Worst name change? Hardly. If we hadn’t renamed Lake Shore Drive, would we have seen the brilliant plow name Jean Baptiste-Point du Shovel? I think not.
Absolute worst name change, Cook County Hospital to that of a criminal who died in public office & was replaced by his halfwit son in a deal so crooked that Clark Street at Wrightwood is straighter than that! Even more absurd, it was his honest predecessor, Dick Phelan who actually did the deal to replace that antiquated building with a modern hospital!
re: single issue Gaza conflict voters. There is a recent episode on This American Life about this. People are conflicted. It is more that how and whether to vote, there is also the issue of making an endorsement and working to get out the vote for an organization that represents Arab Americans living in Michigan. Some of these people feel their interest is not represented by the Harris campaign, and they will not get what they want if Harris wins. The case for not voting or voting for a third party candidate is to send a message to the Democratic party that they cannot be taken for granted in order to get better representation in the future. However, if that fails, it means their interest in America's role in the conflict is just not important enough to the Democratic party to get attention.
I get that it's hard when neither side takes your view on an issue of great importance to you. But that doesn't mean sitting it out. Jews often faced similar issues in the past in the U.S. There was tremendous antisemitism all around and they would never get someone who was all-in on their concerns. But they recognized a greater friend in the likes of FDR, and better to at least be in the tent. As detailed in Ken Burns's documentary for example, the Roosevelt administration was hardly pristine in its handling of Jewish concerns. It could have loosened immigration restrictions and taken in more Jewish refugees. His State Department was rife with the WASP-y antisemitism then ubiquitous in elite circles. But he and Eleanor spoke out against antisemitism, he appointed Jews to important positions, he was seen as far more likely to take the right side against the forces of fascism, and he took the calls of prominent Jews.
A contrasting conundrum faced Blacks in the election of 1912. Nobody seemed to be with them. Woodrow Wilson ultimately won the support of Black leaders, but it was a bad call. Wilson talked nice -- Black leaders liked his "New Freedom" platform and held out hope it would apply to them -- but he was a true racist to the core, and his policies (re-segregating the federal workforce, for example) reflected that, leading to sharp disappointment.
In this situation of no candidate really being all-in with you, are Arab- and Palestinian-Americans more like Jews supporting FDR or Blacks supporting Wilson? I'd say that's a very easy question, not even close. It's a lot more like the former. Harris and the Democrats will take your concerns seriously, take your calls, and, at least compared with a Trump White House, place greater pressure on right-wing forces in Israel. With them, you're in the tent. With the other side, you're in the wilderness.
To my staunchly pro-Israel friends, I would say that I understand that you worry that Harris and the Democrats aren't as hawkish is you'd like. To you, it always seems like the Democrats are saying no, don't do that, don't take this action in your defense, you'll start a wider war, you're not allowed to win, you're not allowed to crush these evil forces bent on your destruction once and for all.
But Democratic White Houses have been fundamentally supportive of your defense. Obama supported Iron Dome funding, for example. Biden has sent missile defense teams, for example. They have not buckled to prevailing reflexive anti-Israel sentiment at the UN, for example. The vast majority of Democrats support Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and will continue to support it.
That doesn't mean that they will easily or quickly assent to whatever a right-wing Israeli government wants. But they shouldn't. They have most strongly opposed expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, for example, which sabotage an eventual two-state solution. But if you're not for some eventual settlement, even looking well down the road, that disclaims a right to rule the whole place "from the river to the sea," to borrow a phrase, you're for an unsustainable, indefinite, and unjust occupation and/or punishment that will only continue to discredit Israel on the world stage. You hate Obama's Iran deal, and yet Trump never replaced it, and Iran is closer than ever to obtaining a nuke, a true existential threat to Israel. And there's no doubt that a Harris administration will take your calls too.
Take it from Rahm Emanuel, a guy who feels love for Israel in his bones, who spent many summers there as a kid: Democratic instincts in this area continue to ultimately be in Israel's best interests. Harris, whose husband is Jewish, is no squad-ish radical.
So, yeah, Eric is right. As hard as it may be to believe, there are strong reasons for both Arab-Americans and Jewish-Americans who care about Israel's future to come together. Actually, that's not so hard to believe. Trump is a dumbass reckless piece of shit, so it's not like a coincidence that his alternative would be better for everyone.
re: 25 mph. NYC made the default speed limit 25 mph 10 years ago. It has worked out just fine. It would be just fine in Chicago as well. The question I have is which sections of road would get a higher speed limit? I could see higher speed limits on Ridge, parts of Western, and other places.
And Seattle, Milwaukee, Atlanta, and hundreds of cities world wide. The hand wringing us getting old. Especially when the people most upset by this (like Paul Vallas) are also the people most concerned by "safety." Youd think if they cared so much theyd be open to absolute layup like this
How to punish Jeff Bezos: Either steal a submarine & them torpedo his half billion dollar yacht & send it to the bottom, or find a totally irresistible man to steal his weird trophy girlfriend from him!
As to asking traffic engineers how they set speed limits, never ask a Chicago traffic engineer anything, as all of them are crazier than Trump or even the Brewster Sisters & their brother Teddy from "Arsenic & Old Lace", which is really saying something. In a Tribune Tempo section article maybe 20 years ago, they did a long article on one of them & one quote from him I've never forgotten: "We don't like left turns, we want traffic to go straight"! That is utter insanity, as no one can go anywhere by just going straight, which is why so many Chicago intersections don't have left turn signals & unlike in the burbs, where the state DOT controls the signals, even when there are left turn signals, they aren't fully actuated as they are in the burbs, which means they aren't controlled by metal sensing signal loops embedded in the street's left turn lane, to determine if the left turn arrow should go on. In Chicago, the left turn arrow always goes on, even when there's no traffic in the left turn lane! That slows down traffic!
There is a semi-serious joke about retirees in Miami who only go straight or turn right, even if it means going four times as far to reach their destination.
I can sorta understand the decision to not use sensor loops in the asphalt, as I’m sure the cost to add and maintain them can be substantial. In a cost-conscious city like Chicago that prob… sorry, I can’t even finish that sentence without laughing…
Except the sensor loops do exist in the left turn lanes in Chicago, I saw one actually used several years for a few days at Clark/Devon & then they turned it off!
Don't get me started on traffic engineering in Chicago and Illinois. I grew up in Michigan, where they know a thing or two about traffic engineering design. Think "Michigan Loop" for left turns; flashing red arrow for left turns; flashing yellow lights for stop lights between certain hours (10:00 PM-5:00 AM, for example) (with the crossing lights set as flashing red lights).
However, UPS programs its truck routing software to avoid left turns (only 10% of their trucks' turns on their routes are left turns) which apparently saves fuel, reduces emissions and improves safety.
The Michigan Loop for left turns is great, but requires an insanely wide right of way.
Chicago used to make all but the most important traffic intersection traffic lights flash red all night from midnight to maybe 6AM, but some fool changed that. We also have numerous intersections where right turns on red are banned 24 hours a day, which is insane.
But the real insanity is the first intersection in Chicago to get signs allowing a right turn on red was Granville/Clark, when the state passed a law allowing that.
Several years later, when right on red became allowed unless banned, the first intersection in Chicago to get No Turn On Red signs was the same Granville/Clark!
Like I said, Chicago's traffic engineers are totally insane & utterly incompetent!
You are correct, the Michigan Loop requires large rights-of-way. The Detroit metropolitan area is blessed with many, many multilane surface streets -many of which cross each other. At virtually all intersections, there is one of the two roads that is the higher-volume traffic road. For those who have not had the experience of driving along a major surface thoroughfare at night (where there are traffic lights at every intersection) and seeing all of them switch to "blinking yellow" on the higher volume road all at once (usually at 10:00 PM), it is really cool. No unnecessary waiting at stoplights when traffic volumes are low (night).
You have no idea how right you are! A book came out recently that was written by a traffic enginee called Kileld By A Traffic Engineer. I cannot recommend the book enough! In our country, traffic engineers rely on a set of standards and regulations that were never proven to be safe. For the past 70 years we assumed they were following best practices when in reality they have not.
Again, i cannot recommend this book enough! I will even buy it for Eric to read and pass off to the Mincing Rascals if he's so inclined
I looked up the book at the Chicago Public Library. All copies are checked out & have holds on them.
Very popular book & expensive as it's over $33 for a paperback at Amazon!
I'll put it on hold, but I read a long excerpt at Amazon, he writes very clearly for an engineer, which surprised me, as most love jargon & overuse it, he didn't & actually attacked them for doing so.
Oh wow! I bought my copy at Myopic books this weekend for only $11. Might be worth it to try some smaller stores!
Otherwise, yes, he is a good writer and very funny. I also think he is a big Simpsons, if that does anything for you.
He is not mad or angry with traffic engineers, either. He likens them to doctors in the 1700s, working with the best they have. It's not judgmental, just points out the flaws in what we do. I think you'll like it and find it very eye opening :)
Does he talk about the speed limit determination formula -- the 85th percentile rule? Under this rule, the speed limit is determined by observing the actual speed drivers take and setting it around the speed 15 percent of drivers exceed. This always struck me as obtuse in theory for two reasons. First, drivers cannot possibly be the best judge of a "safe" speed, can they? Shouldn't it be based on the various characteristics of the roadway and environment and studies about what conditions are likely to produce accidents and so on, regardless of how people drive? Second, won't drivers choose a speed at least in part based on whatever the existing speed limit is, making the measure circular?
My wife and I have a home in a not very diverse suburb which is within a mile of two very diverse suburbs. On Halloween, I would guess that over half of our trick or treaters come from other towns. We give out the big candy bars and I love to hold the bowl out and watch the minds of the kids deciding on Kit Kat v Snickers v Reeses v Twix... It's rare that any of the kids don't say "Trick or Treat" or "Thank You". I'm saddened that we won't be flying back this Halloween for the 1st time since we moved, but I'm trying to talk one of my kids into coming out from the city to carry on the tradition.
And I apologize in advance for the 20+ grams of sugar I am forcing on my Trick or Treaters!
Back in my day we always knew which houses were giving out the good stuff, but we would still hit up all the houses anyway. It was all about the haul.
And the flip side of full-size candy bars were those do-gooders who thought it would be helpful to give out raisins or baggies of sliced apples -- MONSTERS!
I just hope Kimmel does his thing again this year, which he skipped last year & ask parents to tell their kids they ate all the candy & video the responses, which are either hysterically funny or amazingly empathetic!
I cannot be too worried when the name of one corporation takes over from the name of another corporation, but do not like it when a descriptive or non-corporate name is changed from, say Green Park to the j. Stanley Shyster Park, Anyway, thanks for taking my mind fleetingly out of the morass of existential dread about November 5th.
It's appallingly bad, because Julius Rosenwald who created MSI, specifically didn't want his name in it!
And that creep Griffin relocated his company to Miami, where a NY Post article says his employees are having trouble getting their kids into the few private schools there, because the Miami schools are so bad!
But I'll stick with the renaming of County Hospital as the worst!
Regarding the visual tweets. That little girl was my daughter any time someone would touch/break apart her food before she had a chance to do that herself.
In the past, he endorsed John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012. But once Trump became the GOP nominee, GWB decided he was done endorsing anyone for president. At least his daughter Barbara Bush has endorsed Harris.
You cannot punish a billionaire any any financial sense whatsoever. Boycott Bezos' main product? Cancellation of my Prime account would be an imperceptible drop in his ocean of money -- and it punishes my family a gazillion times more than him. The only punishment for Bezos et al is to take away what they cannot buy or replace, and that would be respect. Observing the immediate fallout to which he apparently was oblivious, Bezos has to look in the mirror every day and go to bed every night realizing how history will judge his cravenness. The memory of Neville Chamberlain's cowardly decision is not lost to time, and neither will Jeff Bezos'.
The problem with major newspapers and other credible media sources dropping the endorsements of national candidates (to placate their billionaire owners and their wealthy friends), voters are left with few choices except partisan publications and social media sources where lies abound.
Thanks for the link! So Bezos says that it has nothing to do with trump, but the guy who runs Bezo's aerospace division just had a meeting with trump? I can see where the two events could occur in a vacuum. Yup, totally unrelated.
Bezos’s decision not to endorse, to me, is just as scary as Bill Gates’ and Jamie Damon’s reluctance to publicly endorse Harris even though in private they have expressed they favor her. All are demonstrating that they are afraid of retribution from Trump should he win. This is frightening for the future of our country when powerful, influential people are afraid to speak out.
Bill Gates has given her $50 million! That's not hiding (though, in fairness, I think this occurred relatively recently -- that, or everyone kept quiet, which I guess is your point!).
How "robust" will the U.S. economy continue to be if its "captains of industry" are afraid of offending the President of the United States? Especially if that President is prima facie immune from prosecution for any actions s/he takes for which they can claim it is part of their "official" executive duties. Bezos, Dimon, Zuckerberg, et. al. are smart enough (or at least they should be) to understand that the reason why the US economy is the World's strongest is because of its political stability - and that by kowtowing to Trump for short-term preservation of their personal wealth they are risking longer-term political instability that will have far larger impact on their fortunes over the long term. Incomprehensible.
You misunderstand and underestimate the US economy if you believe the failure of the captains of industry to endorse trump's opponent will have any significant impact on that economy.
Full disclosure - I'm an anti-trumper, have been since he won the republican nomination in 2016.
Trump is an ignorant, stupid, demented moron. But, if re-elected, he will not have a significant impact on the US economy.
Regarding cancelling a Washington Post subscription: Your and Mary Schmich's argument not to cancel is well-reasoned. But I am not in a reasoning mood. I'm enraged. My rage left me no choice.
Tough choice on visual tweets between lion king and skeletons on zoom.
I second that. I wish we could do ranked choice voting on these
I liked skeletons and ranch dressing but went for skeletons.
Ranch dressing was solid!
Worst name change? Hardly. If we hadn’t renamed Lake Shore Drive, would we have seen the brilliant plow name Jean Baptiste-Point du Shovel? I think not.
Absolute worst name change, Cook County Hospital to that of a criminal who died in public office & was replaced by his halfwit son in a deal so crooked that Clark Street at Wrightwood is straighter than that! Even more absurd, it was his honest predecessor, Dick Phelan who actually did the deal to replace that antiquated building with a modern hospital!
re: single issue Gaza conflict voters. There is a recent episode on This American Life about this. People are conflicted. It is more that how and whether to vote, there is also the issue of making an endorsement and working to get out the vote for an organization that represents Arab Americans living in Michigan. Some of these people feel their interest is not represented by the Harris campaign, and they will not get what they want if Harris wins. The case for not voting or voting for a third party candidate is to send a message to the Democratic party that they cannot be taken for granted in order to get better representation in the future. However, if that fails, it means their interest in America's role in the conflict is just not important enough to the Democratic party to get attention.
This is known as cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Maybe for the current election cycle. But if it gets their issue more priority next time it might be worth it.
I know someone who cast a blank ballot in the last mayoral election to make a statement. I don't think less of him for that.
Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the best of the three options (#3 being to abstain from voting).
Evil of 2 lessers.
I get that it's hard when neither side takes your view on an issue of great importance to you. But that doesn't mean sitting it out. Jews often faced similar issues in the past in the U.S. There was tremendous antisemitism all around and they would never get someone who was all-in on their concerns. But they recognized a greater friend in the likes of FDR, and better to at least be in the tent. As detailed in Ken Burns's documentary for example, the Roosevelt administration was hardly pristine in its handling of Jewish concerns. It could have loosened immigration restrictions and taken in more Jewish refugees. His State Department was rife with the WASP-y antisemitism then ubiquitous in elite circles. But he and Eleanor spoke out against antisemitism, he appointed Jews to important positions, he was seen as far more likely to take the right side against the forces of fascism, and he took the calls of prominent Jews.
A contrasting conundrum faced Blacks in the election of 1912. Nobody seemed to be with them. Woodrow Wilson ultimately won the support of Black leaders, but it was a bad call. Wilson talked nice -- Black leaders liked his "New Freedom" platform and held out hope it would apply to them -- but he was a true racist to the core, and his policies (re-segregating the federal workforce, for example) reflected that, leading to sharp disappointment.
In this situation of no candidate really being all-in with you, are Arab- and Palestinian-Americans more like Jews supporting FDR or Blacks supporting Wilson? I'd say that's a very easy question, not even close. It's a lot more like the former. Harris and the Democrats will take your concerns seriously, take your calls, and, at least compared with a Trump White House, place greater pressure on right-wing forces in Israel. With them, you're in the tent. With the other side, you're in the wilderness.
To my staunchly pro-Israel friends, I would say that I understand that you worry that Harris and the Democrats aren't as hawkish is you'd like. To you, it always seems like the Democrats are saying no, don't do that, don't take this action in your defense, you'll start a wider war, you're not allowed to win, you're not allowed to crush these evil forces bent on your destruction once and for all.
But Democratic White Houses have been fundamentally supportive of your defense. Obama supported Iron Dome funding, for example. Biden has sent missile defense teams, for example. They have not buckled to prevailing reflexive anti-Israel sentiment at the UN, for example. The vast majority of Democrats support Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and will continue to support it.
That doesn't mean that they will easily or quickly assent to whatever a right-wing Israeli government wants. But they shouldn't. They have most strongly opposed expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, for example, which sabotage an eventual two-state solution. But if you're not for some eventual settlement, even looking well down the road, that disclaims a right to rule the whole place "from the river to the sea," to borrow a phrase, you're for an unsustainable, indefinite, and unjust occupation and/or punishment that will only continue to discredit Israel on the world stage. You hate Obama's Iran deal, and yet Trump never replaced it, and Iran is closer than ever to obtaining a nuke, a true existential threat to Israel. And there's no doubt that a Harris administration will take your calls too.
Take it from Rahm Emanuel, a guy who feels love for Israel in his bones, who spent many summers there as a kid: Democratic instincts in this area continue to ultimately be in Israel's best interests. Harris, whose husband is Jewish, is no squad-ish radical.
So, yeah, Eric is right. As hard as it may be to believe, there are strong reasons for both Arab-Americans and Jewish-Americans who care about Israel's future to come together. Actually, that's not so hard to believe. Trump is a dumbass reckless piece of shit, so it's not like a coincidence that his alternative would be better for everyone.
re: 25 mph. NYC made the default speed limit 25 mph 10 years ago. It has worked out just fine. It would be just fine in Chicago as well. The question I have is which sections of road would get a higher speed limit? I could see higher speed limits on Ridge, parts of Western, and other places.
And Seattle, Milwaukee, Atlanta, and hundreds of cities world wide. The hand wringing us getting old. Especially when the people most upset by this (like Paul Vallas) are also the people most concerned by "safety." Youd think if they cared so much theyd be open to absolute layup like this
How to punish Jeff Bezos: Either steal a submarine & them torpedo his half billion dollar yacht & send it to the bottom, or find a totally irresistible man to steal his weird trophy girlfriend from him!
As to asking traffic engineers how they set speed limits, never ask a Chicago traffic engineer anything, as all of them are crazier than Trump or even the Brewster Sisters & their brother Teddy from "Arsenic & Old Lace", which is really saying something. In a Tribune Tempo section article maybe 20 years ago, they did a long article on one of them & one quote from him I've never forgotten: "We don't like left turns, we want traffic to go straight"! That is utter insanity, as no one can go anywhere by just going straight, which is why so many Chicago intersections don't have left turn signals & unlike in the burbs, where the state DOT controls the signals, even when there are left turn signals, they aren't fully actuated as they are in the burbs, which means they aren't controlled by metal sensing signal loops embedded in the street's left turn lane, to determine if the left turn arrow should go on. In Chicago, the left turn arrow always goes on, even when there's no traffic in the left turn lane! That slows down traffic!
There is a semi-serious joke about retirees in Miami who only go straight or turn right, even if it means going four times as far to reach their destination.
I can sorta understand the decision to not use sensor loops in the asphalt, as I’m sure the cost to add and maintain them can be substantial. In a cost-conscious city like Chicago that prob… sorry, I can’t even finish that sentence without laughing…
Except the sensor loops do exist in the left turn lanes in Chicago, I saw one actually used several years for a few days at Clark/Devon & then they turned it off!
I knew someone (in her 20s!) who refused to make any left turns. Took her forever to get anywhere.
Don't get me started on traffic engineering in Chicago and Illinois. I grew up in Michigan, where they know a thing or two about traffic engineering design. Think "Michigan Loop" for left turns; flashing red arrow for left turns; flashing yellow lights for stop lights between certain hours (10:00 PM-5:00 AM, for example) (with the crossing lights set as flashing red lights).
However, UPS programs its truck routing software to avoid left turns (only 10% of their trucks' turns on their routes are left turns) which apparently saves fuel, reduces emissions and improves safety.
The Michigan Loop for left turns is great, but requires an insanely wide right of way.
Chicago used to make all but the most important traffic intersection traffic lights flash red all night from midnight to maybe 6AM, but some fool changed that. We also have numerous intersections where right turns on red are banned 24 hours a day, which is insane.
But the real insanity is the first intersection in Chicago to get signs allowing a right turn on red was Granville/Clark, when the state passed a law allowing that.
Several years later, when right on red became allowed unless banned, the first intersection in Chicago to get No Turn On Red signs was the same Granville/Clark!
Like I said, Chicago's traffic engineers are totally insane & utterly incompetent!
You are correct, the Michigan Loop requires large rights-of-way. The Detroit metropolitan area is blessed with many, many multilane surface streets -many of which cross each other. At virtually all intersections, there is one of the two roads that is the higher-volume traffic road. For those who have not had the experience of driving along a major surface thoroughfare at night (where there are traffic lights at every intersection) and seeing all of them switch to "blinking yellow" on the higher volume road all at once (usually at 10:00 PM), it is really cool. No unnecessary waiting at stoplights when traffic volumes are low (night).
You have no idea how right you are! A book came out recently that was written by a traffic enginee called Kileld By A Traffic Engineer. I cannot recommend the book enough! In our country, traffic engineers rely on a set of standards and regulations that were never proven to be safe. For the past 70 years we assumed they were following best practices when in reality they have not.
Again, i cannot recommend this book enough! I will even buy it for Eric to read and pass off to the Mincing Rascals if he's so inclined
https://www.amazon.com/Killed-Traffic-Engineer-Shattering-Transportation/dp/1642833304
I looked up the book at the Chicago Public Library. All copies are checked out & have holds on them.
Very popular book & expensive as it's over $33 for a paperback at Amazon!
I'll put it on hold, but I read a long excerpt at Amazon, he writes very clearly for an engineer, which surprised me, as most love jargon & overuse it, he didn't & actually attacked them for doing so.
Oh wow! I bought my copy at Myopic books this weekend for only $11. Might be worth it to try some smaller stores!
Otherwise, yes, he is a good writer and very funny. I also think he is a big Simpsons, if that does anything for you.
He is not mad or angry with traffic engineers, either. He likens them to doctors in the 1700s, working with the best they have. It's not judgmental, just points out the flaws in what we do. I think you'll like it and find it very eye opening :)
Garry, try Thrift Books or ABE.com for older books. Sometimes you can get them very inexpensively.
It's a new book, but I only get books at the library, I'm cheap & I consider the libraries the single best use of our tax money!
Second the thriftbooks.com site. Amazon carries used versions of older books as well.
Does he talk about the speed limit determination formula -- the 85th percentile rule? Under this rule, the speed limit is determined by observing the actual speed drivers take and setting it around the speed 15 percent of drivers exceed. This always struck me as obtuse in theory for two reasons. First, drivers cannot possibly be the best judge of a "safe" speed, can they? Shouldn't it be based on the various characteristics of the roadway and environment and studies about what conditions are likely to produce accidents and so on, regardless of how people drive? Second, won't drivers choose a speed at least in part based on whatever the existing speed limit is, making the measure circular?
He 100% talks about this and you are 100% on the right track. Its actually a pretty big part of the book so yes, go and read it!
My wife and I have a home in a not very diverse suburb which is within a mile of two very diverse suburbs. On Halloween, I would guess that over half of our trick or treaters come from other towns. We give out the big candy bars and I love to hold the bowl out and watch the minds of the kids deciding on Kit Kat v Snickers v Reeses v Twix... It's rare that any of the kids don't say "Trick or Treat" or "Thank You". I'm saddened that we won't be flying back this Halloween for the 1st time since we moved, but I'm trying to talk one of my kids into coming out from the city to carry on the tradition.
And I apologize in advance for the 20+ grams of sugar I am forcing on my Trick or Treaters!
Back in my day we always knew which houses were giving out the good stuff, but we would still hit up all the houses anyway. It was all about the haul.
And the flip side of full-size candy bars were those do-gooders who thought it would be helpful to give out raisins or baggies of sliced apples -- MONSTERS!
I just hope Kimmel does his thing again this year, which he skipped last year & ask parents to tell their kids they ate all the candy & video the responses, which are either hysterically funny or amazingly empathetic!
Born Chicagoans know what our Michigander interloper knows:
It will always be Lake Shore Drive, or just The Drive, not whatever long name activists forced upon us.
It will always be Sears Tower, not Willis.
And it will always be Waveland.
Editing to add: Marshall Fields, not Macy's.
+John Hancock Building
Cubs Park to Wrigley Field in 1927?
I cannot be too worried when the name of one corporation takes over from the name of another corporation, but do not like it when a descriptive or non-corporate name is changed from, say Green Park to the j. Stanley Shyster Park, Anyway, thanks for taking my mind fleetingly out of the morass of existential dread about November 5th.
I can't vote in (or see) the Axios poll as I am not a subscriber. To me the worst name change is the MSI renaming itself after Ken Griffin.
It's appallingly bad, because Julius Rosenwald who created MSI, specifically didn't want his name in it!
And that creep Griffin relocated his company to Miami, where a NY Post article says his employees are having trouble getting their kids into the few private schools there, because the Miami schools are so bad!
But I'll stick with the renaming of County Hospital as the worst!
Marshall Field's and Co to Macy's
Regarding the visual tweets. That little girl was my daughter any time someone would touch/break apart her food before she had a chance to do that herself.
Speaking on non-endorsements: where has George W Bush been and why haven't we heard from him about this year's presidential race?
One rumor says he, like the fat traitor has dementia!
No idea if that's true, but he's never seen in public anymore, so....?
In the past, he endorsed John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012. But once Trump became the GOP nominee, GWB decided he was done endorsing anyone for president. At least his daughter Barbara Bush has endorsed Harris.
Her endorsement, plus $2.50 will get you a ride on any CTA bus!
as will yours! and mine!
You cannot punish a billionaire any any financial sense whatsoever. Boycott Bezos' main product? Cancellation of my Prime account would be an imperceptible drop in his ocean of money -- and it punishes my family a gazillion times more than him. The only punishment for Bezos et al is to take away what they cannot buy or replace, and that would be respect. Observing the immediate fallout to which he apparently was oblivious, Bezos has to look in the mirror every day and go to bed every night realizing how history will judge his cravenness. The memory of Neville Chamberlain's cowardly decision is not lost to time, and neither will Jeff Bezos'.
The problem with major newspapers and other credible media sources dropping the endorsements of national candidates (to placate their billionaire owners and their wealthy friends), voters are left with few choices except partisan publications and social media sources where lies abound.
If anyone is interested, this is Bezos' defense of the decision not to endorse:
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/10/28/2024-elections-live-coverage-updates-analysis/jeff-bezos-washington-post-election-00185981
Thanks for the link! So Bezos says that it has nothing to do with trump, but the guy who runs Bezo's aerospace division just had a meeting with trump? I can see where the two events could occur in a vacuum. Yup, totally unrelated.
Bezos’s decision not to endorse, to me, is just as scary as Bill Gates’ and Jamie Damon’s reluctance to publicly endorse Harris even though in private they have expressed they favor her. All are demonstrating that they are afraid of retribution from Trump should he win. This is frightening for the future of our country when powerful, influential people are afraid to speak out.
Bill Gates has given her $50 million! That's not hiding (though, in fairness, I think this occurred relatively recently -- that, or everyone kept quiet, which I guess is your point!).
How "robust" will the U.S. economy continue to be if its "captains of industry" are afraid of offending the President of the United States? Especially if that President is prima facie immune from prosecution for any actions s/he takes for which they can claim it is part of their "official" executive duties. Bezos, Dimon, Zuckerberg, et. al. are smart enough (or at least they should be) to understand that the reason why the US economy is the World's strongest is because of its political stability - and that by kowtowing to Trump for short-term preservation of their personal wealth they are risking longer-term political instability that will have far larger impact on their fortunes over the long term. Incomprehensible.
You misunderstand and underestimate the US economy if you believe the failure of the captains of industry to endorse trump's opponent will have any significant impact on that economy.
Full disclosure - I'm an anti-trumper, have been since he won the republican nomination in 2016.
Trump is an ignorant, stupid, demented moron. But, if re-elected, he will not have a significant impact on the US economy.
Regarding cancelling a Washington Post subscription: Your and Mary Schmich's argument not to cancel is well-reasoned. But I am not in a reasoning mood. I'm enraged. My rage left me no choice.