Chicago hate: Does the negativity bother you ? (Justice: insurance, cost of)

[NARFALICIOUS]

Chicago is alot cleaner than New York in the busy areas.....

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by villa5

Chicago, no offense, just hasn't be creative enough in being a cutting edge city outside its looks and things to do. It never has been a city that wanted to look for many new ways to reinvent itself like NYC. I'm not saying that as a need to be like NYC but NYC has higher taxes, a lot more expensive, more dirty, less room/more people to work with and companies just flock there regardless. Now ask yourself why is that? Its because NYC accepts and realizes that you have to change your mind state/way u do business as a total culture(citizens and government) that accommodates its population in order to make more money, have a diverse economy/technology that attracts cutting edge businesses to want to invest in the tools of support/ needs of the citizens needed for a more enjoyable and efficient living conditions.

Gee. I love the way that NYC has reinvented itself. It's now only about one thing:$$$$$$$$$$$. That's your reinvention. Its business (and what seems like its only business) is finance, which today is pure predatory and produces nothing. IMHO, NYC was once the greatest city in the world. To me, it's a mere shadow of what it once was. Money has made New York sterile, as sterile as the bland, faceless skyscrapers that keep booming up in midtown, downtown and elsewhere on Manhattan.

a city that literally prices itself out for the vast majority of its people is not a city that "accommodates its population in order to make more money".

What you call "creative", I call cut throat. and cruel.

Chicago aspires to be New York about as much as Chicago aspired to have Macy's replace Marshall Field's. my experience has been that Chicagoans (city and suburbanites) alike see our city as the greatest (again...their opinion) and don't see it in the shadow of any city. We're not New York. Just like we're not LA, SF, Boston, DC, or any great city....and that's great, because we like our city for what it is.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by treemoni

Agree with everything stated here. Anyone who thinks Obama is anything close to a reformer is looking at him through race-tinted glasses.

Or is looking at the lasting impact of his SCOTUS picks.

[MassVt]

Originally Posted by villa5

You just can't expect better if government and the citizens dont want to change themselves and become more aware, educated, wanting to be cutting edge, and more useful to self, nation, and community playing blame game politics. Companies just don't want to be bothered with a population that not up to global speed and if they do the things are attained by the transplants and long time citizens get pushed to the side because of that and give the support to the transplants and the long time citizens are constantly saying "where is the help?"

I guess that "cutting edge" is your favorite expression..

This is like trying to interpret gibberish..

[ChiNaan]

Originally Posted by edsg25

Gee. I love the way that NYC has reinvented itself. It's now only about one thing:$$$$$$$$$$$. That's your reinvention.

I'm okay with Chicago not following in NYC's footsteps.

6 Castles That Cost Less Than An Apartment In NYC

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Or is looking at the lasting impact of his SCOTUS picks.

That's not only sad; it's also incredibly true. Liberals/progressives in the US have no party to represent them and see the Democrats for what they are: GOP Lite, the lesser of 2 evils. And it all does come down to SCOTUS and the ability of the president to appoint new justices.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by edsg25

That's not only sad; it's also incredibly true. Liberals/progressives in the US have no party to represent them and see the Democrats for what they are: GOP Lite, the lesser of 2 evils. And it all does come down to SCOTUS and the ability of the president to appoint new justices.

Is that a joke or are you serious? If you think Roberts and Sotomayor are the same you have a lot of reading to catch up on.

And didn't Obama basically just pull the federal government out of the war on drugs when it comes to interfering with individual states legalizing marijuana for medical purposes?

Yeah, I'm sure Romney would have done the same thing.

[edsg25]

Originally Posted by Chi-town Native

Is that a joke or are you serious? If you think Roberts and Sotomayor are the same you have a lot of reading to catch up on.

And didn't Obama basically just pull the federal government out of the war on drugs when it comes to interfering with individual states legalizing marijuana for medical purposes?

Yeah, I'm sure Romney would have done the same thing.

?????? where did you get the idea that I think Roberts and Sotomayor are the same? When I speak of the Supreme Court, I am speaking of Roberts and his 5-4 majority. That is why the most important thing to me in Obama's election is his ability to appoint new justice(s) that will change that majority. Those 5 justices are royalty, unelected yet legislating on the bench. Citizens united is both travesty and tragedy.

My criticism of Obama comes from my perspective of being to the left of him, something that would be true of any other liberal or progressive. So obviously I deplore Romney on every level. I despise the GOP, but I have no party with the Democrats who left me years ago.....yes, more liberal on social issues, but in many ways as corporate as the Republicans..

i didn't realize that my observations were that easy to misconstrue. Perhaps I wasn't clear which may have led to you defining me as the opposite of what I am.

[Chi-town Native]

Originally Posted by edsg25

?????? where did you get the idea that I think Roberts and Sotomayor are the same? When I speak of the Supreme Court, I am speaking of Roberts and his 5-4 majority. That is why the most important thing to me in Obama's election is his ability to appoint new justice(s) that will change that majority. Those 5 justices are royalty, unelected yet legislating on the bench. Citizens united is both travesty and tragedy.

My criticism of Obama comes from my perspective of being to the left of him, something that would be true of any other liberal or progressive. So obviously I deplore Romney on every level. I despise the GOP, but I have no party with the Democrats who left me years ago.....yes, more liberal on social issues, but in many ways as corporate as the Republicans..

i didn't realize that my observations were that easy to misconstrue. Perhaps I wasn't clear which may have led to you defining me as the opposite of what I am.

I misread you, I thought you were being sarcastic. My unconditional apology (you actually just made my day), and to keep it short let me just say I agree with you 100%. The social issues are nothing to sneeze at, but the corporatist approach is really the underlying cancer in our society right now.

You can't govern a country of 300 million people under the principles dictated by Wall Street.

[EJ3791]

Originally Posted by edsg25

That's not only sad; it's also incredibly true. Liberals/progressives in the US have no party to represent them and see the Democrats for what they are: GOP Lite, the lesser of 2 evils. And it all does come down to SCOTUS and the ability of the president to appoint new justices.

Funny- conservatives feel more or less the the same way about the GOP.

Originally Posted by edsg25

?????? where did you get the idea that I think Roberts and Sotomayor are the same? When I speak of the Supreme Court, I am speaking of Roberts and his 5-4 majority. That is why the most important thing to me in Obama's election is his ability to appoint new justice(s) that will change that majority. Those 5 justices are royalty, unelected yet legislating on the bench. Citizens united is both travesty and tragedy.

My criticism of Obama comes from my perspective of being to the left of him, something that would be true of any other liberal or progressive. So obviously I deplore Romney on every level. I despise the GOP, but I have no party with the Democrats who left me years ago.....yes, more liberal on social issues, but in many ways as corporate as the Republicans..

i didn't realize that my observations were that easy to misconstrue. Perhaps I wasn't clear which may have led to you defining me as the opposite of what I am.

When you say there are five justices who legislate from the bench, I assume you mean Kennedy, Sotomayor, Kagan, Breyer and Ginsburg, right?

Anyway, what's your understanding of Citizens United? What about it do you find so objectionable?