DescentBB

Sorry, no room for the customers but the guy making the sandwich will probably make it through his shift without being shot....so at least there is that

Something you can talk about while you eat quickly keeping your head down...the stats on what was, but now isn't, a violent crime or a murder are being massaged so if you are shot or attacked the official word is it was less likely to happen to you than before they felt a need to bullet proof the workers! And that is a good thing certainly for...well...for someone. So Yay Chicago! Yay Subway!

Honey, pass the kevlar, I'm thinking we stay for dessert!

Bulletproof Subways have been around for years, so this article seems way late. I used to grab lunch from one every couple weeks over a decade ago. The ones I've seen were once other businesses like currency exchanges that were converted to Subway restaurants and they simply left the glass. Not all of them are in bad parts of town, like the one on Western and Diversey (North Side). This just seems like a step up from the sneeze guard anyway.

Your response makes me think of a frog in a pot over a lit stove telling me he doesn't think the water is really all that much warmer than it has been.

Does the frog also find the mayor's revised definition of what counts as a violent crime normal as well?

You gripe about the violent crime on the rise in certain cities in this country. So what you you propose we as a nation do about it? Allow Americans to arm themselves all over the country like the legislation recently passed in Georgia and let everyone personally take care of the problem by shooting every bad guy they encounter like private vigilantes? Or should we just eliminate the whole problem by exterminating all gang bangers en mass, usually minorities who are poor, bored and unemployed, everywhere they live so's to clean up our cities in one fell swoop?

tunnelcat wrote:You gripe about the violent crime on the rise in certain cities in this country. So what you you propose we as a nation do about it? Allow Americans to arm themselves all over the country like the legislation recently passed in Georgia and let everyone personally take care of the problem by shooting every bad guy they encounter like private vigilantes? Or should we just eliminate the whole problem by exterminating all gang bangers en mass, usually minorities who are poor, bored and unemployed, everywhere they live so's to clean up our cities in one fell swoop?

You seem to have a problem with my pointing out the danger of violent crime encroaching on everyday life and the subsequent coverup by the Mayor of Chicago to blatantly hide murders and other violent crime so he can go out and brag about how the crime rate is supposedly lower than its been in decades.

Why you would want to complain about my pointing this out is really strange to me. What motive do you have for trying to attribute all sorts of nonsense to me...like 'exterminating all gangbangers'...etc.?!?

What scares you so much about the facts I pointed out that you feel compelled to rush in and try to muddy the water? Some kind of weird knee-jerk handicap you have there! Maybe you have a soft spot in your heart for lying scumbag politicians who are democrats...what a sad fetish that is!

Surely you don't mean to imply the Mayor should be allowed to continue his cover up.... that we shouldn't talk about what he has done until someone else actually solves his problem for him...do you?

Don't get all out of joint, I've even noticed the crime going up in our little town, and it's directly related to increased influx of homeless people and the crappy job market. There are several homeless camps in the woods a block from my house. I don't even walk the trails through those woods anymore. Plus, we have well-meaning liberal "helpers" in our city who want to assist these people in their plight with shelter and food. All well and feely good, but the word has gotten out and we're getting flooded with transients from all around the state like we're some great homeless hotel and now we're getting more crime because of it. Oh, they're providing some nice shelter for these poor people, but there are few local jobs to get them on back their feet and get them into the economy as working members of society, so they hang out, get drunk and cause trouble.

That's the real problem in Chicago and most cities in America, a lack of good paying jobs, poor education, and yes, poor parenting. I can't necessarily blame the mayor of Chicago because it makes his city look unwelcome to visitors and business. You're right he is covering it up, but you can't blame him when a real solution is still wanting. Hell, I saw 7/11 stores with bullet proof glass cubicles in the heart of Silicon Valley in the 1980's, so the problem is not new. But crime goes up when people are uneducated, unemployed, homeless and zoned out on drugs and alcohol. In large cities, the problem is magnified by the shear numbers of people affected. It's really gotten worse in the rust belt of the Mid-West since most of our high paying manufacturing jobs disappeared due to global arbitrage.

Guess what? The problem's going to get a lot worse because those jobs that are coming back don't pay nearly as well and there aren't as many as before. Why? Because we're repeating history........again. We're starting into another Gilded Age, along with a failing middle class, greater inequity between the classes, higher crime rates and a new wealthy class that doesn't care about anyone's well being but their own. Blame the resurgence of Social Darwinism. Big business and the politicians (both parties) don't give a damn about the lowly peon and the places they have to live in, as long as they don't have to see them and they'll work for dirt low wages. They live in their little walled compounds and gated houses and don't have to deal with the riffraff. They spend millions to grease the skids in Washington to keep it that way. SCOTUS has ruled that their money is equal speech to you and me. Even worse, they're blaming those at the bottom for the abysmal situation they've created. Might as well say: "Welcome to the next Great Depression".

http://faculty.etsu.edu/odonnell/2011fa ... winism.htm

http://go.bloomberg.com/political-capit ... big-tweet/

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/20 ... since-1990

tunnelcat wrote:...
You're right he is covering it up, but you can't blame him when a real solution is still wanting.

That is a completely ridiculous statement! And, yes, actually I can blame him. It is the right thing to do and since the proffessional watchdogs sold their souls out it is even more important than ever that we all demand he is held responsible for these kind of acts!

He is selling his city down the drain for his own political fortune. He moved in a day before it was too late to say he lived there to get elected and he will move out the day he takes his fortune and cashes it in for a run for something bigger leaving his false record evaporating in the stench of the steaming pile of reality he carelessly created and hid from view!

He is a frikken full blown liar, opportunist and thief.
I certainly will blame him for every crooked thing he does and fault everyone who supports him and everyone like you who dogmatically make excuses for him out of one side of their mouth while simultaneously whining about us 'repeating history'!!

How does one enable a repeat of history? Glad you asked! You make excuses that keep liars and thieves in power!

You mean carpetbaggers like Mr. Scott Brown now trying to get elected in New Hampshire? Say, wasn't he a tea party Senator from Massachusetts?

tunnelcat wrote:You mean carpetbaggers like Mr. Scott Brown now trying to get elected in New Hampshire? Say, wasn't he a tea party Senator from Massachusetts?

You find that to be clever?
You avoid the point, and worse, try to deflect attention from the issue, by trying to find a partisan example to offset the indictment I made?!? And how weak of an attemp is that?

Did Scott Brown do the kind of things that are the main thrust of my point? Has he used his office to falsify police reports in order to change violent crime statistics effectively hiding murders so he can keep his place of power?

You are so narrow mindedly knee jerk partisan that it is pointless to take your comments serious.

Will Robinson wrote:

tunnelcat wrote:You mean carpetbaggers like Mr. Scott Brown now trying to get elected in New Hampshire? Say, wasn't he a tea party Senator from Massachusetts?

You find that to be clever?
You avoid the point, and worse, try to deflect attention from the issue, by trying to find a partisan example to offset the indictment I made?!? And how weak of an attemp is that?

Did Scott Brown do the kind of things that are the main thrust of my point? Has he used his office to falsify police reports in order to change violent crime statistics effectively hiding murders so he can keep his place of power?

You are so narrow mindedly knee jerk partisan that it is pointless to take your comments serious.

A carpetbagger is a carpetbagger. Scott Brown got his ass whupped when it came down to an election anyway. We'll see if New Hampshire sees through his blatant attempt to get back into office. You commented about it like Emanuel was the only person guilty of it. But back to your point, Mayor Emanuel was a slimebag working for Obama and he's still a slimebag as mayor of Chicago. If you hunt through some of my old posts, you'd see I never liked him. His tactics were to protect his ass when he worked for Obama, and he's still doing the same thing working as mayor of Chicago. But what I do see is a mayoral job that's damn near impossible to accomplish under our current economic climate. That's the point I was trying to make. You can gripe that he's a crooked carpetbagger with delusions of grandeur out to enrich himself, and you'd be right. But I also see a thankless dead end job that's only attracting crooked politicians. It's a lose, lose situation for all our major cities that lost those lucrative middle class manufacturing jobs and now have a high unemployment and crime rate.

If a bank robber posed as a janitor to steal the banks money would you say yea he's a scumbag thief but being a janitor is a tough job?!?
I think the 'it's a tough job' factor doesn't need to be considered in either case.
And, yea, he isn't the first carpetbagger but that is hardly the main point I raised is it?
The rewriting death reports, police reports, crime reports and getting to herald them in the media almost completely without scrutiny?!? Come on this is a new low and having the D by his name shouldn't be enough to let it slide, not even for the current biased media we have.
Yet there he goes, smiling about "reducing crime".

Will Robinson wrote:If a bank robber posed as a janitor to steal the banks money would you say yea he's a scumbag thief but being a janitor is a tough job?!?

He's not a janitor. He is a bank robber posing as a janitor. His job is robbing banks. Robbing banks seems like a tough job though. Now if you had said he was a janitor who robbed a bank....

Emanuel isn't a mayor nearly as much as he is posing as one thus my twist to the analogy.

Will Robinson wrote:Emanuel isn't a mayor nearly as much as he is posing as one thus my twist to the analogy.

once again, ideological bias showing. Emanuel IS the duly elected mayor of the 2nd largest city in the nation. Whether you like it, or not. Whether you question his tactics, or not. Frankly, those who know the guy have said that this is the job he wanted for a long time. Each to their own. I wouldn't want it. Why do you view him as posing, Will? Do you have evidence that he isn't working hard at the position? If so, you haven't shown any here.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Emanuel isn't a mayor nearly as much as he is posing as one thus my twist to the analogy.

once again, ideological bias showing. Emanuel IS the duly elected mayor of the 2nd largest city in the nation. Whether you like it, or not. Whether you question his tactics, or not. Frankly, those who know the guy have said that this is the job he wanted for a long time. Each to their own. I wouldn't want it. Why do you view him as posing, Will? Do you have evidence that he isn't working hard at the position? If so, you haven't shown any here.

Oh yea, silly me,
I guess I'm just a stooge for thinking falsifying police reports to hide murders from the tally just doesn't cut it as "working hard" at the job of being mayor! Lol!

It is, however, working hard at furthering ones political career....

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Emanuel isn't a mayor nearly as much as he is posing as one thus my twist to the analogy.

once again, ideological bias showing. Emanuel IS the duly elected mayor of the 2nd largest city in the nation. Whether you like it, or not. Whether you question his tactics, or not. Frankly, those who know the guy have said that this is the job he wanted for a long time. Each to their own. I wouldn't want it. Why do you view him as posing, Will? Do you have evidence that he isn't working hard at the position? If so, you haven't shown any here.

Oh yea, silly me,
I guess I'm just a stooge for thinking falsifying police reports to hide murders from the tally just doesn't cut it as "working hard" at the job of being mayor! Lol!

It is, however, working hard at furthering ones political career....

no one 'falsified' anything. They DID change the definitions for statistics, which can, legitimately be seen as playing with perceptions. At any rate, I'll suggest that Emanuel is doing more good for the people of Chicago than bad, and is likely working his ass off doing so.

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:

callmeslick wrote:

Will Robinson wrote:Emanuel isn't a mayor nearly as much as he is posing as one thus my twist to the analogy.

once again, ideological bias showing. Emanuel IS the duly elected mayor of the 2nd largest city in the nation. Whether you like it, or not. Whether you question his tactics, or not. Frankly, those who know the guy have said that this is the job he wanted for a long time. Each to their own. I wouldn't want it. Why do you view him as posing, Will? Do you have evidence that he isn't working hard at the position? If so, you haven't shown any here.

Oh yea, silly me,
I guess I'm just a stooge for thinking falsifying police reports to hide murders from the tally just doesn't cut it as "working hard" at the job of being mayor! Lol!

It is, however, working hard at furthering ones political career....

no one 'falsified' anything. They DID change the definitions for statistics, which can, legitimately be seen as playing with perceptions. At any rate, I'll suggest that Emanuel is doing more good for the people of Chicago than bad, and is likely working his ass off doing so.

What a bunch of bullfeces! First of your euphemistic spin should embarrass you for trying to pass it off! slick-'It isn't falsifying, they are just changing things to play with peoples perceptions'?!? Lol!

second of all, if you had actually read the Chicago news report you would know that some police officers have reported that the actual police reports were altered. That IS FALSIFYING....as well as playing with perceptions.

You are shameless, at a clinically defined pathological level.

not buying the falsifying thing unless proven by more than hearsay. I try to stick with that, if you notice, even on stuff that strikes me as odd(ex-Christie and the bridge thing, reasoning behind Ted Cruz' Canadian dual citizenship, etc). Like I said, it's valid to criticize Emanuel et al for playing with perceptions(trying to make things look better than they are), but, the jump to 'he's hardly working at being mayor' is a stretch. A big stretch, frankly. I'd love to hear more from those who live in the area, as you are no closer to Chicago than I, so neither of us knows how much work the guy is doing.

I agree with you slick. I think Emanuel is working hard....to make himself look good so he can make a bid for the presidency.

callmeslick wrote:I'd love to hear more from those who live in the area, as you are no closer to Chicago than I, so neither of us knows how much work the guy is doing.

I haven't lived there since he took office, but the opinion of my friends and family ranges from loathing to indifference. Emanuel is playing favorites when it comes to education and since a number of my friends are teachers I am helpless to catch an earful. Emanuel seems to be making a lot of the same mistakes Daley did, but the overall opinion of Daley was, strangely, more positive than negative. Honestly, it is still too early to see how his policies as Mayor will affect Chicago in the long run. Wait until the next election cycle.

woodchip wrote:I agree with you slick. I think Emanuel is working hard....to make himself look good so he can make a bid for the presidency.

a statement which shows that you have no clue about electoral politics. Rahm Emanuel will never run for, nor have a chance to be, President. Too polarizing a figure.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:I agree with you slick. I think Emanuel is working hard....to make himself look good so he can make a bid for the presidency.

a statement which shows that you have no clue about electoral politics. Rahm Emanuel will never run for, nor have a chance to be, President. Too polarizing a figure.

Polarizing is becoming the new winning tactic for the left so he might be just right by the time his shot comes around.

what a load of bullflop. Obama won twice because he was trying to be a uniting figure, and because he was WAY less divisive than his opposition. Divisive NEVER works on a national level.

It works if you are only dividing “certain” people out of the equation.

nice backpedal. And, no, divisive doesn't work. Even if 'some people' are involved. The Obama campaign NEVER(and I worked for both) excluded ANY group, and in fact worked real hard on outreach to those who didn't agree with us. In PA, that was very successful, by the way, and allowed my team to carry a majority GOP district, twice.

"backpedal"?

Oh and......Suuuurrrreeee