occupy on the ballot in chicago's 49th ward. sorta.

[mopinko]

so, both my alderman, joe moore, and democratic committeeman, david fagus, have had their jobs for 20 years. they are both great progressives, and the ward is affectionately known as the people's republic of the 49th ward. they really are both doing a fine job and are welcome to stay as long as they want the jobs as far as i am concerned.
the committeeman is being challenged in the march 20th primary by someone who has been very involved in occupy chicago. jim ginderske has been a part of the ward organization for a while, on the board, although he did run for alderman several years ago.
after the unanimous vote for rahm emanuel's budget, our regular meeting got a visit from occupy. the speaker that night was our congresswoman, jan schakoswky. joe got mic checked, i guess cuz they figured he would be one of the lone dissenters, as he often has been. nobody minded until they finished their schtick, and turned and scurried out the door, snickering. both joe and jan implored them to stay and talk. a handful did.
honestly, it was childish, and annoyed a lot of folks. jan especially is a supporter, had been down to several occupy events, and was really insulted.
anyway, things were said, jim got pissed and decided to run for committeeman.
jim is a good guy, tho a bit of a hothead. he is sincere in his desire to work for change. i don't think very many people know anything about the reason for his candidacy. but for those who do it will be a choice between a very good democrat and occupy. it will be a tough choice.

[sabrina 1]

1. I haven't been following all of what is happening in Chicago, but was the budget the problem

(really do not know anything about that which is why I am asking) or was it the fact that Rahm has attempted to make Occupy illegal. Not sure either how much support he got for that.

It would be a shame to lose good reps, but if they voted for Rahm's attempts to silence people, I could see why people might protest that.

As I said though, I do not know why they were there.

[mopinko]

2. specifically it was cuts in human services, particularly mental health care.

it is a big issue, and there are many assisted living units in this neighborhood of all sorts. and many poor and uninsured people.
it also looked at the time as tho the alderman was going to be leaving. he was up for a job at the illinois epa. that stirred things up some as well.
the committeeman does not vote on anything. they run the local party. but that is the office that happens to be open.

as far as making occupy illegal, i would not concur with that characterization as i wouldn't with a lot of the other sound bite-izations of complex things. that all did very little to change existing law, and was more about bring statutes into line with the findings of supreme court rulings stemming from 3 anniversary iraq war march that led to some law suits. most of the real changes got rolled back.

[sabrina 1]

3. Okay, thanks for the information.

It's a shame to see programs being cut for those most in need while the bankers continue to profit. That is an issue that will continue to arouse anger.

Regarding the issue of the law re protesting, I will read more about that as I am not familiar with the details.

I know there was a recent decision in favor of anti-war protesters from 2003. I'm sure that will now open the door for more lawsuits, especially in NYC, and I hope there are, and in Oakland where something needs to be done about the brutality reigned down on unarmed, peaceful protesters.

[mopinko]

4. i can promise you that rahm does not want to see that.

he really doesn't.

[sabrina 1]

5. Then the best way for him to avoid it, is not to emulate the NYC, Portland and Oakland

Mayors, and start respecting the 1st Amendment rights of American citizens. Putting people in pens is not the way to go. And arresting people for simply protesting is not either. I am glad to see people finally saying 'no, we will not be caged like spectators in our democracy'.

In Oakland when over 100,000 people protested all day long a few days after the OPD nearly killed Scott Olsen, the police for the first and only time, kept their distance, as it was the police violence on that night, that contributed to that demonstration. There was not a single incident during the entire day until almost everyone had gone home later that night. Which showed clearly why there were problems. As someone said 'they are dressed in riot gear because they have come to start a riot'.

The police have been attacking protesters. That needs to stop. I hope he understands that.

[mopinko]

6. if there is one city in this country that knows

that the whole world is watching it is chicago. and it is rahm. i don't think he really cares that many people despise him, but he is not eager to add to the list, either.

in all seriousness, the so called "sit down and shut up" ordinance was really chewed over heavily by the city council. my alderman and others fought for the 1st amendment wherever they could. a lot of things were misunderstood, tho, really.