. The SC, which is literally stacked with Dems, will interpret the residency requirements in spirit not letter.

Boxcar

[BlueShoe]

Just in, the Illinois Supreme Court has ordered his name to be placed back on the ballot and no ballots printed and distributed without his name. The Court has agreed to hear his appeal. Chicago politics at work. How many Democrats did you say are on the ISC and how much green stuff was spread around in the right places?

[mostpost]

Just in, the Illinois Supreme Court has ordered his name to be placed back on the ballot and no ballots printed and distributed without his name. The Court has agreed to hear his appeal. Chicago politics at work. How many Democrats did you say are on the ISC and how much green stuff was spread around in the right places?
You do not know what you are talking about. All the candidates are democrats. The last Republican Mayor of Chicago was Big Bill Thompson in the thirties. Or maybe it was the twenties. The last viable Republican candidate was Benjamin Adamowski against the first Richard Daley. And he wasn't all that viable.

The majority on the Appellate Court used a very narrow interpretation of the statute to remove Emmanuel's name. They also ignored several precedents that contradicted their opinion. The dissent effectively destroyed every one of their arguments. Also, in cases like this, a lower court will always certify the case to the next level. This speeds up the process so a timely final decision can be rendered. This Appellate Court did not do that.

The proper way to approach any case is to listen to the evidence and apply the law to make a decision. In this case, it appears the court made a decision then interpreted the law to justify that decision.

[prospector]

Just in, the Illinois Supreme Court has ordered his name to be placed back on the ballot and no ballots printed and distributed without his name. The Court has agreed to hear his appeal. Chicago politics at work. How many Democrats did you say are on the ISC and how much green stuff was spread around in the right places?
chicago politics at its best..it'd been a shame to waste all those dead votes..;)

[boxcar]

You do not know what you are talking about. All the candidates are democrats. The last Republican Mayor of Chicago was Big Bill Thompson in the thirties. Or maybe it was the twenties. The last viable Republican candidate was Benjamin Adamowski against the first Richard Daley. And he wasn't all that viable.

The majority on the Appellate Court used a very narrow interpretation of the statute to remove Emmanuel's name. They also ignored several precedents that contradicted their opinion. The dissent effectively destroyed every one of their arguments. Also, in cases like this, a lower court will always certify the case to the next level. This speeds up the process so a timely final decision can be rendered. This Appellate Court did not do that.

The proper way to approach any case is to listen to the evidence and apply the law to make a decision. In this case, it appears the court made a decision then interpreted the law to justify that decision.

That's a huge assumption. How is the law written? Do you know or this just another one of your knee-jerk reactions?

And if the AC interpreted the law, according to its letter, that would be wrong? Can any court interpret a law too broadly for your tastes? I mean the broader (looser) the interpretation the more likely it'll be that the court would effectively render any given statute null and void.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

That's a huge assumption. How is the law written? Do you know or this just another one of your knee-jerk reactions?

And if the AC interpreted the law, according to its letter, that would be wrong? Can any court interpret a law too broadly for your tastes? I mean the broader (looser) the interpretation the more likely it'll be that the court would effectively render any given statute null and void.

Boxcar
What I am going to say is based on how the law is portrayed in articles I have read, not on an actual reading of the verbatim law. But all the articles have said the same thing.
The law states that in order to be considered a resident a person must have lived in that jurisdiction for a year immediately precedent to the election. It requires physical presence. There is an exception if the person is absent due to service to the country. Despite what someone said up thread, this has always been interpreted to include government as well as military service. A senator does not lose his Illinois citizenship just because he is living in Washington DC.

In this case a person must state his intention to return to his regular abode when his term of service is completed. Emmanuel did this according to his testimony and the testimony of others.

The appellate court did not argue that Emmanuel had forfeited his residency by moving temporarily to Washington D.C. It claimed that the law was not meant to be applied to candidates but only to voters. In other words the law, particularly the exception was meant to protect Emmanuel's right to vote, not his right to run for office.

The court (the majority) came to this conclusion in direct contradiction to several other rulings to the contrary. All this was pointed out in the dissent.

[mostpost]

Don't make the mistake of thinking I am an ardent Rahm Emmanuel supporter. I think he would make a good mayor. He's a tough guy. You need to be a tough guy to be Mayor of Chicago. He's a get things done guy. Also important. But Gery Chico is also very competent. He was mayor Daley's go to guy when something needed to be fixed. (Fixed as in repaired not as in corrupted).
Carol Mosely Braun? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[boxcar]

What I am going to say is based on how the law is portrayed in articles I have read, not on an actual reading of the verbatim law. But all the articles have said the same thing.
The law states that in order to be considered a resident a person must have lived in that jurisdiction for a year immediately precedent to the election. It requires physical presence. There is an exception if the person is absent due to service to the country. Despite what someone said up thread, this has always been interpreted to include government as well as military service. A senator does not lose his Illinois citizenship just because he is living in Washington DC.

In this case a person must state his intention to return to his regular abode when his term of service is completed. Emmanuel did this according to his testimony and the testimony of others.

The appellate court did not argue that Emmanuel had forfeited his residency by moving temporarily to Washington D.C. It claimed that the law was not meant to be applied to candidates but only to voters. In other words the law, particularly the exception was meant to protect Emmanuel's right to vote, not his right to run for office.

The court (the majority) came to this conclusion in direct contradiction to several other rulings to the contrary. All this was pointed out in the dissent.

Fair enough. Hard to imagine, however, how a court could misconstrue who the objects of the law are. If I find time later, I'll research it.

Boxcar

[ArlJim78]

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that by some miracle the supreme court ends up ruling against Rahm. I'd rather see any of the others in office before Rahm.

[boxcar]

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that by some miracle the supreme court ends up ruling against Rahm. I'd rather see any of the others in office before Rahm.

You realize that the SC has already ordered that his name not be removed from the ballot before they rule? I suspect this order is a harbinger of what's coming next with this Dem-controlled court.

Boxcar

[johnhannibalsmith]

Make him change his name to Steve and then put it back on the ballot.

[ArlJim78]

You realize that the SC has already ordered that his name not be removed from the ballot before they rule? I suspect this order is a harbinger of what's coming next with this Dem-controlled court.

Boxcar
yes I'm aware and it may be a harbinger, but I'm not sure it's a done deal either.

[ArlJim78]

You realize that the SC has already ordered that his name not be removed from the ballot before they rule? I suspect this order is a harbinger of what's coming next with this Dem-controlled court.

Boxcar
oh and about the democratic controlled court, I'm not sure that even matters. they're all democrats, but I really wonder if Rahm has the support of some of the other Democratic powers downstate. I'm not sure he's completely worshipped by democrats, far from it I suspect.

[mostpost]

oh and about the democratic controlled court, I'm not sure that even matters. they're all democrats, but I really wonder if Rahm has the support of some of the other Democratic powers downstate. I'm not sure he's completely worshipped by democrats, far from it I suspect.
I think that is a pretty good assessment. Did I really say that? :confused:

[boxcar]

oh and about the democratic controlled court, I'm not sure that even matters. they're all democrats, but I really wonder if Rahm has the support of some of the other Democratic powers downstate. I'm not sure he's completely worshipped by democrats, far from it I suspect.

I can't even begin to imagine why. He's a real sweetheart, despite his slight misstep in sending a 2+ foot, decomposing dead fish to someone he didn't like. I think in order for him to be really disliked he'd have to pull a "godfather" and send the head of a dead horse or something to the SC as a hint of what could be waiting in the wings for an unfavorable decision.

Boxcar

[mostpost]

It was just on the local radio news. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the Appellete Court ruling by 7-0. It was described as a "scathing" reversal. The Supremes said the apellate court majority followed no basis in law in making their decision
More to follow>

[Spiderman]

Good news travels fast. The law was on his side.

[boxcar]

Good news travels fast. The law was on his side.

No surprises here. The 7 apples didn't fall very far from the rotten tree. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Spiderman]

No surprises here. The 7 apples didn't fall very far from the rotten tree. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

That's it, keep on the attack.

[boxcar]

That's it, keep on the attack.

No "attack". First and foremost, I know human nature. Secondly, I know liberals. Thirdly, I knew the SC was stacked with 'em. Lastly, I can connect the dots, which is why I predicted that the SC would overturn the AC decision.

Meanwhile, you keep gulping on the kool-aid.

Boxcar

[Spiderman]

No "attack". First and foremost, I know human nature. Secondly, I know liberals. Thirdly, I knew the SC was stacked with 'em. Lastly, I can connect the dots, which is why I predicted that the SC would overturn the AC decision.

Meanwhile, you keep gulping on the kool-aid.

Boxcar

Sorry that you took it the wrong way. Meant that you stay in character and constant with condemning Dems.

I was the first in this thread to naysay that he would be denied name on ballot. was laying 6-5, but no one called my bet.

[boxcar]

Sorry that you took it the wrong way. Meant that you stay in character and constant with condemning Dems.

I was the first in this thread to naysay that he would be denied name on ballot. was laying 6-5, but no one called my bet.

So, we were in agreement. The only dif is that you see it as a good thing, whereas I don't necessarily do. Liberals pols and judges are, generally, pretty corrupt. Not that the Right is any paragon of virtue either -- but the Left wrote the manual on Corruption. ;)

Boxcar

[Spiderman]

Now, you'll have Rahm to knock which should be more fun than any of the other candidates. Wouldn't be surprised if Rahm bites dog to get into news cycle.

[mostpost]

This just in. The Obama administration has granted the Illinois Supreme Court a waiver on Obamacare. :eek:

[mostpost]

No "attack". First and foremost, I know human nature. Secondly, I know liberals. Thirdly, I knew the SC was stacked with 'em. Lastly, I can connect the dots, which is why I predicted that the SC would overturn the AC decision.

Meanwhile, you keep gulping on the kool-aid.

Boxcar
you should know by now that when you say something that is wrong you will be challenged. The Illinois Supreme Court is not "stacked with liberals" Justices are elected by District and there are plenty of Conservative areas throughout Illinois.
By Party the makeup of the court at present stands at four Democrats and three Republicans. Did you not read me when I said the decision was unanimous? That means even the Conservatives agreed.

Maybe they all followed the law.

[bigmack]

Mosty & Spidergoof celebrating news that 99.9% of the world could give a rats ass about. :jump:

Mayor of Chicago. Name more than 3 mayors in the US. They don't mean nothin' to nobody.

A Jewish cat who fought for Israel in the Gulf War beats out a black woman because he raised more dough. Now over to Herb with sports.

[BlueShoe]

Just in a few minutes ago; Rahm Emanuel has won the race for mayor of Chicago. In his previous position he had very good on the job training for operating in the corrupt world of Chicago politics. In addition, his former boss in always there to advise him as to how things work there.:rolleyes:

[Tom]

The record is still intact.
Another scumbag crook takes charge of Chicago.

The dead will parade in the morning.

[ArlJim78]

Only days after the election and not even sworn in yet, and already an ethical lapse from team Rahm.
______________________________________________

First blow to Emanuel team

Transition aide quits after ethics violation revealed



A veteran politician Rahm Emanuel (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/government/rahm-emanuel--PEPLT000007532.topic) named to his mayoral transition team resigned her high-level state job last summer and paid a fine for conducting political business on state time, according to a newly filed ethics report.

Judy Erwin (http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/politics/judy-erwin-PEPLT001934.topic), a co-chair of Emanuel's mayoral campaign, said late Friday night that she would resign her new post on his transition team after the Tribune contacted her and the campaign. She said she hadn't informed Emanuel of the ethics violation.



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/elections/ct-met-rahm-emanuel-transition-20110226,0,5545430.story

[sandpit]

Only days after the election and not even sworn in yet, and already an ethical lapse from team Rahm.
______________________________________________

First blow to Emanuel team

Transition aide quits after ethics violation revealed



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/elections/ct-met-rahm-emanuel-transition-20110226,0,5545430.story

If everyone that conducted political business on state/federal time, there wouldn't be a single elected official left in office.

[ArlJim78]

If everyone that conducted political business on state/federal time, there wouldn't be a single elected official left in office.
you say that like its a bad thing

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by sandpit
If everyone that conducted political business on state/federal time, there wouldn't be a single elected official left in office.
REPLY BY ARLJIM78
you say that like its a bad thing

That is an amazing statement. In one sentence you have told us what you think of democracy. "Get rid of all those pesky elected officials." It's well known that conservatives are oligarchs. You have just proven it.