Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

IL Supreme Court issues a stay (?) and says to put Rahm's name back on the

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:03 PM
Original message
IL Supreme Court issues a stay (?) and says to put Rahm's name back on the
ballot.

Andrea Mitchell just reported it - no link.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
1. of course. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lamp_shade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yessssssssssss
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. Of course they did.
It's idiotic to throw him off the ballot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
4. Good. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
5. Did they offer a reason?
Bummer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. I don't know if it was just a comment/opinion by Andrea or if they (Supreme Court) indicated
that if someone is in the nation's Capitol serving the country, that should not affect residential status in home state. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Sorry, I've been through this in other threads.
Rahm wasn't serving his country. He was employed by it. There's a difference.

Any argument for his maintaining his residency could also be made for any postal delivery worker who moves to a town 100 miles away to take a delivery job. Or by ANY government employee ANYWHERE who moves to work elsewhere.

He wasn't SENT by the government or the people to serve elsewhere...he went to Washington to chase employment. He moved.

Besides that, he's scum, and I don't want him running for any position anywhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. I'm not the one who offered that opinion, just reporting I'd heard it, acknowledging
I wasn't certain of the source.

No need to convince me of your views. I'm not the one making any decisions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Probably so arrangements can be made to print ballots with his name;
the case will continue. Time crunch there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. Good point. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. Booo!
Although in NYS the case would easily be made that it was "always his intention" to return to his "home".

While I hate the DLC, I think Rham had a case that he was a resident, more or less..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I think it's up to the people of IL -- if they really want him, he should be allowed
to run.

Didn't Cheney do a bogus "resident" thing? I'm thinking others have, too. Rahm's claim is more valid than others' IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. Ding ding DING!1 CHEENEE's blatant law breaking was there from the start
And by "start" (since he was a permanent Rethug regime fixture) I mean his de facto pResidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
10. Good. I hope the ILSC lets the people decide who they want as Mayor.
Edited on Tue Jan-25-11 01:32 PM by Pirate Smile
The IL SC hasn't even said that they will hear the case yet but this will stop Rahm from being screwed by not being on the ballot for early voting which starts in less then a week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ItNerd4life Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
12. Yes, because laws are made to be broken. Just what Chicago needs!
Let's elect a new mayor and his first act is to break the law! woohoo, Chicago politics at it's best!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-25-11 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
15. Shocking. Simply shocking.
:sarcasm:

How utterly predictable.

:thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 07:46 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC