does anyone who supported brandon johnson over paul vallas for mayor want to opine here, with the passage of time and johnson's performance as mayor, on 1] why they still think johnson was a better choice than vallas, or 2] why they've changed their opinion, and would have voted for vallas [in hindsight], or 3] not voted for either johnson or vallas.
PS/full disclosure - i supported vallas for mayor [didn't vote for him, i don't/didn't live in Chgo at the time], and have supported him since he ran against [now ex-con & current MAGA] blagojevich.
I wasn't happy about either candidate, don't like the way the guy I voted for has handled the job, and strongly suspect I'd feel the same if I'd picked the other guy. The mayoral votes I most regret, though? Mine and tens of thousands of others (or whatever the margin was that kept Toni Preckwinkle off the runoff ballot), robbing the city of the chance to have the most capable executive in local government of my nearly 60 years as a Chicagoan. We'd have reelected her handily, I suspect, and never been faced with the lousy options of Johnson and Vallas. Mea culpa!
Regarding the Real ID, I am 71 yrs old now. Have had 3 marriages. Each time I remarried, I went to DMV and legally changed my name. When I went to get my Real ID, I was informed I need my birth certificate and all three marriage licenses and divorce decrees.
With 3 marriages, haven't I already suffered enough?
I know a woman who went thru some many hoops to change her name when she got married that when she got divorced and remarried she stayed with her first husband’s name because it wasn’t worth the effort.
Eric answered my question. Just why do we need them? Go back and read the history of some of the major terrorist incidents. These were not people trying to hide their identity. They were proud of what they did and wanted the world to know. Would Real ID have stopped the World Trade Center bombings? The bombers were not only legally in the country, but attended flight school. Obtaining a Real ID would have been a mere formality.
There are clearly some special cases, cited here, for which getting a Real ID is a serious pain, but for the vast majority of us, it involves 10 minutes to assemble 3 readily available documents and the usual process at Elston to renew your drivers license. As 71% of your readers attest, it’s just no big deal. I do agree that a passport by itself should be enough documentation.
Birth certificate, Social Security card, passport, a bill sent to your house ... I will say when I got mine four years ago I checked my documents about six times b/c I was worried I had the wrong ones.
For a Real ID it's actually easier to get a passport and/or a Global Entry card (like a Pre-Check Plus). I have both and have no plans or need to put myself through the torture of trying to get the DMV's version of Real ID.
For people who don't have/want a passport, Real ID will be the only way to fly (one day - they keep putting it off). Getting my Real ID a couple years ago with my renewal wasn't a big deal ($5 extra), but will prefer using my (finally renewed w/name change) passport/passport card when they arrive. Getting a new passport (old was too expired to just renew by mail) was easier than Real ID, far less documentation required.
LOL! Had to have my marriage certificate for my Real ID as well. Oddly, we just got new passports (whole fam) and was surprised they didn't want my marriage certificate. They said if it's changed on your driver license, we assume it's legit. My prior passport was in my maiden name and the US govt just accepts that my name change is valid because my driver license is in a different name. Bizarre.
Fascinating how many of our idiot aldermen who don't have Shot Spotter are against it. Like my rotten, vile anti-Semitic pile of shit alderman Vasquez & the two equally moronic ones in the wards that are just yards from my house from 48th & 49th wards. That idiot in 48 is proud that she won't send out alerts anymore of violent crime in her ward because it makes her look bad. Except she is bad!
Even more fascinating & bizarre is how appallingly stupid Johnson is, going against not just a majority of aldermen, but all of the ones who actually have it in their wards, plus the public in those wards who also want it kept & want more police around, not less!
He appears to be a disastrous clone of NYC's previous mayor, the utterly incompetent & hapless fool, Bill DiBlasio, who was hated by almost everyone at the end of his term. Even his own wife dumped him at the end!
As for convicted felon Jackson Junior, why are so many people in politics always lining up to say such wonderful things about their fellow politicians who went to prison for being crooks, when they want a pardon, or even the praise letters they send to the federal judges prior to their sentencing? I get the feeling that it's because they want that to be reciprocated for when they get caught, convicted & go to prison!
I listened to the Mincing Rascals. Someone compared Johnson’s brute style with our former president. And with regards to a plan to replace Shot Spotter, I suppose Johnson can say “I’ve got a concept of a plan”
Regarding the White Sox, my wife and I went to our only game last Saturday and saw a walk off win (after two blown 3 run leads). They are 1-0 for me. Someone had free tickets, so it only cost me $111. My wife wanted to try a $15 Girl Scout cookie shake. And parking is $30.
If that terrible Sheriff Joe Arpaio can get a pardon, Jackson Jr deserves one as well. And spare me the two wrongs don't make a right speech. We either create legislation that defines consistently what qualifies for a pardon or we accept that Presidents can pardon whomever the Fuck they want like the Kings of Old.
Way to twist my words, Rick. Are you really gonna sit there and say "whelp, the Sheriff who violated human rights on a daily basis got a parole he didn't deserve, but that's just how the cookie crumbles."?
Between Arpaio and Jackson Jr, who has done more harm? who has shown remorse, even if perfunctory? And which one might do more good with their pardon?
If we are gonna pretend that Justice is Blind and fairness exists in this country, than we have to evaluate our systems and our processes. Since we don't have a mechanism to reverse undeserved pardons, the best we can do is balance the scales where we can.
Both did great harm. Arpaio by being a racist & Junior by deceiving his constituents. Any remorse from Junior is as fake as a Rolex you buy on a Manhattan street corner. Arpaio will never apologize, as he's depraved.
Two wrongs don't make a right. We always make the assumption that politics is a zero sum game and we must even things out. I disagree. If we wish to pardon someone on our hearts, I won't argue. I guess it's the Christian kindness thing to do. But this is also about letting him back in the game. Forget it as far as I'm concerned. I might forgive John Dillinger. But I would never again give him the keys to the bank.
I read your rant concerning Steven Thrasher. Does it concern you that you could not cite any journalistic ethical violations or license issues? There appears to be no effective code that Thrasher accepted and then violated. Journalism (unlike medicine, law or even driving a car) requires no license, no agreement to follow any ethical code or laws and no preparation.
So your rant really becomes a difference of opinion on his behavior. I agree with your opinion, but it is sad it is just an opinion.
Journalism is a profession in need of enforceable guidelines.
As a kid watching my mother cook, I practiced my reading by sounding out the unfamiliar words on the boxes and bottles she'd placed on the counter. I never came close to WUSH tuh sher (stressed syllable is given in capital letters; WUSH rhyming with with push). The "sister" joke reminded me of those long-ago hapless attempts: much funnier, and closer to the usual pronunciation, than my "wore SESS ter shire."
First typo has been fixed. Second remains in the "1916 Philadelphia Athletics" paragraph: in context, it refers to the era, so the number of scheduled games (154) seems more appropriate than 153.
ah, my white sox - can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.
EZ has the numbers down tight - barring a near-mirable on the order of the 2003 tigers 5-of-the-last-6, sox are almost a dead lock to break all post-1900 loss and losing % records. at least 2 weeks ago i had them pegged for 125 losses - i'll stick with 125, and hope i'm wrong [on the high side].
kudos to EZ for linking the article at espn. com. i had read the whole article [looong article] the day it came out. both the author [authors?] and the players showed professionalism and good judgment - and noble spirit, on the part of the players - for an article on a subject that is otherwise pathetic.
Re NU's Thrasher: I can never get over the narcissism embodied in Thrasher's loutish reply to Eric's polite and impeccably reasoned invitation to further discussion. As a Medill grad who's already embarrassed enough by their new name, I can hardly stand knowing that this is the type of person they hire. But OK; we already know from NU Prof Laura Kipnis that Northwestern's investigation process etc is out of control. And then the Cook County state's attorney office under Kim Foxx has a blanket policy to dismiss charges against all protesters/rioters who can by any stretch of the imagination be described as "peaceful." But question: Medill lists Thrasher as an assistant professor. That means he does not have tenure. So why are they stuck with him? Isn't it reasonable for alum and others to expect Medill to not renew Thrasher's contract when it's up? A journalism professor who doesn't understand the real meaning of objective reporting, and actively teaches students not to attempt to report objective reality for their readers, isn't just worthless but actively antithetical to the school's entire mission.
Too bad there are no ethics issues or license issues. Thrasher has not violated any enforceable ethics code or school mission statements. And so he stays, and so he teaches.
He is kind of a symbol for the profession of journalism needing at least an enforceable ethics code.
He absolutely violated a university mission statement and policy against harassment of students. The encampment he supported and tried to prevent the dismantling of had clearly visible signage that indicated "No Jews allowed". This was an absolute violation of NW's policy against harassment.
If one tried to put in rules for journalists which could be acted on with the force of law, there would be challenges based on the first amendment. The best we can hope for are "guidelines" from an industry group.
I would use the lawyer model. Have requirements for licensing and an enforceable ethics codes. Journalists who break this code would face censure and potential loss of license. In extreme cases, the force of law would be brought.
Works to some extent with lawyers, expect it could be a start for the journalism profession.
I think you can enforce guidelines without a first amendment issue.
Keep in mind, I would expect the journalism groups to be private, not a governmental entity.
Right now you have the Wild West with any goofball claiming to be a journalist.
You cannot do that as a lawyer, doctor or motor vehicle operator.
I think that it is pretty clear from reading the web page that the Medill school now views 'social justice' and DEI as the top priority mission of journalists. This is consistent with the progressive and Critical Theory notion that objectivity and facts are props for the existing power structure which need to be ignored or suppressed in the quest for justice. The mission of the journalist is to lead, sway, or punish in the interest of the cause, not to merely inform the public with objective facts that they may not properly interpret.
In fact, many professional journalists have defended the rights of faux journalists and made no effort to protect the reputation of their profession. They seem to have taken pride in embracing anyone that made claim to the title. Attacks on journalistic bona-fides seem to be entirely political, on all sides.
While I certainly honor Zorn's right to say NU is stuck with Thrasher, I disagree that having hired him should necessarily foreclose firing him, even if the offense is merely being outrageously bad at his job.
I'm a supporter in general of academic tenure as a protection against punishment for expression of controversial opinions. After all, free exchange of ideas is the lifeblood of a truth-seeking institution. At the same time, tenure should be premised only on some combination of outstanding academic achievement and outstanding teaching, consistently confirmed over a lengthy probationary period, consistent with the university's truth-seeking mission. Ideological firebrands, the immature sort to whom students, being immature themselves, often gravitate, who don't engage in serious study and/or only confirm priors in the classroom rather than challenge them -- shrill activists, in other words -- should be consigned, at most, to guest lecturer positions.
If institutions of higher learning won't uphold standards of higher learning, who will?
It's a two-comment day: Also loved Justin Kaufman's columnist quiz and got a perfect score though I was guessing on the last question. Also loved Justin's parting line for successful quiz takers: "Congrats! You must have skipped the front page and thumbed right to the columnists. Me too :)"
I just don't understand why he'd review a show about Mike Royko, acknowledge that the greatness and longevity of his work, and not point out that readers interested in Mike should check out this section of my Substack: Mike Royko 50+/- Years Ago Today. https://roselandchicago1972.substack.com/s/mike-royko-50-years-ago-today
Even I, a die-hard White Sox fan since the age of 8, am rooting for them to lose a couple more games this year. Why? Because every time I wear my Sox shirt in public and people say, "How are you still wearing that?" I answer, "Hey, we're setting records, baby!!" I look forward to saying we broke the ultimate record we were going for this season.
"I don’t think the Secret Service is up for the task at hand. It’s time to switch over to thoughts and prayers. And, just in case, I think we should also post a copy of the Ten Commandments at all the golf courses and rally events — unknown"
This quote is absolute gold!! Thank you for finding and sharing it, Eric.
So Trump will go after everyone who cheats in the 2024 election. (1) What he means to say is every Democrat. Republican cheating is just fine -- and probably necessary for him to win (to use Trump's own style of rhetorical trope). (2) I'd like to make a bet with a Republican that, if Trump wins and pursues that policy, he will fail to convict more people of cheating than have been convicted for invading Congress on January 6, 2021. I would win a huge amount of money, a beautiful amount of money.
does anyone who supported brandon johnson over paul vallas for mayor want to opine here, with the passage of time and johnson's performance as mayor, on 1] why they still think johnson was a better choice than vallas, or 2] why they've changed their opinion, and would have voted for vallas [in hindsight], or 3] not voted for either johnson or vallas.
PS/full disclosure - i supported vallas for mayor [didn't vote for him, i don't/didn't live in Chgo at the time], and have supported him since he ran against [now ex-con & current MAGA] blagojevich.
I wasn't happy about either candidate, don't like the way the guy I voted for has handled the job, and strongly suspect I'd feel the same if I'd picked the other guy. The mayoral votes I most regret, though? Mine and tens of thousands of others (or whatever the margin was that kept Toni Preckwinkle off the runoff ballot), robbing the city of the chance to have the most capable executive in local government of my nearly 60 years as a Chicagoan. We'd have reelected her handily, I suspect, and never been faced with the lousy options of Johnson and Vallas. Mea culpa!
Is Kennedy Bartley a time traveler from 1970? Calling cops pigs was well outdated by the 80's.
https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxaN7SE_kr3q-a1F5NObq55W2VMicHI9_D?si=J2w3iHFSzGdIojic
Regarding the Real ID, I am 71 yrs old now. Have had 3 marriages. Each time I remarried, I went to DMV and legally changed my name. When I went to get my Real ID, I was informed I need my birth certificate and all three marriage licenses and divorce decrees.
With 3 marriages, haven't I already suffered enough?
I know a woman who went thru some many hoops to change her name when she got married that when she got divorced and remarried she stayed with her first husband’s name because it wasn’t worth the effort.
So, as a widow, would I have to bring my husband's death certificate?
Real IDs are not worth the headache to obtain one.
Eric answered my question. Just why do we need them? Go back and read the history of some of the major terrorist incidents. These were not people trying to hide their identity. They were proud of what they did and wanted the world to know. Would Real ID have stopped the World Trade Center bombings? The bombers were not only legally in the country, but attended flight school. Obtaining a Real ID would have been a mere formality.
Patty, I will answer your question…YES!
There are clearly some special cases, cited here, for which getting a Real ID is a serious pain, but for the vast majority of us, it involves 10 minutes to assemble 3 readily available documents and the usual process at Elston to renew your drivers license. As 71% of your readers attest, it’s just no big deal. I do agree that a passport by itself should be enough documentation.
Three readily available documents?! Name these, please...
Birth certificate, Social Security card, passport, a bill sent to your house ... I will say when I got mine four years ago I checked my documents about six times b/c I was worried I had the wrong ones.
And yet the same requirement for voter registration is horrendously onerous and the equivalent of voter suppression.
I'll use 2nd Amendment logic here: Voting is a basic right/duty of citizenship. Driving is a privilege sanctioned by the State.
All you need to register to vote in Illinois is a Driver's License or State ID card. And you can do it online.
For a Real ID it's actually easier to get a passport and/or a Global Entry card (like a Pre-Check Plus). I have both and have no plans or need to put myself through the torture of trying to get the DMV's version of Real ID.
For people who don't have/want a passport, Real ID will be the only way to fly (one day - they keep putting it off). Getting my Real ID a couple years ago with my renewal wasn't a big deal ($5 extra), but will prefer using my (finally renewed w/name change) passport/passport card when they arrive. Getting a new passport (old was too expired to just renew by mail) was easier than Real ID, far less documentation required.
your tax dollars at work. a reminder as to why i believe in limited govt.
LOL! Had to have my marriage certificate for my Real ID as well. Oddly, we just got new passports (whole fam) and was surprised they didn't want my marriage certificate. They said if it's changed on your driver license, we assume it's legit. My prior passport was in my maiden name and the US govt just accepts that my name change is valid because my driver license is in a different name. Bizarre.
Fascinating how many of our idiot aldermen who don't have Shot Spotter are against it. Like my rotten, vile anti-Semitic pile of shit alderman Vasquez & the two equally moronic ones in the wards that are just yards from my house from 48th & 49th wards. That idiot in 48 is proud that she won't send out alerts anymore of violent crime in her ward because it makes her look bad. Except she is bad!
Even more fascinating & bizarre is how appallingly stupid Johnson is, going against not just a majority of aldermen, but all of the ones who actually have it in their wards, plus the public in those wards who also want it kept & want more police around, not less!
He appears to be a disastrous clone of NYC's previous mayor, the utterly incompetent & hapless fool, Bill DiBlasio, who was hated by almost everyone at the end of his term. Even his own wife dumped him at the end!
As for convicted felon Jackson Junior, why are so many people in politics always lining up to say such wonderful things about their fellow politicians who went to prison for being crooks, when they want a pardon, or even the praise letters they send to the federal judges prior to their sentencing? I get the feeling that it's because they want that to be reciprocated for when they get caught, convicted & go to prison!
I listened to the Mincing Rascals. Someone compared Johnson’s brute style with our former president. And with regards to a plan to replace Shot Spotter, I suppose Johnson can say “I’ve got a concept of a plan”
The quips this week were better. First time I ever voted for 5 of 10.
I voted for seven of them.
The ones I skipped were # 2, 4 & 8 as listed on the blog today.
I flat out didn't understand the "sister sauce" one.
worcestershire
Regarding the White Sox, my wife and I went to our only game last Saturday and saw a walk off win (after two blown 3 run leads). They are 1-0 for me. Someone had free tickets, so it only cost me $111. My wife wanted to try a $15 Girl Scout cookie shake. And parking is $30.
But the “L” is $2.50 each way (half that if you’re a senior.
Not if you live in Naperville
If that terrible Sheriff Joe Arpaio can get a pardon, Jackson Jr deserves one as well. And spare me the two wrongs don't make a right speech. We either create legislation that defines consistently what qualifies for a pardon or we accept that Presidents can pardon whomever the Fuck they want like the Kings of Old.
Michael M, brutal but accurate statement…ouch!
So let’s pardon everyone? It’s not two wrongs make a right, it’s does one stupid mistake justify another one.
Way to twist my words, Rick. Are you really gonna sit there and say "whelp, the Sheriff who violated human rights on a daily basis got a parole he didn't deserve, but that's just how the cookie crumbles."?
Between Arpaio and Jackson Jr, who has done more harm? who has shown remorse, even if perfunctory? And which one might do more good with their pardon?
If we are gonna pretend that Justice is Blind and fairness exists in this country, than we have to evaluate our systems and our processes. Since we don't have a mechanism to reverse undeserved pardons, the best we can do is balance the scales where we can.
Both did great harm. Arpaio by being a racist & Junior by deceiving his constituents. Any remorse from Junior is as fake as a Rolex you buy on a Manhattan street corner. Arpaio will never apologize, as he's depraved.
Two wrongs don't make a right. We always make the assumption that politics is a zero sum game and we must even things out. I disagree. If we wish to pardon someone on our hearts, I won't argue. I guess it's the Christian kindness thing to do. But this is also about letting him back in the game. Forget it as far as I'm concerned. I might forgive John Dillinger. But I would never again give him the keys to the bank.
I read your rant concerning Steven Thrasher. Does it concern you that you could not cite any journalistic ethical violations or license issues? There appears to be no effective code that Thrasher accepted and then violated. Journalism (unlike medicine, law or even driving a car) requires no license, no agreement to follow any ethical code or laws and no preparation.
So your rant really becomes a difference of opinion on his behavior. I agree with your opinion, but it is sad it is just an opinion.
Journalism is a profession in need of enforceable guidelines.
* Didn't you mean 43-119, not 119-43?
*. . . and 154 games,, not 153, as the length of the pre-162 season?
* First time in months, perhaps ever, that a quip had me laughing so hard that I cried, and it's the lowest-rated quip on the list so far??
I suppose it’s the sister sauce, which, as usual, I don’t get.
It's a down-to-earth pronunciation of "Worcestershire Sauce"
Still makes no sense.
Would it make more sense if he called it "worst sister sauce"?
Not really!
As a kid watching my mother cook, I practiced my reading by sounding out the unfamiliar words on the boxes and bottles she'd placed on the counter. I never came close to WUSH tuh sher (stressed syllable is given in capital letters; WUSH rhyming with with push). The "sister" joke reminded me of those long-ago hapless attempts: much funnier, and closer to the usual pronunciation, than my "wore SESS ter shire."
worcestershire
First typo has been fixed. Second remains in the "1916 Philadelphia Athletics" paragraph: in context, it refers to the era, so the number of scheduled games (154) seems more appropriate than 153.
ah, my white sox - can't live with 'em, can't live without 'em.
EZ has the numbers down tight - barring a near-mirable on the order of the 2003 tigers 5-of-the-last-6, sox are almost a dead lock to break all post-1900 loss and losing % records. at least 2 weeks ago i had them pegged for 125 losses - i'll stick with 125, and hope i'm wrong [on the high side].
kudos to EZ for linking the article at espn. com. i had read the whole article [looong article] the day it came out. both the author [authors?] and the players showed professionalism and good judgment - and noble spirit, on the part of the players - for an article on a subject that is otherwise pathetic.
Re NU's Thrasher: I can never get over the narcissism embodied in Thrasher's loutish reply to Eric's polite and impeccably reasoned invitation to further discussion. As a Medill grad who's already embarrassed enough by their new name, I can hardly stand knowing that this is the type of person they hire. But OK; we already know from NU Prof Laura Kipnis that Northwestern's investigation process etc is out of control. And then the Cook County state's attorney office under Kim Foxx has a blanket policy to dismiss charges against all protesters/rioters who can by any stretch of the imagination be described as "peaceful." But question: Medill lists Thrasher as an assistant professor. That means he does not have tenure. So why are they stuck with him? Isn't it reasonable for alum and others to expect Medill to not renew Thrasher's contract when it's up? A journalism professor who doesn't understand the real meaning of objective reporting, and actively teaches students not to attempt to report objective reality for their readers, isn't just worthless but actively antithetical to the school's entire mission.
Too bad there are no ethics issues or license issues. Thrasher has not violated any enforceable ethics code or school mission statements. And so he stays, and so he teaches.
He is kind of a symbol for the profession of journalism needing at least an enforceable ethics code.
He absolutely violated a university mission statement and policy against harassment of students. The encampment he supported and tried to prevent the dismantling of had clearly visible signage that indicated "No Jews allowed". This was an absolute violation of NW's policy against harassment.
Hmmm…is that feel good policy enforceable? Did Thrasher sign a consent to that?
You indicate he violated this policy, is there any due process procedure going on concerning Thrasher being “guilty” of harassment?
If one tried to put in rules for journalists which could be acted on with the force of law, there would be challenges based on the first amendment. The best we can hope for are "guidelines" from an industry group.
I would use the lawyer model. Have requirements for licensing and an enforceable ethics codes. Journalists who break this code would face censure and potential loss of license. In extreme cases, the force of law would be brought.
Works to some extent with lawyers, expect it could be a start for the journalism profession.
I think you can enforce guidelines without a first amendment issue.
Keep in mind, I would expect the journalism groups to be private, not a governmental entity.
Right now you have the Wild West with any goofball claiming to be a journalist.
You cannot do that as a lawyer, doctor or motor vehicle operator.
I think that it is pretty clear from reading the web page that the Medill school now views 'social justice' and DEI as the top priority mission of journalists. This is consistent with the progressive and Critical Theory notion that objectivity and facts are props for the existing power structure which need to be ignored or suppressed in the quest for justice. The mission of the journalist is to lead, sway, or punish in the interest of the cause, not to merely inform the public with objective facts that they may not properly interpret.
And Marc, do journalists who stray from this mission face any repercussions?
They do not lose their license (no license to lose). No ethics issue to enforce as there are no accepted ethics code which are enforceable.
I guess it comes down to folks saying bad journalist…you are a bad journalist.
Guess the profession of journalism has lost control of itself.
In fact, many professional journalists have defended the rights of faux journalists and made no effort to protect the reputation of their profession. They seem to have taken pride in embracing anyone that made claim to the title. Attacks on journalistic bona-fides seem to be entirely political, on all sides.
While I certainly honor Zorn's right to say NU is stuck with Thrasher, I disagree that having hired him should necessarily foreclose firing him, even if the offense is merely being outrageously bad at his job.
I'm a supporter in general of academic tenure as a protection against punishment for expression of controversial opinions. After all, free exchange of ideas is the lifeblood of a truth-seeking institution. At the same time, tenure should be premised only on some combination of outstanding academic achievement and outstanding teaching, consistently confirmed over a lengthy probationary period, consistent with the university's truth-seeking mission. Ideological firebrands, the immature sort to whom students, being immature themselves, often gravitate, who don't engage in serious study and/or only confirm priors in the classroom rather than challenge them -- shrill activists, in other words -- should be consigned, at most, to guest lecturer positions.
If institutions of higher learning won't uphold standards of higher learning, who will?
It's a two-comment day: Also loved Justin Kaufman's columnist quiz and got a perfect score though I was guessing on the last question. Also loved Justin's parting line for successful quiz takers: "Congrats! You must have skipped the front page and thumbed right to the columnists. Me too :)"
I just don't understand why he'd review a show about Mike Royko, acknowledge that the greatness and longevity of his work, and not point out that readers interested in Mike should check out this section of my Substack: Mike Royko 50+/- Years Ago Today. https://roselandchicago1972.substack.com/s/mike-royko-50-years-ago-today
Even I, a die-hard White Sox fan since the age of 8, am rooting for them to lose a couple more games this year. Why? Because every time I wear my Sox shirt in public and people say, "How are you still wearing that?" I answer, "Hey, we're setting records, baby!!" I look forward to saying we broke the ultimate record we were going for this season.
that's the spirit!
"I don’t think the Secret Service is up for the task at hand. It’s time to switch over to thoughts and prayers. And, just in case, I think we should also post a copy of the Ten Commandments at all the golf courses and rally events — unknown"
This quote is absolute gold!! Thank you for finding and sharing it, Eric.
So Trump will go after everyone who cheats in the 2024 election. (1) What he means to say is every Democrat. Republican cheating is just fine -- and probably necessary for him to win (to use Trump's own style of rhetorical trope). (2) I'd like to make a bet with a Republican that, if Trump wins and pursues that policy, he will fail to convict more people of cheating than have been convicted for invading Congress on January 6, 2021. I would win a huge amount of money, a beautiful amount of money.