1. Why did African-Americans migrate to northern cities? (Points : 1)
escape Jim Crow
find jobs
find their American dream
all of the above
2. In what industry did most African-Americans find jobs? (Points : 1)
steel
domestic services
automobile
cotton mill
3. Who published the book The Philadelphia *****? (Points : 1)
W.E.B. Du Bois
Jacob Riis
William Tweed
Jane Adams
4. Which form of transportation made it possible for people to move to the suburbs in the late 1800s? (Points : 1)
subways
trolleys
cable cars
all of the above
5. What were low-cost apartment buildings commonly called? (Points : 1)
slums
ghettos
tenements
settlement houses
6. City public services were paid for by (Points : 1)
the federal government.
tax money.
charity from the wealthy.
political machines.
7. The boss of a political machine (Points : 1)
controlled a voting block of immigrants.
made money for the machine.
took money from contractors.
all of the above
8. What was it called when groups organized to back a political official? (Points : 1)
boss
political machine
settlement
illegal organization
9. Where did the settlement house movement begin? (Points : 1)
Chicago
the United States
England
New York City
10. What was the first Chicago settlement house called? (Points : 1)
Hull House
Tammany Hall
Homestead Square
none of the above
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Need help with american history questions right know?
1. Why did African-Americans migrate to northern cities? (Points : 1)
escape Jim Crow
find jobs
find their American dream
all of the above
2. In what industry did most African-Americans find jobs? (Points : 1)
steel
domestic services
automobile
cotton mill
3. Who published the book The Philadelphia *****? (Points : 1)
W.E.B. Du Bois
Jacob Riis
William Tweed
Jane Adams
4. Which form of transportation made it possible for people to move to the suburbs in the late 1800s? (Points : 1)
subways
trolleys
cable cars
all of the above
5. What were low-cost apartment buildings commonly called? (Points : 1)
slums
ghettos
tenements
settlement houses
6. City public services were paid for by (Points : 1)
the federal government.
tax money.
charity from the wealthy.
political machines.
7. The boss of a political machine (Points : 1)
controlled a voting block of immigrants.
made money for the machine.
took money from contractors.
all of the above
8. What was it called when groups organized to back a political official? (Points : 1)
boss
political machine
settlement
illegal organization
9. Where did the settlement house movement begin? (Points : 1)
Chicago
the United States
England
New York City
10. What was the first Chicago settlement house called? (Points : 1)
Hull House
Tammany Hall
Homestead Square
none of the above
escape Jim Crow
find jobs
find their American dream
all of the above
2. In what industry did most African-Americans find jobs? (Points : 1)
steel
domestic services
automobile
cotton mill
3. Who published the book The Philadelphia *****? (Points : 1)
W.E.B. Du Bois
Jacob Riis
William Tweed
Jane Adams
4. Which form of transportation made it possible for people to move to the suburbs in the late 1800s? (Points : 1)
subways
trolleys
cable cars
all of the above
5. What were low-cost apartment buildings commonly called? (Points : 1)
slums
ghettos
tenements
settlement houses
6. City public services were paid for by (Points : 1)
the federal government.
tax money.
charity from the wealthy.
political machines.
7. The boss of a political machine (Points : 1)
controlled a voting block of immigrants.
made money for the machine.
took money from contractors.
all of the above
8. What was it called when groups organized to back a political official? (Points : 1)
boss
political machine
settlement
illegal organization
9. Where did the settlement house movement begin? (Points : 1)
Chicago
the United States
England
New York City
10. What was the first Chicago settlement house called? (Points : 1)
Hull House
Tammany Hall
Homestead Square
none of the above
Can you get your kids taken from you if you own a pitbull?
I have an 8 month old pit bull/ Labrador puppy. Well today my daughters dad and I got into an argument and he threatened to get my little girl taken from me because I cannot afford to drive her 3 hours to see him. He doesn't pay child support, doesn't help at all with diapers, clothing, things she needs such as food, medical, etc.... I pay for it all. I work 2 jobs and just finished Medical school, not to mention I am moving back to Chicago to be able to get a better job. He doesn't help at all, and that is all I have asked him to do. He says he has some fake police report of police officers coming to my house on a regular basis. Not true, because currently I live in public housing (for 2 more weeks) and if that were to happen I would be evicted. He is also saying that if he calls the social workers on me and they see my dog they'll take her away because I am putting my daughter in danger, when in reality I am responsible with both by kid and my dog, I never leave her alone, she was also temperament tested and loves my daughter. I am just worried that he could take my child from me and I'm scared he'll try. He also is a chronic marijuana user, has no place of his own, cannot get a job because of his drug use and he robbed an elderly persons house but never went to jail for it. I just need some advice because I have been under a ton of stress.Can you get your kids taken from you if you own a pitbull?
Is he unemployed like most fathers in the Mancession, so cannot pay?
http://squidoo.com/children-of-separated鈥?/a>
Shut the hell up katsumi! Own a pitbull, raise it right and then see how loving they can be. Idiot!
No if the dog is a loving dog and good with the kids then he has no case on that. As long as you dont ever leave your kids alone with ANY dog whether it be a pitbull or yorkie you should be fine.Can you get your kids taken from you if you own a pitbull?
No, unless your dog was vicous and life threatening then i highly doubt your child would be taken from you! Even if it was evil, the dog would be taken away not your child :)
NoCan you get your kids taken from you if you own a pitbull?
No way.
But for you; make sure you document everything when you are with him, or when he comes over or when you go over there. Keep your mouth shut, and do not tell him anything that is going on in your life, like family friends, etc.
He will use that information in the future against you.
Cover your azzzz.
Good Luck
I would not worry about it. It appears he is in the wrong. He just tried to scare you. The fact that you are under great stress shows his tactics worked. You should pursue the child support. Here in Texas, they can take his driver license if he is not paying up. It looks like another case of dead beat father. He should be the one worrying about laws. If you are really worried, you can have your pitbull adopted and get a less "agressive" looking dog. http://www.digi-go.com/reehome/
Sounds fair. Pitbulls are time bombs that will kill or maim someday.
Is he unemployed like most fathers in the Mancession, so cannot pay?
http://squidoo.com/children-of-separated鈥?/a>
Shut the hell up katsumi! Own a pitbull, raise it right and then see how loving they can be. Idiot!
No if the dog is a loving dog and good with the kids then he has no case on that. As long as you dont ever leave your kids alone with ANY dog whether it be a pitbull or yorkie you should be fine.Can you get your kids taken from you if you own a pitbull?
No, unless your dog was vicous and life threatening then i highly doubt your child would be taken from you! Even if it was evil, the dog would be taken away not your child :)
NoCan you get your kids taken from you if you own a pitbull?
No way.
But for you; make sure you document everything when you are with him, or when he comes over or when you go over there. Keep your mouth shut, and do not tell him anything that is going on in your life, like family friends, etc.
He will use that information in the future against you.
Cover your azzzz.
Good Luck
I would not worry about it. It appears he is in the wrong. He just tried to scare you. The fact that you are under great stress shows his tactics worked. You should pursue the child support. Here in Texas, they can take his driver license if he is not paying up. It looks like another case of dead beat father. He should be the one worrying about laws. If you are really worried, you can have your pitbull adopted and get a less "agressive" looking dog. http://www.digi-go.com/reehome/
Sounds fair. Pitbulls are time bombs that will kill or maim someday.
Neighborhoods near Chicago's Field Museum?
I'm thinking of applying for a couple of positions at the Field Museum in Chicago. I was wondering what neighborhoods might be good to check for housing. I'll be entry-level, so affordability is a must. Also, I'd like to rely on public transportation. Any suggestions?Neighborhoods near Chicago's Field Museum?
Assuming you get the job at The Field, you might want to consider neighborhoods in the area that are affordable. The South Loop is the closest neighborhood and it is booming but not necessarily affordable. Rents for a one bdrm. average more than $1,000/mo. If that works for you, then definitely look into the South Loop because it's the perfect place to live -- close to public transport, great restaurants, safe and close to work.
If that's not an option for you, consider going a bit west to the University Village area around UIC. Also consider going south. There are some great, affordable apartments on the "near south side" around 31st street -- Prairie Shores, Lake Meadows, etc. You're about 10 minutes from downtown and it's also a safe, affordable, quiet area.Neighborhoods near Chicago's Field Museum?
You'll be working on the outskirts of downtown, try the NorthCenter, Lakeview, Lincoln Park, Logan Square, or Irving Park will work great. Public transportation - the el %26amp; the bus will get you to downtown in no more than 30-45 minutes tops. You're going to a great city!! Enjoy!!Neighborhoods near Chicago's Field Museum?
Nearby neighborhoods are Lincoln Park, Gold Coast, South Loop, Loop, Pilsen, Old Town and..... that should be about it. You can take a bus from all those locations. Due to the Museums location walking distance is a minimal equivalant of 5-10 blocks at the closest if you decide to walk fromt he closest neighborhood. As far as price goes anywhere close to the Museum.... GOOD LUCK! They are all pricey areas...
Well, the Field Museum is easy access by most public transportation, but the neighborhoods I'd recommend the most would be the South Loop, which extends from Congress to Cermak and the lake to Halsted, as you're by the lake, near transportation, and can walk to the Field.
The other good option would be Lakeview, up near Belmont and the lake - the 146 bus picks up there and goes straight down express to Michigan Avenue and the Field Museum. Lakeview is more affordable than the South Loop, very young and vibrant, with lots of restaurants, but your commute would be a bit longer.
Assuming you get the job at The Field, you might want to consider neighborhoods in the area that are affordable. The South Loop is the closest neighborhood and it is booming but not necessarily affordable. Rents for a one bdrm. average more than $1,000/mo. If that works for you, then definitely look into the South Loop because it's the perfect place to live -- close to public transport, great restaurants, safe and close to work.
If that's not an option for you, consider going a bit west to the University Village area around UIC. Also consider going south. There are some great, affordable apartments on the "near south side" around 31st street -- Prairie Shores, Lake Meadows, etc. You're about 10 minutes from downtown and it's also a safe, affordable, quiet area.Neighborhoods near Chicago's Field Museum?
You'll be working on the outskirts of downtown, try the NorthCenter, Lakeview, Lincoln Park, Logan Square, or Irving Park will work great. Public transportation - the el %26amp; the bus will get you to downtown in no more than 30-45 minutes tops. You're going to a great city!! Enjoy!!Neighborhoods near Chicago's Field Museum?
Nearby neighborhoods are Lincoln Park, Gold Coast, South Loop, Loop, Pilsen, Old Town and..... that should be about it. You can take a bus from all those locations. Due to the Museums location walking distance is a minimal equivalant of 5-10 blocks at the closest if you decide to walk fromt he closest neighborhood. As far as price goes anywhere close to the Museum.... GOOD LUCK! They are all pricey areas...
Well, the Field Museum is easy access by most public transportation, but the neighborhoods I'd recommend the most would be the South Loop, which extends from Congress to Cermak and the lake to Halsted, as you're by the lake, near transportation, and can walk to the Field.
The other good option would be Lakeview, up near Belmont and the lake - the 146 bus picks up there and goes straight down express to Michigan Avenue and the Field Museum. Lakeview is more affordable than the South Loop, very young and vibrant, with lots of restaurants, but your commute would be a bit longer.
Moving from Texas to Chicago?
Some quick questions:
Money/School:
1. I was planning to get my degree in respiratory therapy here in Texas, but I'm concerned about whether I'd have to start all over in a new state. and what would it take if I did?
2. Is the state tax a lot? Texas doesn't have one, so I don't know what to expect from it in the workforce
3. Are houses more expensive? If so what is a ratio of buying houses in Texas and buying a home in Chicago, or a suburb outside of that?
4. How long do you have to be a resident in Illinois, for a public college or university so you can pay in-state tuition?
Culture: (These may seem a little insignificant)
1. Will my southern culture be noticed, or will I blend in pretty well?
2. Do they sell cowboy boots there?
3. Are there country radio stations you can listen to?
4. Is it ok to wave to people you don't know such as walking down the street, or seeing someone drive by in there car?
5. Is it ok to talk to smile at people you don't know and ask them how they are?
6. Can you see the stars at night?
I've never been up north and I hear that people aren't very polite and everything is so noisy. I also hear there is great food, so many things to see, and lots of history. Which is great for a vacation. But I'm really curious about all of the expenses and where would I stand in Chicago economically, and socially.
Thanks!
P.S. Not looking forward to the weather. I love Texas weather. Not a big fan of cold weather, which I know is inevitable there. :/Moving from Texas to Chicago?
In regards to your "culture" questions:
1. The cultural difference will be noticed, but you will will not be penalized for this unless you sound like some bigoted redneck, right-wing extremist, or Bible-thumper.
2. You can probably find cowboy boots at a few specialty stores, but NOBODY other than four year old boys wear them.
3. There is one country station at 99.5 FM.
4. I wouldn't do it. You don't know what kind of wackos might think you are an overly trusting rube.
5. It's OK to start up a conversation, but again, be wary - as you should be with any stranger.
6. Usually not: too much light pollution from city lights.Moving from Texas to Chicago?
A country girl living a city life,? You should document that. Buy your clothes off line. Don't get too friendly. They can be reckless %26amp; mean. You'll stick out like a sore thumb. They'll know you're not from there. Just be careful like wise its fun but remember don't get too friendlynyc restaurant week
Money/School:
1. I was planning to get my degree in respiratory therapy here in Texas, but I'm concerned about whether I'd have to start all over in a new state. and what would it take if I did?
2. Is the state tax a lot? Texas doesn't have one, so I don't know what to expect from it in the workforce
3. Are houses more expensive? If so what is a ratio of buying houses in Texas and buying a home in Chicago, or a suburb outside of that?
4. How long do you have to be a resident in Illinois, for a public college or university so you can pay in-state tuition?
Culture: (These may seem a little insignificant)
1. Will my southern culture be noticed, or will I blend in pretty well?
2. Do they sell cowboy boots there?
3. Are there country radio stations you can listen to?
4. Is it ok to wave to people you don't know such as walking down the street, or seeing someone drive by in there car?
5. Is it ok to talk to smile at people you don't know and ask them how they are?
6. Can you see the stars at night?
I've never been up north and I hear that people aren't very polite and everything is so noisy. I also hear there is great food, so many things to see, and lots of history. Which is great for a vacation. But I'm really curious about all of the expenses and where would I stand in Chicago economically, and socially.
Thanks!
P.S. Not looking forward to the weather. I love Texas weather. Not a big fan of cold weather, which I know is inevitable there. :/Moving from Texas to Chicago?
In regards to your "culture" questions:
1. The cultural difference will be noticed, but you will will not be penalized for this unless you sound like some bigoted redneck, right-wing extremist, or Bible-thumper.
2. You can probably find cowboy boots at a few specialty stores, but NOBODY other than four year old boys wear them.
3. There is one country station at 99.5 FM.
4. I wouldn't do it. You don't know what kind of wackos might think you are an overly trusting rube.
5. It's OK to start up a conversation, but again, be wary - as you should be with any stranger.
6. Usually not: too much light pollution from city lights.Moving from Texas to Chicago?
A country girl living a city life,? You should document that. Buy your clothes off line. Don't get too friendly. They can be reckless %26amp; mean. You'll stick out like a sore thumb. They'll know you're not from there. Just be careful like wise its fun but remember don't get too friendly
How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
Food Stamp President logic: "There were 130,000,000 votes for President in 2008. Half of that is 65,000,000. There are currently 46,000,000 people on Food Stamps. If I can just get 20,000,000 more people onto Food Stamps before November, that's 66,000,000 votes for me and I will be able to keep on living in The White House."
http://www.dailyjobsupdate.com/public/fo鈥?/a>How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
I just hope and pray he hitch-hikes.......lol
It is the modern way of showing racism. reagan campaign = newts new campaign. There you go again.
There you go again...Let see how many times Newt uses this Reagan quote with others.
The food stamps seem to be a Bush issue as well.
Now I know the fact these politicians are corrupt and the banks are way out of line still does not matter.
14.7 - Bush
14.2 Obama
Seems to be the food stamp count. 2008 Crash? 41% of Food Stamp recipients are working?
hate is the work of the dark side. The Bible does not sponsor hate so we are surrounded by evil?How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
I'm not sure why the Right are suddenly obsessed with so called food stamps. Your supposed logic shows a remarkable absence of logic. Since when is there a correlation between needing public assistance programs and voting habits? I assume you have no idea how many people in deeply red states make use of such programs. Also, most who benefit from those programs are CHILDREN. Not likely to sway the vote much, huh?
Time to get some common sense on the Right.
another republican lie smacked down by the truth...."under Bush, the welfare program grew by 14.7 million individuals; under Obama so far, it鈥檚 grown by 14.2 million, and, as of October, was declining"How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
By greasing his skids and jerking his chain all the way back to Bills Ayers bedroom.
http://www.dailyjobsupdate.com/public/fo鈥?/a>How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
I just hope and pray he hitch-hikes.......lol
It is the modern way of showing racism. reagan campaign = newts new campaign. There you go again.
There you go again...Let see how many times Newt uses this Reagan quote with others.
The food stamps seem to be a Bush issue as well.
Now I know the fact these politicians are corrupt and the banks are way out of line still does not matter.
14.7 - Bush
14.2 Obama
Seems to be the food stamp count. 2008 Crash? 41% of Food Stamp recipients are working?
hate is the work of the dark side. The Bible does not sponsor hate so we are surrounded by evil?How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
I'm not sure why the Right are suddenly obsessed with so called food stamps. Your supposed logic shows a remarkable absence of logic. Since when is there a correlation between needing public assistance programs and voting habits? I assume you have no idea how many people in deeply red states make use of such programs. Also, most who benefit from those programs are CHILDREN. Not likely to sway the vote much, huh?
Time to get some common sense on the Right.
another republican lie smacked down by the truth...."under Bush, the welfare program grew by 14.7 million individuals; under Obama so far, it鈥檚 grown by 14.2 million, and, as of October, was declining"How will the Food Stamp President get back to Chicago when he loses the election in November?
By greasing his skids and jerking his chain all the way back to Bills Ayers bedroom.
Neighborhoods in Chicago?
I was wondering about the best neighborhoods to live in Chicago. I live in AZ, so, I really don't know the geography.
Not looking for houses, just an apartment. They area doesn't have to be anything fancy, but pretty safe for a single gal to live. Also hoping to not really need a car. It would be nice if there were places to eat, shop, and hang out fairly close by. As well as public transportation...which, from what I understand is not really a problem.
I apologize if this sounds stupid, but I know almost nothing about Chicago living.Neighborhoods in Chicago?
The River North/Old Town/Gold Coast areas that the others recommended are nice, but EXPENSIVE. Plus they're very populated and busy. Chicago has many lovely, safe neighborhoods with fun shops, restaurants and action, but are still quiet and safe.
Check out Lakeview, North Center, Ravenswood, and Lincoln Square. They're quieter, on the North Side, and farther from downtown, but still there's excellent public transit, beautiful parks, shopping coffee shops and food.Neighborhoods in Chicago?
You should look in the North Chicago (I live there ) part around Michicagn Av., Lake Shore, and the gold coast that is the best part of town to be in. South Side of Chicago would be the second best be careful where you are becuase Chicago has a good and bad part in all the sides, around south loop and hyde park would be the best I think. Then Avoid West Chicago even if you do find a good part it is surrouned by bad parts, this is where the notorious Henery Horner Homes and Cabrini Green used to be.
*Also don't call it Chi-Town and don't joke that it is called Windy City becuase of the Wind becuase it is about politics.Neighborhoods in Chicago?
Anything east of the Chicago River where it splits in the north, north of the Chicago River where it slplits in the south and South of Peterson is nice.
http://www.dreamtown.com/maps/chicago-ne鈥?/a> [click on North/Central to see the area I am talking about]...
Not looking for houses, just an apartment. They area doesn't have to be anything fancy, but pretty safe for a single gal to live. Also hoping to not really need a car. It would be nice if there were places to eat, shop, and hang out fairly close by. As well as public transportation...which, from what I understand is not really a problem.
I apologize if this sounds stupid, but I know almost nothing about Chicago living.Neighborhoods in Chicago?
The River North/Old Town/Gold Coast areas that the others recommended are nice, but EXPENSIVE. Plus they're very populated and busy. Chicago has many lovely, safe neighborhoods with fun shops, restaurants and action, but are still quiet and safe.
Check out Lakeview, North Center, Ravenswood, and Lincoln Square. They're quieter, on the North Side, and farther from downtown, but still there's excellent public transit, beautiful parks, shopping coffee shops and food.Neighborhoods in Chicago?
You should look in the North Chicago (I live there ) part around Michicagn Av., Lake Shore, and the gold coast that is the best part of town to be in. South Side of Chicago would be the second best be careful where you are becuase Chicago has a good and bad part in all the sides, around south loop and hyde park would be the best I think. Then Avoid West Chicago even if you do find a good part it is surrouned by bad parts, this is where the notorious Henery Horner Homes and Cabrini Green used to be.
*Also don't call it Chi-Town and don't joke that it is called Windy City becuase of the Wind becuase it is about politics.Neighborhoods in Chicago?
Anything east of the Chicago River where it splits in the north, north of the Chicago River where it slplits in the south and South of Peterson is nice.
http://www.dreamtown.com/maps/chicago-ne鈥?/a> [click on North/Central to see the area I am talking about]...
How do i research a car accident?
there was a pretty bad car accident right outside my house. i would like to know how to find out what happened. i live in chicago. are there police records or accident reccords or any public records i can look at? it happened on Carmen and Ashland.
i cant find anywhere online of any records of this. is there a number i can call?
EDIT: i cant believe questions about 'what should i wear to maroon 5 concert' has been answered but can ANYONE on yahoo answers help me out with this?How do i research a car accident?
When the accident report is ready, you can go to the police station and pay to get an accident report since they are public record. You may also be able to get info. from the local newspaper. I know of no site that would have that informationHow do i research a car accident?
go to pd and get accident report/maybe its 5.00 or so/make sure you have date and timeHow do i research a car accident?
look on the news website. if it was that bad it shoudl be onthere
i cant find anywhere online of any records of this. is there a number i can call?
EDIT: i cant believe questions about 'what should i wear to maroon 5 concert' has been answered but can ANYONE on yahoo answers help me out with this?How do i research a car accident?
When the accident report is ready, you can go to the police station and pay to get an accident report since they are public record. You may also be able to get info. from the local newspaper. I know of no site that would have that informationHow do i research a car accident?
go to pd and get accident report/maybe its 5.00 or so/make sure you have date and timeHow do i research a car accident?
look on the news website. if it was that bad it shoudl be onthere
Which is better, Chicago Vs. Philadelphia?
Im about to move out of the house and have no college education yet. Which city is better in regards of cost of living, public transportation, apartment rent rates and overall for an 18 y.o?Which is better, Chicago Vs. Philadelphia?
Well I think you should do some online research, because everyone has their own views on here. You also need to remember how horrible the economy is right now so have an open mind. Chicago has lots of public transportation. CTA buses aren't the best but there are plent of them. Apartments cost depend on what part of the city you live in. It'd be most expensive up north. I think it's best to live in a south suburb... They are reasonably priced. Overall, it is a major city and it is expensive. I guess you can compare Philly to that.
Well I think you should do some online research, because everyone has their own views on here. You also need to remember how horrible the economy is right now so have an open mind. Chicago has lots of public transportation. CTA buses aren't the best but there are plent of them. Apartments cost depend on what part of the city you live in. It'd be most expensive up north. I think it's best to live in a south suburb... They are reasonably priced. Overall, it is a major city and it is expensive. I guess you can compare Philly to that.
Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
Hi, I'm a university student and a lifelong Seoul resident.
I'm going to Chicago as an international student next year and I'll be staying there for a year.
Before going there, I want to know general information about Chicago.
These are the things that I would like to hear about Chicago:
1. Safety and Crime rate
2. Environment and Pollution(esp. air pollution)
3. Public Transportation System
4. Living Expenses (except for housing)
5. Friendliness of People(Residents)
6. Weather and Climate
7. Cultural Activities (Clubbing, Parties, Gay Culture)
Is there anyone who has lived in both Seoul and Chicago?
Since I am from Seoul, it would be great if you compare Chicago with Seoul.
(If you haven't lived in Seoul, just give me some general answers for my question. You can also compare Chicago with other big cities in the US such as LA or New York.)Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
Hi, I'm from Seoul, Korea and I was an exchange student of UIUC. So I've been to Chicago many many times and I can compare both cities for you.
1. Safety and Crime rate
Seoul is definitely safer than Chicago in terms of crime rate.
In fact, Seoul is one of the safest big cities in the world along with Tokyo and Singapore. In Seoul, you can see a woman walking down the street alone after midnight. However, you should be careful and know which areas to stay away from in Chicago.
2. Environment and Pollution(esp. air pollution)
I'm not sure about the exact measurement of air quality level but I think Chicago is generally a little bit cleaner than Seoul.
The traffic was less crowded back there.
3. Public Transportation System
Chicago does have buses and subway system but it is not as extensive as Seoul which means there are some places you may not be able to reach by public trans. Chicago has a better public trans system than LA but when compared to Seoul, it's more of a driving city and it's good to have a car if you can manage it.
4. Living Expenses (except for housing)
I think both Seoul and Chicago are pretty much similar in terms of living expenses. However, the food and grocery was cheaper in Chicago. Housing? Of course, Chicago is cheaper.
5. Friendliness of People(Residents)
It really depends who you meet and hang around with.
But Champaign where I stayed in Illinois were very friendly. lol
6. Weather and Climate
The weather of Chicago was pretty similar to Seoul except that it has the colder and longer winter. Even their April can be very cold and stormy! Summer was really similar - hot and humid weather. It snows a lot in the winter as well.
7. Cultural Activities (Clubbing, Parties, Gay Culture)
Chicago is a home to various cultural activities and there are a lot of things to see and enjoy.
I also think Chicago is more open to gay culture than Seoul -the largest and only officially recognized gay neighborhood being Boystown, centered along Halsted Street between Belmont and Addison. (Here is a map: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q%26amp;hl=en%26amp;ge鈥?/a>
A Wikipedia article about Boystown can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boystown%2C鈥?/a>
As far as I remember, Loyola school is located in the downtown Chicago called Michigan Ave. So it's quite safe and great place to shop, eat out and have fun.Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
I lived in Chicago nearly all of my life, and I loved it. There is so much to do and see, sporting events, museums, concerts, theater, fine dining, and the list goes on.
Chicago is the 3rd largest city in the United States, as with any big city, you are going to have high crime areas and areas that crime in nearly non-existant. Downtown and in the University areas are generally safe, and are well patrolled. The idea is to be self aware and watch your surrounding, just like any other place you go.
I can't say that Chicago is a clean air city, but it has improved. There is alot of industry in the area, and with that comes air pollution. When you get there you will notice it, but take allergy medication and after a couple of weeks, your nose will get used to it.
There are several good modes of public transportation. Aside from cabs, there is bus service, the "L"-elevated train, a commuter train which services the suburbs, and the South Shore which runs from the north side of Chicago to South Bend, Indiana (Notre Dame). They are all cost efficient and run night and day.
As for living expenses, Chicago is relatively inexpensive compared to other big cities. I guess this would have to depend on what items/services you were looking at using. For example, a gallon of milk would cost about 4.00 per gallon, but I live in a rural area now and pay about the same. The only thing that may be taxed at a higher rate would be tobacco products and alcohol.
I would like to think that people from the Midwest are friendly, since I am one of them, but I have to admit, most people are blunt and busy and do not like to engage in conversations with strangers. However, if they see that you are in distress (car broken down, someone harrassing you) they will step up and help you if they can.
oh..weather....well, you have two seasons there.....one last about 2 months and it's called hot and humid, then the remaining ten months is cold and windy. It will snow....alot....but life does not stop and places do not shut down unless it's a blizzard because Chicago has a fairly decent (and some may argue) snow removal plan.
As far as cultural activities, I cannot comment on the gay culture, but I am sure that once you get there, someone will be able to assist you with that. Again, it's a big city, and as with all large cities, there is a place and activity for everyone!! Aside from that, as I stated at the beginning, there are many many things to do, and once you get there, you will find so much more. From ball games to opera, from pizza to fine dining, there is really nothing you cannot find in Chicago.
I would suggest while you are there to check out Navy Pier, the Field Museum, eat at least once at Gino's East Pizza, go to Cub's game, take in a concert at the Aragon Ballroom (and check out the amazing architecture in there!)...get on the south shore and ride it from the beginning to the end..there's alot of things to see. If you are old enough to drink (21) make sure that you spend one night bar hopping on Rush Street as well.
I wish you great success in your education, and I hope that your experience in Chicago will be memorable in a good way.Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
Never been to Seoul but know enough about to Korea to answer. Native Chicagoan.
1. Fairly safe.
2. Air quality cleaner than Seoul. Street sweepers clean certain areas more than others.
3. They is plenty to choose from. Depends on where you are going to and from.
There are several line for each. I have included a website that should be helpful and gives detail information on most of the transportation options.
CTA-buses and trains that run mostly within the city of Chicago.
Pace-buses that operate mostly in the suburbs.
Metra-trains that operate from the suburbs to downtown
Chicago with some stops within the city of Chicago.
Amtrak-trains that cross the entire country. (separate website)
Cab-several companies.
http://www.rtachicago.com/
4. I heard Seoul was more expensive. It's in the middle. Not cheap not expensive depends on your spending habits.
5. Natives are friendly. Always ranks as one the friendliest people in the country and definitely nicer to out of towners than Koreans are to non-Koreans.
6. Chicago's weather is so predictible because it is so unpredictable. The weather depends on Mother Nature's mood. Normally the winter is colder and Chicago receives more snow than Seoul.
7. Cultural activities would be museums, theatres, dinners, etc. Field Museum, Art Institute, Shedd Aquarium, Museum of Science and Industry, etc.
Clubbing, parties, etc will depend on where you stay and where you go to school.
Most out of towners/college students usually hang out in Lakeview. Do not know about gay culture but Lakeview is one of Chicago's gay communities.
It was recently announced that a gay community center opened in Lakeview. (tried to find the info but couldn't)
Here a website I found about Lakeview.
http://centerstage.net/neighborhoods/lak鈥?/a>area code look up
I'm going to Chicago as an international student next year and I'll be staying there for a year.
Before going there, I want to know general information about Chicago.
These are the things that I would like to hear about Chicago:
1. Safety and Crime rate
2. Environment and Pollution(esp. air pollution)
3. Public Transportation System
4. Living Expenses (except for housing)
5. Friendliness of People(Residents)
6. Weather and Climate
7. Cultural Activities (Clubbing, Parties, Gay Culture)
Is there anyone who has lived in both Seoul and Chicago?
Since I am from Seoul, it would be great if you compare Chicago with Seoul.
(If you haven't lived in Seoul, just give me some general answers for my question. You can also compare Chicago with other big cities in the US such as LA or New York.)Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
Hi, I'm from Seoul, Korea and I was an exchange student of UIUC. So I've been to Chicago many many times and I can compare both cities for you.
1. Safety and Crime rate
Seoul is definitely safer than Chicago in terms of crime rate.
In fact, Seoul is one of the safest big cities in the world along with Tokyo and Singapore. In Seoul, you can see a woman walking down the street alone after midnight. However, you should be careful and know which areas to stay away from in Chicago.
2. Environment and Pollution(esp. air pollution)
I'm not sure about the exact measurement of air quality level but I think Chicago is generally a little bit cleaner than Seoul.
The traffic was less crowded back there.
3. Public Transportation System
Chicago does have buses and subway system but it is not as extensive as Seoul which means there are some places you may not be able to reach by public trans. Chicago has a better public trans system than LA but when compared to Seoul, it's more of a driving city and it's good to have a car if you can manage it.
4. Living Expenses (except for housing)
I think both Seoul and Chicago are pretty much similar in terms of living expenses. However, the food and grocery was cheaper in Chicago. Housing? Of course, Chicago is cheaper.
5. Friendliness of People(Residents)
It really depends who you meet and hang around with.
But Champaign where I stayed in Illinois were very friendly. lol
6. Weather and Climate
The weather of Chicago was pretty similar to Seoul except that it has the colder and longer winter. Even their April can be very cold and stormy! Summer was really similar - hot and humid weather. It snows a lot in the winter as well.
7. Cultural Activities (Clubbing, Parties, Gay Culture)
Chicago is a home to various cultural activities and there are a lot of things to see and enjoy.
I also think Chicago is more open to gay culture than Seoul -the largest and only officially recognized gay neighborhood being Boystown, centered along Halsted Street between Belmont and Addison. (Here is a map: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q%26amp;hl=en%26amp;ge鈥?/a>
A Wikipedia article about Boystown can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boystown%2C鈥?/a>
As far as I remember, Loyola school is located in the downtown Chicago called Michigan Ave. So it's quite safe and great place to shop, eat out and have fun.Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
I lived in Chicago nearly all of my life, and I loved it. There is so much to do and see, sporting events, museums, concerts, theater, fine dining, and the list goes on.
Chicago is the 3rd largest city in the United States, as with any big city, you are going to have high crime areas and areas that crime in nearly non-existant. Downtown and in the University areas are generally safe, and are well patrolled. The idea is to be self aware and watch your surrounding, just like any other place you go.
I can't say that Chicago is a clean air city, but it has improved. There is alot of industry in the area, and with that comes air pollution. When you get there you will notice it, but take allergy medication and after a couple of weeks, your nose will get used to it.
There are several good modes of public transportation. Aside from cabs, there is bus service, the "L"-elevated train, a commuter train which services the suburbs, and the South Shore which runs from the north side of Chicago to South Bend, Indiana (Notre Dame). They are all cost efficient and run night and day.
As for living expenses, Chicago is relatively inexpensive compared to other big cities. I guess this would have to depend on what items/services you were looking at using. For example, a gallon of milk would cost about 4.00 per gallon, but I live in a rural area now and pay about the same. The only thing that may be taxed at a higher rate would be tobacco products and alcohol.
I would like to think that people from the Midwest are friendly, since I am one of them, but I have to admit, most people are blunt and busy and do not like to engage in conversations with strangers. However, if they see that you are in distress (car broken down, someone harrassing you) they will step up and help you if they can.
oh..weather....well, you have two seasons there.....one last about 2 months and it's called hot and humid, then the remaining ten months is cold and windy. It will snow....alot....but life does not stop and places do not shut down unless it's a blizzard because Chicago has a fairly decent (and some may argue) snow removal plan.
As far as cultural activities, I cannot comment on the gay culture, but I am sure that once you get there, someone will be able to assist you with that. Again, it's a big city, and as with all large cities, there is a place and activity for everyone!! Aside from that, as I stated at the beginning, there are many many things to do, and once you get there, you will find so much more. From ball games to opera, from pizza to fine dining, there is really nothing you cannot find in Chicago.
I would suggest while you are there to check out Navy Pier, the Field Museum, eat at least once at Gino's East Pizza, go to Cub's game, take in a concert at the Aragon Ballroom (and check out the amazing architecture in there!)...get on the south shore and ride it from the beginning to the end..there's alot of things to see. If you are old enough to drink (21) make sure that you spend one night bar hopping on Rush Street as well.
I wish you great success in your education, and I hope that your experience in Chicago will be memorable in a good way.Living in Chicago?? (compared with Seoul)?
Never been to Seoul but know enough about to Korea to answer. Native Chicagoan.
1. Fairly safe.
2. Air quality cleaner than Seoul. Street sweepers clean certain areas more than others.
3. They is plenty to choose from. Depends on where you are going to and from.
There are several line for each. I have included a website that should be helpful and gives detail information on most of the transportation options.
CTA-buses and trains that run mostly within the city of Chicago.
Pace-buses that operate mostly in the suburbs.
Metra-trains that operate from the suburbs to downtown
Chicago with some stops within the city of Chicago.
Amtrak-trains that cross the entire country. (separate website)
Cab-several companies.
http://www.rtachicago.com/
4. I heard Seoul was more expensive. It's in the middle. Not cheap not expensive depends on your spending habits.
5. Natives are friendly. Always ranks as one the friendliest people in the country and definitely nicer to out of towners than Koreans are to non-Koreans.
6. Chicago's weather is so predictible because it is so unpredictable. The weather depends on Mother Nature's mood. Normally the winter is colder and Chicago receives more snow than Seoul.
7. Cultural activities would be museums, theatres, dinners, etc. Field Museum, Art Institute, Shedd Aquarium, Museum of Science and Industry, etc.
Clubbing, parties, etc will depend on where you stay and where you go to school.
Most out of towners/college students usually hang out in Lakeview. Do not know about gay culture but Lakeview is one of Chicago's gay communities.
It was recently announced that a gay community center opened in Lakeview. (tried to find the info but couldn't)
Here a website I found about Lakeview.
http://centerstage.net/neighborhoods/lak鈥?/a>
Have the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
When he admittedly, in his book, said he chose Marxist friends and professors in college,
people said it didn't matter.
When he traveled to Pakistan , after college on an unknown national passport,
people said it didn't matter.
When he sought the endorsement of the Marxist party in 1996 as he ran for the Illinois Senate,
people said it doesn't matter.
When he sat in a Chicago Church for twenty years and listened to a preacher spew hatred for America and preach black liberation theology,
people said it didn't matter.
When an independent Washington organization, that tracks senate voting records, gave him the distinctive title as the "most liberal senator",
people said it didn't matter.
When the Palestinians in Gaza , set up a fund raising telethon to raise money for his election campaign,
people said it didn't matter.
When his voting record supported gun control,
people said it didn't matter.
When he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done,
people said it didn't matter.
When he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan and Mummar Kadaffi and Hugo Chavez,
people said it didn't matter.
When it was pointed out that he was a total, newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing,
people said it didn't matter.
When he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals,
people said it didn't matter.
When his voting record in the Illinois senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question,
people said it didn't matter.
When he refused to wear a flag, lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry,
people said it didn't matter.
When people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises,
people said it didn't matter.
When he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance,
people said it didn't matter.
When he surrounded himself in the White house with advisors who were pro gun control, pro abortion, pro homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition,
people said it didn't matter.
When he aired his views on abortion, homosexuality and a host of other issues,
people said it didn't matter.
When he said he favors sex education in Kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination,
people said it didn't matter.
When his background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him,
people said it didn't matter.
When the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate,
people said it didn't matter.
When he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezco, a man of questionable character, who is now in prson and had helped Obama to a sweet deal on the purchase of his home,
people said it didn't matter.
When it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire Marxist, spent a ton of money to get him elected,
people said it didn't matter.
When he started appointing czars that were radicals, revolutionaries, and even avowed Marxist/Communist,
people said it didn't matter.
When he stood before the nation and told us that his intentions were to "fundamentally transform this nation" into something else,
people said it didn't matter.
When it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and served as an attorney for ACORN,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed cabinet members and several advisors who were tax cheats and socialists,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed a science czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Cass Sunstein as regulatory czar and he believes in "Explicit Consent", harvesting human organs without family consent, and to allow animals to be represented in court,
while banning all hunting,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual, and organizer of a group called gay, lesbian, straight, education network, as safe school czar and it became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Mark Lloyd as diversity czar and he believed in curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the wealth and admires Hugo Chavez,
people said it didn't matter.
When Valerie Jarrett was selected as Obama's senior White House advisor and she is an avowed Socialist,
people said it didn't matter.
When Anita Dunn, White House Communications director said Mao Tse Tung was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for inspiration,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Carol Browner as global warming czar, and she is a well known socialist working on cap and trade
as the nations largHave the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
It does matter- everything you said
Only a fool will say it does not matter
When there is nothing left of the nation you knew
was it because you were the one who said it does not matter that little by little it was being taken apart?
God bless us all, may your children children still experience the country you knew as a child. Its foundation and beliefs, its uniqueness, its spirit and its dreams.
christmas soap box sale is here !!!Have the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
yes
Man, you said a mouth full there.Have the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
I'm raising my children to be smarter than you. That matters.
Everything that you have mentioned does matter but to the liberals the only thing that matters is that Obama is not George W. Bush.
It does not matter to them that BO promised to end the war in Iraq or that he promised that the $700 billion jobs creation stimulus created little or no jobs.
It mattered to them that Bush gave tax cuts to the rich, it does not matter to them that Obama gave $300 billion to investors (the rich) to purchase toxic assets.
It does not matter to them that BO can not walk on water, heal the sick or raise the dead, but they treat him as though he does and wants to get rid of the one that CAN
It does not matter to them that October 2009 was the deadliest month in terms of US military troop deaths since the war began but it mattered if 4 of our finest were killed under Bush.
It does not matter that BO has more CAZRS that report directly to him so that he can circumvent congress, these CZARS have powers that congress can not even stop.
It does not matter. He is the President of the United States. That is all that matters to me. This post is so full of errors.
people said it didn't matter.
When he traveled to Pakistan , after college on an unknown national passport,
people said it didn't matter.
When he sought the endorsement of the Marxist party in 1996 as he ran for the Illinois Senate,
people said it doesn't matter.
When he sat in a Chicago Church for twenty years and listened to a preacher spew hatred for America and preach black liberation theology,
people said it didn't matter.
When an independent Washington organization, that tracks senate voting records, gave him the distinctive title as the "most liberal senator",
people said it didn't matter.
When the Palestinians in Gaza , set up a fund raising telethon to raise money for his election campaign,
people said it didn't matter.
When his voting record supported gun control,
people said it didn't matter.
When he refused to disclose who donated money to his election campaign, as other candidates had done,
people said it didn't matter.
When he received endorsements from people like Louis Farrakhan and Mummar Kadaffi and Hugo Chavez,
people said it didn't matter.
When it was pointed out that he was a total, newcomer and had absolutely no experience at anything except community organizing,
people said it didn't matter.
When he chose friends and acquaintances such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn who were revolutionary radicals,
people said it didn't matter.
When his voting record in the Illinois senate and in the U.S. Senate came into question,
people said it didn't matter.
When he refused to wear a flag, lapel pin and did so only after a public outcry,
people said it didn't matter.
When people started treating him as a Messiah and children in schools were taught to sing his praises,
people said it didn't matter.
When he stood with his hands over his groin area for the playing of the National Anthem and Pledge of Allegiance,
people said it didn't matter.
When he surrounded himself in the White house with advisors who were pro gun control, pro abortion, pro homosexual marriage and wanting to curtail freedom of speech to silence the opposition,
people said it didn't matter.
When he aired his views on abortion, homosexuality and a host of other issues,
people said it didn't matter.
When he said he favors sex education in Kindergarten, including homosexual indoctrination,
people said it didn't matter.
When his background was either scrubbed or hidden and nothing could be found about him,
people said it didn't matter.
When the place of his birth was called into question, and he refused to produce a birth certificate,
people said it didn't matter.
When he had an association in Chicago with Tony Rezco, a man of questionable character, who is now in prson and had helped Obama to a sweet deal on the purchase of his home,
people said it didn't matter.
When it became known that George Soros, a multi-billionaire Marxist, spent a ton of money to get him elected,
people said it didn't matter.
When he started appointing czars that were radicals, revolutionaries, and even avowed Marxist/Communist,
people said it didn't matter.
When he stood before the nation and told us that his intentions were to "fundamentally transform this nation" into something else,
people said it didn't matter.
When it became known that he had trained ACORN workers in Chicago and served as an attorney for ACORN,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed cabinet members and several advisors who were tax cheats and socialists,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed a science czar, John Holdren, who believes in forced abortions, mass sterilizations and seizing babies from teen mothers,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Cass Sunstein as regulatory czar and he believes in "Explicit Consent", harvesting human organs without family consent, and to allow animals to be represented in court,
while banning all hunting,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Kevin Jennings, a homosexual, and organizer of a group called gay, lesbian, straight, education network, as safe school czar and it became known that he had a history of bad advice to teenagers,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Mark Lloyd as diversity czar and he believed in curtailing free speech, taking from one and giving to another to spread the wealth and admires Hugo Chavez,
people said it didn't matter.
When Valerie Jarrett was selected as Obama's senior White House advisor and she is an avowed Socialist,
people said it didn't matter.
When Anita Dunn, White House Communications director said Mao Tse Tung was her favorite philosopher and the person she turned to most for inspiration,
people said it didn't matter.
When he appointed Carol Browner as global warming czar, and she is a well known socialist working on cap and trade
as the nations largHave the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
It does matter- everything you said
Only a fool will say it does not matter
When there is nothing left of the nation you knew
was it because you were the one who said it does not matter that little by little it was being taken apart?
God bless us all, may your children children still experience the country you knew as a child. Its foundation and beliefs, its uniqueness, its spirit and its dreams.
christmas soap box sale is here !!!Have the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
yes
Man, you said a mouth full there.Have the people that elected Obama realized that it DOES matter?
I'm raising my children to be smarter than you. That matters.
Everything that you have mentioned does matter but to the liberals the only thing that matters is that Obama is not George W. Bush.
It does not matter to them that BO promised to end the war in Iraq or that he promised that the $700 billion jobs creation stimulus created little or no jobs.
It mattered to them that Bush gave tax cuts to the rich, it does not matter to them that Obama gave $300 billion to investors (the rich) to purchase toxic assets.
It does not matter to them that BO can not walk on water, heal the sick or raise the dead, but they treat him as though he does and wants to get rid of the one that CAN
It does not matter to them that October 2009 was the deadliest month in terms of US military troop deaths since the war began but it mattered if 4 of our finest were killed under Bush.
It does not matter that BO has more CAZRS that report directly to him so that he can circumvent congress, these CZARS have powers that congress can not even stop.
It does not matter. He is the President of the United States. That is all that matters to me. This post is so full of errors.
Isn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
Why did McCain get all giddy when he was talking about Obama's "earmark" expense of a 3 million dollar planetarium?
Don't we want the tax money to fund things for the public, like science and technology?
Where does McCain's $300 Billion dollar plan go?
To buy back mortgages that the bail-out should have covered...
I say go ahead and "earmark" to your hearts content as long as the tax payer is actually getting something in return...
What do you think?Isn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
I agree, earmarks are good when used properly, 3m for a planetarium that will probably be host to thousands of school field trips, earning the money back and paying it forward through education...As far as McCains houses though, those were purchased with Joe- 6 packs beer money and they are technically cindy's but point taken.
As was made evident in many reports yesterday on the sheriff that won't evict people any more because most of the time the people living in these bank forclosure properties are renters, why bail out these Property owners or banks? readjust the loans interest rates so the real homeowners that need to stay in their homes can stay there and continue to pay their mortgages and let the speculators and house flippers and investment properties go back to the bank ( or the taxpayers via the bailout)
Careful with Class hatred.
Obama is an ivy league lawyer,, his wife used to clear a cool half a million every year as some sort of corporate consultant.
The Democrats are the one with Monarchy fetish for the Kennedy Clan.
You don't want people to realize the Democrats are run by the super-rich too.
I'd stay away from McCain's Plan to clean up the Fannie Mae Sub-Prime loan mess too. That was the Democrats in action.
Isn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
Agreed. God forbid Americans be educated about science. But let's spend billions on Puerto Rican rum and Nascar tracks! Little "goodies" in the bailout bill McCain voted for. No, no, no, planetariums are a ridiculous thing to spend money on. Especially when the Bible tells us everything there is to know about space, anyway.
(I'm afraid the point went completely over their heads, didn't it? Oh well.)
Comparing someones own sucess in saying they have X amount of houses, isint using government funds.
if he wants to buy 30 houses with his or his wifes salary, more power to him. since when do we punish sucess in america? thought that was the american dream
obama isint using his own money, hes using our money and sending it back to his home state.
Epic failIsn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
That planetarium is used to educate children about our universe. It's not a shocker McCain opposes money going to education. The more educated someone is the less likely they are to vote Republican. The GOP is for stupid people.
McCain bought his houses with his money that he earned. Chicago bought their Disneyland attraction with MY money! theres a difference. Is there a brain in that house plant you have for a head?
Yeah, but the key difference here is that John McCain earned the money to buy his house whereas Obama begged the Government for the money.
Hey Einstein, McCain used his OWN money to buy his homes. Obama used tax payers money! BIG difference!
John didn't buy his houses with government money. FYI...John McCain has never in his ENTIRE career asked for a single nickle in earmarks......$000000000000! Obama.......1 million dollars for every day he was a senator!
I do not think McCains house was purchased using earmarks therefor your question isn't relevant.
NO earmarks present a separate and individual proposal. Why are law makers afraid of that?
McCain has an axe to grind towards anything educational... Knowledge and learning does not bode well for building and maintaining a GOP base.
McCain hates science. He thinks that's for "elitists."
One thing that McCain loves about Palin is that they both hate science. Any science project to them is pork barrel.
I think you don't understand that we don't have the money to earmark all these projects.
did the tax payers pay for McCain's house?
Pretty sad reach there, pal.
Ha Ha, and how much did we give Palin to NOT build her bridge to nowhere? $400M
Three million dollars is a trickle in the waterfall of money that is tossed around in Washington, and it obviously has been used for a project that enhances the public in Chicago. How wonderful of Obama to ask for money to promote Scientific Education in Chicago, where there are many little children who are never exposed to the skeleton of a dinosaur or a tankful of tropical fish.
McCain's plan to bail out homeowners has only one huge hitch. His plan includes buying houses at market value. That means they will be bought at the higher prices that they SHOULD be earning, but unfortunately are not and may not be selling for those higher prices for many, many years. I had thought this meant that the houses would be bought for the price they are worth today, but the economist said no, they would be bought for the price on the mortgage. So this will be a huge loss for the taxpayers. This information came from the economic expert on CNN, who said McCain's plan is not a good one because of this hitch.
Don't we want the tax money to fund things for the public, like science and technology?
Where does McCain's $300 Billion dollar plan go?
To buy back mortgages that the bail-out should have covered...
I say go ahead and "earmark" to your hearts content as long as the tax payer is actually getting something in return...
What do you think?Isn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
I agree, earmarks are good when used properly, 3m for a planetarium that will probably be host to thousands of school field trips, earning the money back and paying it forward through education...As far as McCains houses though, those were purchased with Joe- 6 packs beer money and they are technically cindy's but point taken.
As was made evident in many reports yesterday on the sheriff that won't evict people any more because most of the time the people living in these bank forclosure properties are renters, why bail out these Property owners or banks? readjust the loans interest rates so the real homeowners that need to stay in their homes can stay there and continue to pay their mortgages and let the speculators and house flippers and investment properties go back to the bank ( or the taxpayers via the bailout)
Careful with Class hatred.
Obama is an ivy league lawyer,, his wife used to clear a cool half a million every year as some sort of corporate consultant.
The Democrats are the one with Monarchy fetish for the Kennedy Clan.
You don't want people to realize the Democrats are run by the super-rich too.
I'd stay away from McCain's Plan to clean up the Fannie Mae Sub-Prime loan mess too. That was the Democrats in action.
Isn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
Agreed. God forbid Americans be educated about science. But let's spend billions on Puerto Rican rum and Nascar tracks! Little "goodies" in the bailout bill McCain voted for. No, no, no, planetariums are a ridiculous thing to spend money on. Especially when the Bible tells us everything there is to know about space, anyway.
(I'm afraid the point went completely over their heads, didn't it? Oh well.)
Comparing someones own sucess in saying they have X amount of houses, isint using government funds.
if he wants to buy 30 houses with his or his wifes salary, more power to him. since when do we punish sucess in america? thought that was the american dream
obama isint using his own money, hes using our money and sending it back to his home state.
Epic failIsn't Obama's $3M Planetarium in Chicago still less expensive than even one of McCain's houses?
That planetarium is used to educate children about our universe. It's not a shocker McCain opposes money going to education. The more educated someone is the less likely they are to vote Republican. The GOP is for stupid people.
McCain bought his houses with his money that he earned. Chicago bought their Disneyland attraction with MY money! theres a difference. Is there a brain in that house plant you have for a head?
Yeah, but the key difference here is that John McCain earned the money to buy his house whereas Obama begged the Government for the money.
Hey Einstein, McCain used his OWN money to buy his homes. Obama used tax payers money! BIG difference!
John didn't buy his houses with government money. FYI...John McCain has never in his ENTIRE career asked for a single nickle in earmarks......$000000000000! Obama.......1 million dollars for every day he was a senator!
I do not think McCains house was purchased using earmarks therefor your question isn't relevant.
NO earmarks present a separate and individual proposal. Why are law makers afraid of that?
McCain has an axe to grind towards anything educational... Knowledge and learning does not bode well for building and maintaining a GOP base.
McCain hates science. He thinks that's for "elitists."
One thing that McCain loves about Palin is that they both hate science. Any science project to them is pork barrel.
I think you don't understand that we don't have the money to earmark all these projects.
did the tax payers pay for McCain's house?
Pretty sad reach there, pal.
Ha Ha, and how much did we give Palin to NOT build her bridge to nowhere? $400M
Three million dollars is a trickle in the waterfall of money that is tossed around in Washington, and it obviously has been used for a project that enhances the public in Chicago. How wonderful of Obama to ask for money to promote Scientific Education in Chicago, where there are many little children who are never exposed to the skeleton of a dinosaur or a tankful of tropical fish.
McCain's plan to bail out homeowners has only one huge hitch. His plan includes buying houses at market value. That means they will be bought at the higher prices that they SHOULD be earning, but unfortunately are not and may not be selling for those higher prices for many, many years. I had thought this meant that the houses would be bought for the price they are worth today, but the economist said no, they would be bought for the price on the mortgage. So this will be a huge loss for the taxpayers. This information came from the economic expert on CNN, who said McCain's plan is not a good one because of this hitch.
Is Obama really ready to run this country?
First, he knew nothing of Bill Ayers terrorist acts, he knows nothing about former PLO leader who he associates with, he knows nothing about the crooks in Chicago who helped him buy his house, and now he does know anything about Auntie from Boston disregarding judges orders to leave the country 4 years ago because she is an illegal immigrant living in, needless to say, public housing in Boston. So Obama conveniently has no knowledge of all this illegal and anti- American activity going on right under his nose and even in his own family, but all you people think he is ready to offer us Americans national security and peace of mind? I don't get your way of thinking. I am not Pro McCain - just taking the lesser of the two evils when I vote against Obama.Is Obama really ready to run this country?
Don't forget the 20 years of anti-American sermons he supposedly slept through...
Wolf in sheep's clothing.
McCain is the morally wrong choice. He keeps bums on the street while the rich get richer, he doesn't respect women's choices, he is against gays, wants to drill everywhere except where the oil companies are now, he has never repudiated any of the crazy comments at his rallies, and intends to go to war with Iran.
You're telling me that's better than an illegal immigrant and two people he's repudiated?Is Obama really ready to run this country?
Excellent points. I knew these groups were trouble way back when, why didnt he? The answer is that he didn't care as long as they advanced his career.
The real issure is not that he accepted their support. Most politicians take money from anyone. It is that they all picked Obama as the person who they chose to support. If i were running for office, no crazy islamists or former political bombers would consider supporting me, because im an honest guy. Which is why i am not in politics.
Personally, I really don't think even HE knows he's ready. Bush didn't exactly make America a basket of roses, but who knows? Maybe once Obama's up there in the White House and running the country, maybe he will be, maybe not. If he has good ideas and puts them into action, Obama will make a great president.Is Obama really ready to run this country?
NO Executive Experience
NO Military Experience
NO thing passed but 1 small insignicant bill in Congress
NO integrity - accepted millions in illegal donations from untraceable credit cards - John McCain refused all donations of this type
NOt a keeper of his word First it's 250,000, then 200,000, then 150,000, now 120,000 to get a tax cut
NO decent associations - Ayers, J Wright,PLO Rashid Khalidi, Tony Rezko, Farrahkan
NOBAMA NATION
Hell no he isn't. Bottom line......go to their roots....We've got a candidate who was aformer POW who almost DIED for THIS COUNTRY
And we have the other candidate who was associated with a racist America hating church.
This election is like a wicked funhouse....it leaves me in shock. JUST those two simple but extreme differences shouldn't even make it a contest.
If McCain was leading the polls now, there would be more dirt said about him than what you've written about Obama. Why? Because the media loves to have a tight election race. They want it to be close, so you'll watch hours of TV coverage on Nov. 4.
Presidents are the poster boy and don't do much except sign papers and shake hands. What you need to think about is who he is going to bring with him to the white house and forget about the nonsense brought up on talk radio.
The United States of America is in real trouble if this man is elected. He sees truth as......."lie, cover up or play dumb". He is not qualified to be president. The only thing that he can do is read a teleprompter.
Voting for lessor of two evils. Voting to endorse someone you don't believe in, to block another person you don't believe in. That's just brilliant.
No!!! In my opinion Sarah Palin has more experience than Obama.
Obama's just going to send this country into the ground but he's probably going to win.
PS Go McCain!!!
Guilt by Association Game is very Weak
Obama was NEVER involved in ANY CRIME
All you have is what SOME BODY ELSE did
McCain was involved with the Keating 5-NOT McCain's Friend
Palin Violated Ethic's-NOT Palins Friend.
Yep he has proved it to me with his campaign. He's an extraordinary person.......so go ahead and be stupid and vote for more of the same...it's been great W, thanks for the f***in memories!
repubs palled around with bill ayers too. mccain gave half a million dollars to rashid khalidi. or "khaladi" as palin calls him.
nostrodamus? you need to call the art bell show.
Yes into the ground.
You could find this interesting, do a search on - Obama Ray Mabus then after you see who Maybus is do a search on Nostradamus Mabus
Yes, and I wonder why no one in big media makes that exact point. I wonder if he knows that the Dallas Cowboys and Mickey Mouse voted for him too?
YES,he better be.He will be elected next Tuesday.
Obama isn't even ready to run a lemonade stand. He's a post turtle.
Obviously, he is lying. If he isn't then he is stupid and blind. He is unfit to be the President either way.
Is Palin?
Because if McCain wins, she is going to be the one running the country in two years.
N.O.
No, he's not ready,
period.
I just know that if he wins, it would be a lesson I hope we can learn from.
Good or bad.
Yep. Right into the ground.
This one is simple!!! NO NO NO!!!!!!!
yes, he's ready to run it into the ground!
GO MCCAIN!
HELL NO.
Yes he is.
no. he's gonna lead us into another depression
Yes, I think Obama is ready to run this country.
You might want to ask yourself if Palin is ready to run this country. I know she's only running for vice president, but there's a good chance that McCain will die while in office. Palin doesn't even know what the Bush Doctrine is!
YES HE IS!!!!
HE CAN RUN THIS COUNTRY MUCH BETTER THE OLD *** MCCAIN.PEOPLE AL IN DANIEL BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT HE YOU BE A MUCH BETTER PRESIDENT
Don't forget the 20 years of anti-American sermons he supposedly slept through...
Wolf in sheep's clothing.
McCain is the morally wrong choice. He keeps bums on the street while the rich get richer, he doesn't respect women's choices, he is against gays, wants to drill everywhere except where the oil companies are now, he has never repudiated any of the crazy comments at his rallies, and intends to go to war with Iran.
You're telling me that's better than an illegal immigrant and two people he's repudiated?Is Obama really ready to run this country?
Excellent points. I knew these groups were trouble way back when, why didnt he? The answer is that he didn't care as long as they advanced his career.
The real issure is not that he accepted their support. Most politicians take money from anyone. It is that they all picked Obama as the person who they chose to support. If i were running for office, no crazy islamists or former political bombers would consider supporting me, because im an honest guy. Which is why i am not in politics.
Personally, I really don't think even HE knows he's ready. Bush didn't exactly make America a basket of roses, but who knows? Maybe once Obama's up there in the White House and running the country, maybe he will be, maybe not. If he has good ideas and puts them into action, Obama will make a great president.Is Obama really ready to run this country?
NO Executive Experience
NO Military Experience
NO thing passed but 1 small insignicant bill in Congress
NO integrity - accepted millions in illegal donations from untraceable credit cards - John McCain refused all donations of this type
NOt a keeper of his word First it's 250,000, then 200,000, then 150,000, now 120,000 to get a tax cut
NO decent associations - Ayers, J Wright,PLO Rashid Khalidi, Tony Rezko, Farrahkan
NOBAMA NATION
Hell no he isn't. Bottom line......go to their roots....We've got a candidate who was aformer POW who almost DIED for THIS COUNTRY
And we have the other candidate who was associated with a racist America hating church.
This election is like a wicked funhouse....it leaves me in shock. JUST those two simple but extreme differences shouldn't even make it a contest.
If McCain was leading the polls now, there would be more dirt said about him than what you've written about Obama. Why? Because the media loves to have a tight election race. They want it to be close, so you'll watch hours of TV coverage on Nov. 4.
Presidents are the poster boy and don't do much except sign papers and shake hands. What you need to think about is who he is going to bring with him to the white house and forget about the nonsense brought up on talk radio.
The United States of America is in real trouble if this man is elected. He sees truth as......."lie, cover up or play dumb". He is not qualified to be president. The only thing that he can do is read a teleprompter.
Voting for lessor of two evils. Voting to endorse someone you don't believe in, to block another person you don't believe in. That's just brilliant.
No!!! In my opinion Sarah Palin has more experience than Obama.
Obama's just going to send this country into the ground but he's probably going to win.
PS Go McCain!!!
Guilt by Association Game is very Weak
Obama was NEVER involved in ANY CRIME
All you have is what SOME BODY ELSE did
McCain was involved with the Keating 5-NOT McCain's Friend
Palin Violated Ethic's-NOT Palins Friend.
Yep he has proved it to me with his campaign. He's an extraordinary person.......so go ahead and be stupid and vote for more of the same...it's been great W, thanks for the f***in memories!
repubs palled around with bill ayers too. mccain gave half a million dollars to rashid khalidi. or "khaladi" as palin calls him.
nostrodamus? you need to call the art bell show.
Yes into the ground.
You could find this interesting, do a search on - Obama Ray Mabus then after you see who Maybus is do a search on Nostradamus Mabus
Yes, and I wonder why no one in big media makes that exact point. I wonder if he knows that the Dallas Cowboys and Mickey Mouse voted for him too?
YES,he better be.He will be elected next Tuesday.
Obama isn't even ready to run a lemonade stand. He's a post turtle.
Obviously, he is lying. If he isn't then he is stupid and blind. He is unfit to be the President either way.
Is Palin?
Because if McCain wins, she is going to be the one running the country in two years.
N.O.
No, he's not ready,
period.
I just know that if he wins, it would be a lesson I hope we can learn from.
Good or bad.
Yep. Right into the ground.
This one is simple!!! NO NO NO!!!!!!!
yes, he's ready to run it into the ground!
GO MCCAIN!
HELL NO.
Yes he is.
no. he's gonna lead us into another depression
Yes, I think Obama is ready to run this country.
You might want to ask yourself if Palin is ready to run this country. I know she's only running for vice president, but there's a good chance that McCain will die while in office. Palin doesn't even know what the Bush Doctrine is!
YES HE IS!!!!
HE CAN RUN THIS COUNTRY MUCH BETTER THE OLD *** MCCAIN.PEOPLE AL IN DANIEL BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT HE YOU BE A MUCH BETTER PRESIDENT
How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
The Obama administration extended Fannie and Freddie an UNLIMITED line of credit on December 28, 2009. (I'm sure they weren't trying to bury this news during the holidays....lol) These two entities have lost the tax payer $145 billion to date. These are the same entities Barney Frank (the guy who helped author financial "reform") said were financially sound in 2003.
What is with this seemingly corrupt and incestuous relationship between Fannie, Freddie and the Democratic Party??
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/polit…
On Emanuel's watch, the board was told by executives of a plan to use accounting tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits the government-chartered firm was then reaping from risky investments. The goal was to push earnings onto the books in future years, ensuring that Freddie Mac would appear profitable on paper for years to come and helping maximize annual bonuses for company brass.
The accounting scandal wasn't the only one that brewed during Emanuel's tenure.
During his brief time on the board, the company hatched a plan to enhance its political muscle. That scheme, also reviewed by the board, led to a record $3.8 million fine from the Federal Election Commission for illegally using corporate resources to host fundraisers for politicians. Emanuel was the beneficiary of one of those parties after he left the board and ran in 2002 for a seat in Congress from the North Side of Chicago.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12616830…
The Obama administration's decision to cover an unlimited amount of losses at the mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the next three years stirred controversy over the holiday.
The Treasury announced Thursday it was removing the caps that limited the amount of available capital to the companies to $200 billion each.
Unlimited access to bailout funds through 2012 was "necessary for preserving the continued strength and stability of the mortgage market," the Treasury said. Fannie and Freddie purchase or guarantee most U.S. home mortgages and have run up huge losses stemming from the worst wave of defaults since the 1930s.
"The timing of this executive order giving Fannie and Freddie a blank check is no coincidence," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the House Financial Services Committee. He said the Christmas Eve announcement was designed "to prevent the general public from taking note."
Treasury officials couldn't be reached for comment Friday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEX…
"The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see, I think we see entities which are fundamentally sound financially, and withstand some of the disaster scenarios, and even if there were a problem. the federal government doesn't bail them [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] out, but the more pressure there is there, then the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing"
-Barney Frank
September 10, 2003
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-13…
Fannie and Freddie, now 80 percent owned by U.S. taxpayers, already have drawn $145 billion from an unlimited line of government credit granted to ensure that home buyers can get loans while the private housing-finance industry is moribund. That surpasses the amount spent on rescues of American International Group Inc., General Motors Co. or Citigroup Inc., which have begun repaying their debts.
“It is the mother of all bailouts,” said Edward Pinto, a former chief credit officer at Fannie Mae, who is now a consultant to the mortgage-finance industry.How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
People went to prison and the largest accounting firm in the world ArthurAndersen was put out of business for doing these very same things at ENRON.
But, since its government, and 10000x worse than ENRON, nobody goes to jail, nobody is fired, nobody pays a fine, and the people in Washington responsible for it, they reward themselves.
Maybe when the republicans take the house, a congressional investigation will be undertaken leading to the resignation of all those involved in the worst financial scandal IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY.
Essentially Rahm Emanuel is politically useful to Obama. that is the reason that Rahm Emanuel is there.How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
I am not impressed that Chris Dodd or Barney Frank or Rahn Emmanuel are not in prison where they should be.
Fannie %26amp; Freddie crashed our economy, yet Obama NEVER mentions them or 'reforms' them. In fact he put the two guys most responsible for killing us- Barney Frank and Chris Dodd in charge of fixing things. Dumbest move in Presidential history.How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
Emmanuel is in tight with the investment bankers (he used to be one) and his specialty in politics is fund-raising. He's the Democrats' money man, and in politics nothing talks (or shuts people up) like money. Obama probably couldn't have gotten elected without him, and despite what he's doing to the country Obama does take care of his cronies. It would take more than a scandal for Obama to turn his back on his main money man.
You have to understand with democrats the more you screw up the higher up the ladder you go.
See so just like turbo tax cheat tim. The IMF would send him a check every year with a letter stating that the check was for taxes (sounds simple right, get check and letter pay taxes) but n little timmy wanted to spend it on other things, so he did. Then when he was caught, OOOOPPPPPSSSS His lie was I used turbo tax. If I was the CEO of turbo tax I would have taken him to court for liable and sued the a*ss off him.
What is with this seemingly corrupt and incestuous relationship between Fannie, Freddie and the Democratic Party??
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/polit…
On Emanuel's watch, the board was told by executives of a plan to use accounting tricks to mislead shareholders about outsize profits the government-chartered firm was then reaping from risky investments. The goal was to push earnings onto the books in future years, ensuring that Freddie Mac would appear profitable on paper for years to come and helping maximize annual bonuses for company brass.
The accounting scandal wasn't the only one that brewed during Emanuel's tenure.
During his brief time on the board, the company hatched a plan to enhance its political muscle. That scheme, also reviewed by the board, led to a record $3.8 million fine from the Federal Election Commission for illegally using corporate resources to host fundraisers for politicians. Emanuel was the beneficiary of one of those parties after he left the board and ran in 2002 for a seat in Congress from the North Side of Chicago.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12616830…
The Obama administration's decision to cover an unlimited amount of losses at the mortgage-finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the next three years stirred controversy over the holiday.
The Treasury announced Thursday it was removing the caps that limited the amount of available capital to the companies to $200 billion each.
Unlimited access to bailout funds through 2012 was "necessary for preserving the continued strength and stability of the mortgage market," the Treasury said. Fannie and Freddie purchase or guarantee most U.S. home mortgages and have run up huge losses stemming from the worst wave of defaults since the 1930s.
"The timing of this executive order giving Fannie and Freddie a blank check is no coincidence," said Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the House Financial Services Committee. He said the Christmas Eve announcement was designed "to prevent the general public from taking note."
Treasury officials couldn't be reached for comment Friday.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMnSp4qEX…
"The more people, in my judgment, exaggerate a threat of safety and soundness, the more people conjure up the possibility of serious financial losses to the Treasury, which I do not see, I think we see entities which are fundamentally sound financially, and withstand some of the disaster scenarios, and even if there were a problem. the federal government doesn't bail them [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac] out, but the more pressure there is there, then the less I think we see in terms of affordable housing"
-Barney Frank
September 10, 2003
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-13…
Fannie and Freddie, now 80 percent owned by U.S. taxpayers, already have drawn $145 billion from an unlimited line of government credit granted to ensure that home buyers can get loans while the private housing-finance industry is moribund. That surpasses the amount spent on rescues of American International Group Inc., General Motors Co. or Citigroup Inc., which have begun repaying their debts.
“It is the mother of all bailouts,” said Edward Pinto, a former chief credit officer at Fannie Mae, who is now a consultant to the mortgage-finance industry.How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
People went to prison and the largest accounting firm in the world ArthurAndersen was put out of business for doing these very same things at ENRON.
But, since its government, and 10000x worse than ENRON, nobody goes to jail, nobody is fired, nobody pays a fine, and the people in Washington responsible for it, they reward themselves.
Maybe when the republicans take the house, a congressional investigation will be undertaken leading to the resignation of all those involved in the worst financial scandal IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANITY.
Essentially Rahm Emanuel is politically useful to Obama. that is the reason that Rahm Emanuel is there.How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
I am not impressed that Chris Dodd or Barney Frank or Rahn Emmanuel are not in prison where they should be.
Fannie %26amp; Freddie crashed our economy, yet Obama NEVER mentions them or 'reforms' them. In fact he put the two guys most responsible for killing us- Barney Frank and Chris Dodd in charge of fixing things. Dumbest move in Presidential history.How did Rahm Emmanuel manage to get in the White House after his scandal plagued days at Freddie Mac?
Emmanuel is in tight with the investment bankers (he used to be one) and his specialty in politics is fund-raising. He's the Democrats' money man, and in politics nothing talks (or shuts people up) like money. Obama probably couldn't have gotten elected without him, and despite what he's doing to the country Obama does take care of his cronies. It would take more than a scandal for Obama to turn his back on his main money man.
You have to understand with democrats the more you screw up the higher up the ladder you go.
See so just like turbo tax cheat tim. The IMF would send him a check every year with a letter stating that the check was for taxes (sounds simple right, get check and letter pay taxes) but n little timmy wanted to spend it on other things, so he did. Then when he was caught, OOOOPPPPPSSSS His lie was I used turbo tax. If I was the CEO of turbo tax I would have taken him to court for liable and sued the a*ss off him.
Who do I talk to about unfair treatment from a public assistance caseworker?
I live in Chicago and I know that there are alot of people here take advantage of public assistance but I am not one of them and don't appreciate how I was treated when I requested cash assistance. I am currently going to school for nursing as well as raising my 2 kids ages 18 months and 3 years. My boyfriend ( the kids father) is taking care of the kids as well as his 86 year old bed stricken grandmother. ( he literally has to change her diapers and feed her like a baby, she is completely incapable of taking care of herself anymore. So, when I tell my caseworker our situation she tells me that either me or my boyfriend has to work 40 hrs a week at "work training in order to recieve cash assistance. If I had time to do work traing I would just get a job. If I have to get a job, I will have to drop out of nursing school b/c with 2 kids I barely have time for school as it is. And my boyfriend has to stay home to take care of the kids and his grandmother so he can't leave the house. When I told her this she said it was his problem that he has to take care of his grandmother... I know we have problems thats why I am asking for assistance. What does she expect us to do, thow her out on the street??? We can't afford to put her in a nursing home ,and we wouldn't anyway..we want family to take care of her, but we want to know if this is right what this caseworker is doing. Is this just one of those : "well, life isn't fair" situations or could I request a different caseworker...honeslty her attitude was offending and I don't think she was trreating me fairly. Thanks :)Who do I talk to about unfair treatment from a public assistance caseworker?
You should go above her head and speak to someone else about your case. I'm not 100% sure on the way the system is set up in the states, but I would think that attending nursing school should qualify as "work training." After all, when you finish, you'll have a viable career waiting for you, and will hardly be a drain on the system.mediterranean diet
You should go above her head and speak to someone else about your case. I'm not 100% sure on the way the system is set up in the states, but I would think that attending nursing school should qualify as "work training." After all, when you finish, you'll have a viable career waiting for you, and will hardly be a drain on the system.
Going on a trip with my girlfriend in a month to Chicago. Advice?
Hi there,
I currently have planned that I am going to Chicago with my girlfriend Jan 17-19. We have reservations at the Ohio House Motel, which is located at 602 North Lasalle Street, which is also about a mile above the Loop.
I have planned that we are going to do the Chicago CityPass, so we are going to see Shedd Aquarium, the Field Museum, the Skydeck, Art Institute, and Museum of Science and Industry.
I've looked at the maps as far as taking public transit and such. Can anyone tell me if these areas are safe? Can I safely walk back a mile in the dark from the Skydeck to my hotel around 8pm or so?Going on a trip with my girlfriend in a month to Chicago. Advice?
I have worked in downtown Chicago for over 20 years. And there have been quite a few occasions where I had to travel between the intersection of State Street and Randolph Street to the former Sears Tower (where the Skydeck is). During the daytime, there is a tremendous amount of pedestrian and vehicle traffic to contend with. However, after sunset, the pedestrians and vehicles are sporadic, especially when the weather is cold like it is during winter. And although your route between the Skydeck and your Motel is fairly well lit (especially if you take Lasalle street), I would still recommend taking a taxi. Save your walking for the daylight hours.
Also, when you are north of the Chicago River, I would recommend that you stay east of Lasalle Street since that is where you will see more pedestrians and vehicles. There used to be the Cabrini-Green public housing project about 5 blocks northwest of where your motel is located. As a result, that location became a notorious high crime area. And although it was supposed to have been completely torn down by 2011, I'm not sure how much the neighborhood has improved.
One final but important point. Have you heard about flash mobs? There are good flash mobs and bad flash mobs. The good ones might have a large crowd suddenly start singing a song or performing a dance out in public. But the bad ones have been attacking the public and tourists in low crime and more affluent areas. Read about them at the source links I posted below.
In the first link below, they make reference to the CTA. That is the Chicago Transit Authority who runs the buses and subway/elevated electric trains.
The flash mobs have not been a big problem in Chicago. no flash mobs recently, especially in January when you plan to visit. I don't know why Horatio even dredges it up. It is plenty safe to walk up LaSalle St at 8pm from the Loop to 602 N. LaSalle St. The other answers are more accurate about this.
The Ohio House Motel is in the North Loop area, which contains art galleries, entertainment venues, and a lot of restaurants and bars. Generally, the streets are not empty during the early evening, and you should be safe. LaSalle Street is a busy street, so I think nobody is likely to hassle you.
This area, although not really residential, is not considered a bad area; but use common sense and don't show off any jewelry, cell phones, fancy electronic gadgets, or other signs of conspicuous consumption.
Yeah,it's safe.Summertime would have been a better time to visit though,might be snowy and cold for walking at night.Going on a trip with my girlfriend in a month to Chicago. Advice?
You have nothing to worry about. Have walked that area alone many times deep into the night and never once had an issue
no take a cab after dark
You should not having a problem walking around the Loop and North Side of Chicago. It's just like any other big city though, so you have to be aware of your belongings/self when in the subway or walking down a dark alley. That area of the city is where people go to party, so you should see people going and coming from bars, parties, and events for the most part along with hotel workers trying to get out to Halsted.
If you go to Navy Pier may I recommend the Stained glass museum at the end - it was the only part worthwhile of Navy Pier IMO. 3 foods you have to try - Chicago dog, Hot Italian Beef sandwich, and Deep Dish Pizza. Honorable mention to a filet mignon at any Chicago steakhouse and a corned beef sandwich at Manny's.
I currently have planned that I am going to Chicago with my girlfriend Jan 17-19. We have reservations at the Ohio House Motel, which is located at 602 North Lasalle Street, which is also about a mile above the Loop.
I have planned that we are going to do the Chicago CityPass, so we are going to see Shedd Aquarium, the Field Museum, the Skydeck, Art Institute, and Museum of Science and Industry.
I've looked at the maps as far as taking public transit and such. Can anyone tell me if these areas are safe? Can I safely walk back a mile in the dark from the Skydeck to my hotel around 8pm or so?Going on a trip with my girlfriend in a month to Chicago. Advice?
I have worked in downtown Chicago for over 20 years. And there have been quite a few occasions where I had to travel between the intersection of State Street and Randolph Street to the former Sears Tower (where the Skydeck is). During the daytime, there is a tremendous amount of pedestrian and vehicle traffic to contend with. However, after sunset, the pedestrians and vehicles are sporadic, especially when the weather is cold like it is during winter. And although your route between the Skydeck and your Motel is fairly well lit (especially if you take Lasalle street), I would still recommend taking a taxi. Save your walking for the daylight hours.
Also, when you are north of the Chicago River, I would recommend that you stay east of Lasalle Street since that is where you will see more pedestrians and vehicles. There used to be the Cabrini-Green public housing project about 5 blocks northwest of where your motel is located. As a result, that location became a notorious high crime area. And although it was supposed to have been completely torn down by 2011, I'm not sure how much the neighborhood has improved.
One final but important point. Have you heard about flash mobs? There are good flash mobs and bad flash mobs. The good ones might have a large crowd suddenly start singing a song or performing a dance out in public. But the bad ones have been attacking the public and tourists in low crime and more affluent areas. Read about them at the source links I posted below.
In the first link below, they make reference to the CTA. That is the Chicago Transit Authority who runs the buses and subway/elevated electric trains.
The flash mobs have not been a big problem in Chicago. no flash mobs recently, especially in January when you plan to visit. I don't know why Horatio even dredges it up. It is plenty safe to walk up LaSalle St at 8pm from the Loop to 602 N. LaSalle St. The other answers are more accurate about this.
Report Abuse
Going on a trip with my girlfriend in a month to Chicago. Advice?The Ohio House Motel is in the North Loop area, which contains art galleries, entertainment venues, and a lot of restaurants and bars. Generally, the streets are not empty during the early evening, and you should be safe. LaSalle Street is a busy street, so I think nobody is likely to hassle you.
This area, although not really residential, is not considered a bad area; but use common sense and don't show off any jewelry, cell phones, fancy electronic gadgets, or other signs of conspicuous consumption.
Yeah,it's safe.Summertime would have been a better time to visit though,might be snowy and cold for walking at night.Going on a trip with my girlfriend in a month to Chicago. Advice?
You have nothing to worry about. Have walked that area alone many times deep into the night and never once had an issue
no take a cab after dark
You should not having a problem walking around the Loop and North Side of Chicago. It's just like any other big city though, so you have to be aware of your belongings/self when in the subway or walking down a dark alley. That area of the city is where people go to party, so you should see people going and coming from bars, parties, and events for the most part along with hotel workers trying to get out to Halsted.
If you go to Navy Pier may I recommend the Stained glass museum at the end - it was the only part worthwhile of Navy Pier IMO. 3 foods you have to try - Chicago dog, Hot Italian Beef sandwich, and Deep Dish Pizza. Honorable mention to a filet mignon at any Chicago steakhouse and a corned beef sandwich at Manny's.
Great Chicago neighborhoods?
I might be relocating to Chicago for work. The job is NW in Des Plaines. I am only vaguely familiar with the city, mostly from downtown visits. Currently my 6 yr old son and I live in Columbus, OH. We live in a very upscale neighborhood that is a "first ring" suburb. We pay our suburb taxes and have different school district and emergency responders but still have a Columbus mailing address. There are no bad neighborhoods around us and it is the safest place in Columbus. Everyone works hard and takes care of themselves and their neighbors. I am a single parent. Right now we rent a small house for about $1000/month but I am sure we would probably end up in an apartment there. Does anyone have any suggestions for neighborhoods that are very safe with good public schools and not a long commute to Des Plaines? I was looking over some neighborhoods and Elk Grove, Des Plaines and Arlington Heights seemed decent but I haven't visited them yet and I don't know their proximity to the city. I don't want to be too far removed from the city. And I do need to rent initially.Great Chicago neighborhoods?
I grew up in Des Plaines if you move to Des Plaines the area around rand and wolf is nice Elk Grove is most likely your best bet with what you want to pay in rent all the schools in the cities you are asking about are good in these cities your are about 30 min from downtown with traffic if you take the train it's like 15 min hope this helpsGreat Chicago neighborhoods?
you can stay in your VERY UPSCALE neighborhood since we in downtown chicago are just po' peoples.
I grew up in Des Plaines if you move to Des Plaines the area around rand and wolf is nice Elk Grove is most likely your best bet with what you want to pay in rent all the schools in the cities you are asking about are good in these cities your are about 30 min from downtown with traffic if you take the train it's like 15 min hope this helpsGreat Chicago neighborhoods?
you can stay in your VERY UPSCALE neighborhood since we in downtown chicago are just po' peoples.
Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
I just move from Los Angeles to Chicago and find out that it is much better place than LA. White christmas, tall buildings, bars, clubs, etc. You don't have to drive if you don't want to, because you can always take the public transportation like blue line, purple line etc
Bad thing in California:
Spoiled people, high cost of living, gas, house etc.
Never have a white christmas
Smog polliution, traffic jams everyday, low paid jobs
So the answer I want is, do you agree?Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
I agree with you.
This is the worst state in the U.S.
LAX is a nightmare
Move there if you are a l**er.
you are correct. chicago is atleast 10,000 times better than LA.Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
both big
both popular
both beautiful
both a little costly
both have lots of people and culture
and i live in one and gonna move to the other
Yes, I agree with all. I also find that their are more RUDE people in Los Angeles than Chicago.Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
I'd take Chicago over LA anyday.
lived in both places and they both suck....nuff said!!!!
I've been to Los Angles and to me it seems very big and rather scary. Not familiar like Chicago is. That's my favorite big city to visit. I live in Michigan and I go to Chicago on the train, I would rather go there than to Detroit, now that's a scary place.
Bad thing in California:
Spoiled people, high cost of living, gas, house etc.
Never have a white christmas
Smog polliution, traffic jams everyday, low paid jobs
So the answer I want is, do you agree?Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
I agree with you.
This is the worst state in the U.S.
LAX is a nightmare
Move there if you are a l**er.
you are correct. chicago is atleast 10,000 times better than LA.Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
both big
both popular
both beautiful
both a little costly
both have lots of people and culture
and i live in one and gonna move to the other
Yes, I agree with all. I also find that their are more RUDE people in Los Angeles than Chicago.Compare Chicago and Los Angeles?
I'd take Chicago over LA anyday.
lived in both places and they both suck....nuff said!!!!
I've been to Los Angles and to me it seems very big and rather scary. Not familiar like Chicago is. That's my favorite big city to visit. I live in Michigan and I go to Chicago on the train, I would rather go there than to Detroit, now that's a scary place.
Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
Hi, I'm a university student and a lifelong Seoul resident.
I'm going to Chicago as an international student next year and I'll be staying there for a year.
Before going there, I want to know general information about Chicago.
These are the things that I would like to hear about Chicago:
1. Safety and Crime rate
2. Environment and Pollution(esp. air pollution)
3. Public Transportation System
4. Living Expenses (except for housing)
5. Friendliness of People(Residents)
6. Weather and Climate
7. Cultural Activities (Clubbing, Parties, Gay Culture)
Is there anyone who has lived in both Seoul and Chicago?
Since I am from Seoul, it would be great if you compare Chicago with Seoul.Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
1)
As far as traffic goes, I hate to say this, but I think Chicagoans tend to be slightly more sane than Seoulites when it comes to driving and pedestrian traffic. This is probably due to the fact that Chicago is not as densely populated and does not have the problem of six lanes of traffic.
Regarding crime, Seoul is a relatively safer city than Chicago in terms of crime. But as in any major city, you just have to be aware of your surroundings. Neighborhoods that are under greater socioeconomic stress (and therefore typically linked with higher crime rates) are on the south and west sides of Chicago. Even in those specific areas, I don't think it would be a cause for alarm during the day and near main streets; just be more cautious where you are at night. But there's no guarantee even in the "nicest" neighborhoods. If you are going to be a student, you'll have the added security of the campus community.
2)
Chicago is a relatively cleaner city than Seoul both in air quality and littering. Again, at least part of this has to do with population density.
3)
Chicago does have a subway and bus system. Unfortunately, its subway system is not as extensive as Seoul's or New York City (where I now live). There are some neighborhoods in the Chicago metropolitan area that are more easily accessible by car, e.g., Koreatown, a lot of "young" neighborhoods with hip bars and restaurants north of downtown Chicago, etc. If you can manage the expense of a car, I would recommend it.
4)
In a 2005 CNNmoney.com report, CNN ranked Seoul as the 5th most expensive city in the world whereas Chicago ranked 52. You also have the advantage of a decent exchange rate. 1000 Won = 1.07 USD last I checked.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/21/pf/costl鈥?/a>
5)
It's hard to generalize about an entire city of people, given its diversity, but I would say that Chicagoans are less frantic in nature than New Yorkers or Seoulites. Obviously, depending on the level of education of the person you meet, their knowledge (and acceptance) of foreign cultures will vary. But overall it is a cosmopolitan city, although it doesn't get as much notoriety as other US cities like LA or New York. However, you will find that Chicagoans are very proud of their city.
6)
Chicago has a temperate climate similar to Seoul's except for two major differences. It does not have a monsoon season and it can get much colder in the winter compared to Seoul. The reason is that Chicago is next to Lake Michigan, a freshwater lake, which unlike an ocean or sea, does not provide a warming affect. Wind chill factors make temperatures feel much colder. Incidentally, Chicago's nickname is the "Windy City," although the source of that nickname is under debate, since some say it is a reference to the weather while others say it comes from a historically political context. Bring a hat to protect your ears, and wear layers (coming inside from the cold, some buildings can be very warm). For the summer, don't forget to bring a swimsuit. Chicago's beach front on Lake Michigan is all open to the public and a gorgeous place to exercise or just sun bathe.
7)
Chicago has great parks, great museums, a world class symphony orchestra, a public (free!) zoo within Chicago itself, great theater, great restaurants, great sports teams, great bars and clubs (unfortunately, you'd need a car to get to most, especially for the late hours). Chicago also has Oprah!
Here's a link to check out:
http://www.chicagotraveler.com/guide-to-鈥?/a>
Chicago has an annual gay pride parade day, but I'm not sure what date it falls. As far as gay culture goes, there is one neighborhood enclave that is specifically gay friendly nicknamed "Boystown" located within the formally named neighborhood of Lakeview. I don't know too much about available activities, but I found this website with gay interest themes relating to Boystown and the rest of Chicago
http://www.boystownchicago.com/
As with any place in the world, depending on whom you meet, people's attitude toward gay culture varies, but from my understanding of Seoul, it is STILL quite difficult to be openly gay there. In that regard, Chicago is probably more progressive.
Anyway, Chicago is a great city, and I think if you keep an open mind and get over the initial culture shock of being in a new country, you'll have a great time.Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
Check out this site below. Depending on where you live in chicago the answers to your questions can vary. Yes they have public transportation, trains, taxis, and buses. Weather is coldddd in the Winter. Safety, be aware of your surroundings at all times.Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
Chicago is not nearly as safe as Seoul. Be careful and know which areas to stay away from.
The air quality is a little better than Seoul. Seoul is surrounded by mountains and has an inversion layer so the air only gets cleaned when it rains. Chicago is known as the windy city for a reason, so there isn't really any stagnant air.
You'll see more trash on the grounds in Chicago and Graffiti on trains and such.
The public transportation is good but again be careful.
Chicago is pretty expensive. But Pizza and Greek foood are good here.
If you think Seoul is cold wait till you get to Chicago.
People are pretty freindly but it depends on where you are.
I'm going to Chicago as an international student next year and I'll be staying there for a year.
Before going there, I want to know general information about Chicago.
These are the things that I would like to hear about Chicago:
1. Safety and Crime rate
2. Environment and Pollution(esp. air pollution)
3. Public Transportation System
4. Living Expenses (except for housing)
5. Friendliness of People(Residents)
6. Weather and Climate
7. Cultural Activities (Clubbing, Parties, Gay Culture)
Is there anyone who has lived in both Seoul and Chicago?
Since I am from Seoul, it would be great if you compare Chicago with Seoul.Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
1)
As far as traffic goes, I hate to say this, but I think Chicagoans tend to be slightly more sane than Seoulites when it comes to driving and pedestrian traffic. This is probably due to the fact that Chicago is not as densely populated and does not have the problem of six lanes of traffic.
Regarding crime, Seoul is a relatively safer city than Chicago in terms of crime. But as in any major city, you just have to be aware of your surroundings. Neighborhoods that are under greater socioeconomic stress (and therefore typically linked with higher crime rates) are on the south and west sides of Chicago. Even in those specific areas, I don't think it would be a cause for alarm during the day and near main streets; just be more cautious where you are at night. But there's no guarantee even in the "nicest" neighborhoods. If you are going to be a student, you'll have the added security of the campus community.
2)
Chicago is a relatively cleaner city than Seoul both in air quality and littering. Again, at least part of this has to do with population density.
3)
Chicago does have a subway and bus system. Unfortunately, its subway system is not as extensive as Seoul's or New York City (where I now live). There are some neighborhoods in the Chicago metropolitan area that are more easily accessible by car, e.g., Koreatown, a lot of "young" neighborhoods with hip bars and restaurants north of downtown Chicago, etc. If you can manage the expense of a car, I would recommend it.
4)
In a 2005 CNNmoney.com report, CNN ranked Seoul as the 5th most expensive city in the world whereas Chicago ranked 52. You also have the advantage of a decent exchange rate. 1000 Won = 1.07 USD last I checked.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/21/pf/costl鈥?/a>
5)
It's hard to generalize about an entire city of people, given its diversity, but I would say that Chicagoans are less frantic in nature than New Yorkers or Seoulites. Obviously, depending on the level of education of the person you meet, their knowledge (and acceptance) of foreign cultures will vary. But overall it is a cosmopolitan city, although it doesn't get as much notoriety as other US cities like LA or New York. However, you will find that Chicagoans are very proud of their city.
6)
Chicago has a temperate climate similar to Seoul's except for two major differences. It does not have a monsoon season and it can get much colder in the winter compared to Seoul. The reason is that Chicago is next to Lake Michigan, a freshwater lake, which unlike an ocean or sea, does not provide a warming affect. Wind chill factors make temperatures feel much colder. Incidentally, Chicago's nickname is the "Windy City," although the source of that nickname is under debate, since some say it is a reference to the weather while others say it comes from a historically political context. Bring a hat to protect your ears, and wear layers (coming inside from the cold, some buildings can be very warm). For the summer, don't forget to bring a swimsuit. Chicago's beach front on Lake Michigan is all open to the public and a gorgeous place to exercise or just sun bathe.
7)
Chicago has great parks, great museums, a world class symphony orchestra, a public (free!) zoo within Chicago itself, great theater, great restaurants, great sports teams, great bars and clubs (unfortunately, you'd need a car to get to most, especially for the late hours). Chicago also has Oprah!
Here's a link to check out:
http://www.chicagotraveler.com/guide-to-鈥?/a>
Chicago has an annual gay pride parade day, but I'm not sure what date it falls. As far as gay culture goes, there is one neighborhood enclave that is specifically gay friendly nicknamed "Boystown" located within the formally named neighborhood of Lakeview. I don't know too much about available activities, but I found this website with gay interest themes relating to Boystown and the rest of Chicago
http://www.boystownchicago.com/
As with any place in the world, depending on whom you meet, people's attitude toward gay culture varies, but from my understanding of Seoul, it is STILL quite difficult to be openly gay there. In that regard, Chicago is probably more progressive.
Anyway, Chicago is a great city, and I think if you keep an open mind and get over the initial culture shock of being in a new country, you'll have a great time.Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
Check out this site below. Depending on where you live in chicago the answers to your questions can vary. Yes they have public transportation, trains, taxis, and buses. Weather is coldddd in the Winter. Safety, be aware of your surroundings at all times.Comparing Seoul with Chicago?
Chicago is not nearly as safe as Seoul. Be careful and know which areas to stay away from.
The air quality is a little better than Seoul. Seoul is surrounded by mountains and has an inversion layer so the air only gets cleaned when it rains. Chicago is known as the windy city for a reason, so there isn't really any stagnant air.
You'll see more trash on the grounds in Chicago and Graffiti on trains and such.
The public transportation is good but again be careful.
Chicago is pretty expensive. But Pizza and Greek foood are good here.
If you think Seoul is cold wait till you get to Chicago.
People are pretty freindly but it depends on where you are.
What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
Surely it's not the idea of government offerring a reasonably priced and fairly administered health insurance contract?
We have seen how corporate America works. From the big banks, to the big credit card companies and mortgage lenders, right. You don't pay these guys at least $10 million per year, they wouldn't even consider showing up for work. Most of them wind up getting $20 Million or $50 million when all parts of their pay and compensation and pension and healthcare and expense account are figured in.
So the idea that corporate America is ludicrously greedy and rapacious is not news to anybody who has actually been on planet Earth for the past 10 years, right.
Now comes government, and says it wants a non-greedy, and non rapacious healtg insurance company. It wants to set one up. It wants a chance to compete with the insanely greedy private companies, maybe offer a better product, or make them offer better products by giving them some honest competion.
Well, if that's all there were to the offer, only a real Chicago School Purist would object.
So, what's the big objection to the Public Option?
Here it is.
Imagine a company that wanted to sell flood insurance. OK so they sell most of their policies in the floodplain areas of the USA.
In order to attract customers they say "We will pay off on these policies even if you buy them after your house has been completely washed away and destroyed utterly by a flood."
Well, of course they sell a lot of policies, particularly after big floods. Everybody whose house has been destroyed buys a policy for $5,000 and then puts in their claim for their destroyed house for $500,000.
Miracle of miracles this company soon finds itself in big financial trouble. Why?
Because $5,000 is a much smaller number than $500,000.
Now come the company executives, and they say, "How were we to know that our business model was faulty?"
We went to Princeton, Harvard, and Yale, we studied speechmaking, and community organizing, and political theory. We have never seen the inside of any business, met any payroll, done any cost accounting, kept any books, or developed any business models.
How were we to know?
Is this really similar to a health insurance company that agrees to insure all persons regardless of pre-existing conditions.
Imagine that the person is like the house.
Imagine that the pre-existing condition, perhaps glioma of the brain, is the house already having gotten washed away in the flood last week.
Imagine that the premium is $5,000 per year.
Imagine that the operation for the glioma costs $500,000.
Now, the rule of arithmetic that we visited earlier
is still true, $5,000 is a smaller number than $500,000.
Who could possibly imagine that such a health insurance company would run into financial trouble, and quite quickly, and quite deeply?
No one in government. They went to Princeton, Harvard and Yale, you know the drill.
The problem is this: The bad flood insurance company only hurts itself, it's policyholders, its employees and it shareholders. It winds up in bankrupcy Court and gets eliminated, within about 6 months.
But the bad (crazy) U.S. Government backed health insurance company, can't go bankrupt. It has the full faith and credit of the Federal government behind it, who can print money, or take the bad debt onto the Fed Balance sheet.
So this becomes the money black hole. It's like a cash whirlpool. The money disappears down it, and never comes back, and it gets bigger and hungrier every day, every hour.
The rathole down which USA disappeared.
So -- the problem is all about the fact that the government has a completely crazy business model for how a health insurance company can operate -- and it's not their fault -- what do they know from insurance? Zilch -- they are community organizers!
So this is an idea in which everybody is a victim, even the ones coming forward with the idea now, they are victims too ''How were they to know?"What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
This administration hates free enterprise and, since day one, has been trying to destroy it piece by piece. In the past, the anti trust laws would have dealt with enterprises who were deemed "too big to fail". This administration wants one insurance company, Uncle Sam. Everything they are doing right now is meant to lead to that. They don't care how much misery they cause until they get to that point. These people are extremely manipulative and care nothing about the truth.
OK, here's my objection: It's not going to be reasonably priced, AND, it's not going to improve the overall quality of care in the USA - it's actually going to make it worse.
Secondary objection: health care industry comprises 18% of our GNP. The government already controls 30%, between the TARP companies that took bailout money, and GM. Add in health care, and VOILA! We're nearly a socialist company. Look at any of the economies in any socialist companies, and the standard of living for the average person SUCKS.
Fairly administered is a laugh. Ever try getting an answer from the IRS on your taxes? Consumer Reports says, more than half the answers on their own hotline, are WRONG. Guess who pays the fees, if you take them at their word? The poor guy who called - penalties and interest, if you're LUCKY. Jail time if you aren't.
Politicians are ignoring how health insurance companies make money, and clearly, you don't know - so I'll tell you - it's not off the premiums, it's off the reserves. Want to know what THEY are? Do the research, educate yourself.
And as far as flood insurance goes - THAT is a government program, and has been, for about 50 years. So yes, it sucks - BECAUSE IT'S RUN BY THE GOVERNMENT. Gotta laugh out loud, at that example - it's EXACTLY why we shouldn't let government run health insurance. But just to clarify a point - flood insurance doesn't KICK IN, until 30 days AFTER you've bought the policy. So you can't buy a policy retroactively, to cover a flood that's already happened. Of course, it won't work that way with HEALTH CARE, as the insurance companies WILL be required to cover stuff that's already happened.
Oh, and for the other widely used government insurance - try calling your local UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE, and see how easy it is to get a question asked. And after that experience, just think about how you want the same people to run your HEALTH CARE.What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
But don't you understand, The Public Option will be paid for by cuts in Medicare funding. Oh, but there will be one aspect of Medicare that WILL be increased and that's the so-called 'End of life counseling'.
Do they really think the American public is so stupid that they can't add 2+2?
Wow, you have a lot of time on your hands. This is easy. You said "reasonably priced and fairly administered health insurance contract."
Says who? Medicare is a disaster, so why would you want to expand it. It's expensive barely covers any medication and it's just big government run Amck.
Where does this notion that the insurance companies are greedy? I had a client in a coma and he paid his deductible and nothing else. I had a client with cancer and he paid his deductible and nothing else. I have rarely had a client with any issues that weren't easily fixed. Sure, there are plenty of bad products on the marketplace, but there are plenty of bad cars, bad homebuilders, bad mechanics, etc... it doesn't mean the government can do it better.
Bill Gates put Minesweeper on Windows to give governement workers something to do.
We left Europe for a reason. We don't want to be like Europe. We don't trust that the government can run something better. They don't have the track record. The private sector, though not perfect, has a much better record.What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
Medical care is NOT an insurance business
The Problem and solution is this:
Everybody is at risk. Not everybody is at the same risk but the differences are small and may change at any time.
the total cost IS paid one way or another, in money or blood (death)
Everybody Must pay something so the total covers the basics
Anybody is free to chose to pay more to by extra
NO sick person can afford the hugh medical costs of catastrophic illness, Unless, they are in the top 1 -5% of the wealthiest people in in America ( the top 1% of wealthy people control over 90% of all the wealth in America)
The basic question is :
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT IS A "HUMAN RIGHT"
if so, is medical care one of those rights?
Some people just don't get the sarcasm.
Your idea is OK, except that flood insurance is a government program, and we all saw what happened with Katrina.
The Health Insurance Deform bill is not about health insurance cost or health care cost, it is about controlling the sheeple and 1/6 of the economy.
Yes.. it certainly is a hydra-headed monster. Once upon a time we had a medical Profession. But for many years now, it has been the medical Industry. 'Health care industry' - but I can actually remember when your doctor would grab his bag %26amp; come to your house (like at night) - and his visit, with pills and maybe a shot.. would cost from $5 to maybe 10 or 12 bucks.. tops.
The vast changes came with Reagan. He was a puppet for corporate America.. just as Bush was. The USA is ashes. We have no route to follow out of the pit we are swallowed up in.
The Fed is a private corporate entity. Many people think it is somehow government controlled.. nada.
Sure, we are victims. We really have no way to get people nominated and elected.. by us. The ones that are picked.. they make many deals behind the scenes %26amp; have enormous amounts of funding to get onto the ticket.. and then it is mostly a choice of Frick or Frack.
What to do..?? We are more like plankton than sheeple.
Btw, I know TMI re: gliomas.. since my wife died of a glioblastoma multiforme.
so your saying that people getting healthcare instead of being denied it is a black hole of cash? i suppose that is true. by that logic, what we really ought to do is outlaw health insurance entirely, have no government plan, and only people who can afford it would go to the doctor. that way the cost of health care would plummet to meet the un-insurance inflated economic reality, the BS drug industry that is leaching insurance would collapse, the system of doctors that do nothing but refer specialists and prescribe medicine would collapse. it would be a lot like the vet, only for people. yes the economy would collapse and many people would die unnecessarily, but at least we would stop wasting money on this black hole of health care.
How about this? You pay for your own health care, and I'll pay for mine. Get your hand out of my wallet, Commie.
Yeah, look how well Medicare and Medicaid are doing. Now raise that by a power of ten. That's what the public plan will become in 20 or 30 years.
We have seen how corporate America works. From the big banks, to the big credit card companies and mortgage lenders, right. You don't pay these guys at least $10 million per year, they wouldn't even consider showing up for work. Most of them wind up getting $20 Million or $50 million when all parts of their pay and compensation and pension and healthcare and expense account are figured in.
So the idea that corporate America is ludicrously greedy and rapacious is not news to anybody who has actually been on planet Earth for the past 10 years, right.
Now comes government, and says it wants a non-greedy, and non rapacious healtg insurance company. It wants to set one up. It wants a chance to compete with the insanely greedy private companies, maybe offer a better product, or make them offer better products by giving them some honest competion.
Well, if that's all there were to the offer, only a real Chicago School Purist would object.
So, what's the big objection to the Public Option?
Here it is.
Imagine a company that wanted to sell flood insurance. OK so they sell most of their policies in the floodplain areas of the USA.
In order to attract customers they say "We will pay off on these policies even if you buy them after your house has been completely washed away and destroyed utterly by a flood."
Well, of course they sell a lot of policies, particularly after big floods. Everybody whose house has been destroyed buys a policy for $5,000 and then puts in their claim for their destroyed house for $500,000.
Miracle of miracles this company soon finds itself in big financial trouble. Why?
Because $5,000 is a much smaller number than $500,000.
Now come the company executives, and they say, "How were we to know that our business model was faulty?"
We went to Princeton, Harvard, and Yale, we studied speechmaking, and community organizing, and political theory. We have never seen the inside of any business, met any payroll, done any cost accounting, kept any books, or developed any business models.
How were we to know?
Is this really similar to a health insurance company that agrees to insure all persons regardless of pre-existing conditions.
Imagine that the person is like the house.
Imagine that the pre-existing condition, perhaps glioma of the brain, is the house already having gotten washed away in the flood last week.
Imagine that the premium is $5,000 per year.
Imagine that the operation for the glioma costs $500,000.
Now, the rule of arithmetic that we visited earlier
is still true, $5,000 is a smaller number than $500,000.
Who could possibly imagine that such a health insurance company would run into financial trouble, and quite quickly, and quite deeply?
No one in government. They went to Princeton, Harvard and Yale, you know the drill.
The problem is this: The bad flood insurance company only hurts itself, it's policyholders, its employees and it shareholders. It winds up in bankrupcy Court and gets eliminated, within about 6 months.
But the bad (crazy) U.S. Government backed health insurance company, can't go bankrupt. It has the full faith and credit of the Federal government behind it, who can print money, or take the bad debt onto the Fed Balance sheet.
So this becomes the money black hole. It's like a cash whirlpool. The money disappears down it, and never comes back, and it gets bigger and hungrier every day, every hour.
The rathole down which USA disappeared.
So -- the problem is all about the fact that the government has a completely crazy business model for how a health insurance company can operate -- and it's not their fault -- what do they know from insurance? Zilch -- they are community organizers!
So this is an idea in which everybody is a victim, even the ones coming forward with the idea now, they are victims too ''How were they to know?"What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
This administration hates free enterprise and, since day one, has been trying to destroy it piece by piece. In the past, the anti trust laws would have dealt with enterprises who were deemed "too big to fail". This administration wants one insurance company, Uncle Sam. Everything they are doing right now is meant to lead to that. They don't care how much misery they cause until they get to that point. These people are extremely manipulative and care nothing about the truth.
OK, here's my objection: It's not going to be reasonably priced, AND, it's not going to improve the overall quality of care in the USA - it's actually going to make it worse.
Secondary objection: health care industry comprises 18% of our GNP. The government already controls 30%, between the TARP companies that took bailout money, and GM. Add in health care, and VOILA! We're nearly a socialist company. Look at any of the economies in any socialist companies, and the standard of living for the average person SUCKS.
Fairly administered is a laugh. Ever try getting an answer from the IRS on your taxes? Consumer Reports says, more than half the answers on their own hotline, are WRONG. Guess who pays the fees, if you take them at their word? The poor guy who called - penalties and interest, if you're LUCKY. Jail time if you aren't.
Politicians are ignoring how health insurance companies make money, and clearly, you don't know - so I'll tell you - it's not off the premiums, it's off the reserves. Want to know what THEY are? Do the research, educate yourself.
And as far as flood insurance goes - THAT is a government program, and has been, for about 50 years. So yes, it sucks - BECAUSE IT'S RUN BY THE GOVERNMENT. Gotta laugh out loud, at that example - it's EXACTLY why we shouldn't let government run health insurance. But just to clarify a point - flood insurance doesn't KICK IN, until 30 days AFTER you've bought the policy. So you can't buy a policy retroactively, to cover a flood that's already happened. Of course, it won't work that way with HEALTH CARE, as the insurance companies WILL be required to cover stuff that's already happened.
Oh, and for the other widely used government insurance - try calling your local UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE, and see how easy it is to get a question asked. And after that experience, just think about how you want the same people to run your HEALTH CARE.What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
But don't you understand, The Public Option will be paid for by cuts in Medicare funding. Oh, but there will be one aspect of Medicare that WILL be increased and that's the so-called 'End of life counseling'.
Do they really think the American public is so stupid that they can't add 2+2?
Wow, you have a lot of time on your hands. This is easy. You said "reasonably priced and fairly administered health insurance contract."
Says who? Medicare is a disaster, so why would you want to expand it. It's expensive barely covers any medication and it's just big government run Amck.
Where does this notion that the insurance companies are greedy? I had a client in a coma and he paid his deductible and nothing else. I had a client with cancer and he paid his deductible and nothing else. I have rarely had a client with any issues that weren't easily fixed. Sure, there are plenty of bad products on the marketplace, but there are plenty of bad cars, bad homebuilders, bad mechanics, etc... it doesn't mean the government can do it better.
Bill Gates put Minesweeper on Windows to give governement workers something to do.
We left Europe for a reason. We don't want to be like Europe. We don't trust that the government can run something better. They don't have the track record. The private sector, though not perfect, has a much better record.What is the Main Objection to the Public Option in Healthcare Plan?
Medical care is NOT an insurance business
The Problem and solution is this:
Everybody is at risk. Not everybody is at the same risk but the differences are small and may change at any time.
the total cost IS paid one way or another, in money or blood (death)
Everybody Must pay something so the total covers the basics
Anybody is free to chose to pay more to by extra
NO sick person can afford the hugh medical costs of catastrophic illness, Unless, they are in the top 1 -5% of the wealthiest people in in America ( the top 1% of wealthy people control over 90% of all the wealth in America)
The basic question is :
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT IS A "HUMAN RIGHT"
if so, is medical care one of those rights?
Some people just don't get the sarcasm.
Your idea is OK, except that flood insurance is a government program, and we all saw what happened with Katrina.
The Health Insurance Deform bill is not about health insurance cost or health care cost, it is about controlling the sheeple and 1/6 of the economy.
Yes.. it certainly is a hydra-headed monster. Once upon a time we had a medical Profession. But for many years now, it has been the medical Industry. 'Health care industry' - but I can actually remember when your doctor would grab his bag %26amp; come to your house (like at night) - and his visit, with pills and maybe a shot.. would cost from $5 to maybe 10 or 12 bucks.. tops.
The vast changes came with Reagan. He was a puppet for corporate America.. just as Bush was. The USA is ashes. We have no route to follow out of the pit we are swallowed up in.
The Fed is a private corporate entity. Many people think it is somehow government controlled.. nada.
Sure, we are victims. We really have no way to get people nominated and elected.. by us. The ones that are picked.. they make many deals behind the scenes %26amp; have enormous amounts of funding to get onto the ticket.. and then it is mostly a choice of Frick or Frack.
What to do..?? We are more like plankton than sheeple.
Btw, I know TMI re: gliomas.. since my wife died of a glioblastoma multiforme.
so your saying that people getting healthcare instead of being denied it is a black hole of cash? i suppose that is true. by that logic, what we really ought to do is outlaw health insurance entirely, have no government plan, and only people who can afford it would go to the doctor. that way the cost of health care would plummet to meet the un-insurance inflated economic reality, the BS drug industry that is leaching insurance would collapse, the system of doctors that do nothing but refer specialists and prescribe medicine would collapse. it would be a lot like the vet, only for people. yes the economy would collapse and many people would die unnecessarily, but at least we would stop wasting money on this black hole of health care.
How about this? You pay for your own health care, and I'll pay for mine. Get your hand out of my wallet, Commie.
Yeah, look how well Medicare and Medicaid are doing. Now raise that by a power of ten. That's what the public plan will become in 20 or 30 years.
Rahm Emanuel is finally talking about quitting because Obama isn't ruthless enough?
Obama is the ULTIMATE Chicago gangland thug. His whole administration is filled with people who will shake you down, step on your neck, and put you in cement shoes for a bath. Now Rahm says the White House is too touchy feely? What does Rahm want? Public lynchings of those who disagree with him? Congresspeople to be tortured unless they vote his way? Billions in the hands of democrat "friends"?Rahm Emanuel is finally talking about quitting because Obama isn't ruthless enough?
He wants to be mayor of Chicago. The mayor has more power than Obama and it pays better in kick backs.
he's quitting because he's going to be indicted for murderRahm Emanuel is finally talking about quitting because Obama isn't ruthless enough?
Good riddance to him! I would prefer he leave now, rather than waiting 6-8 mos. If it doesn't pan out for him to run for Mayor of Chicago, he can always go back to ballet dancing...read he was very good at that when he was in school.
it looks like rham is going to be the next mayor of chicago, i would be amazed if he losses that election. looks like he did enough work to get support to keep destroying chicago.Rahm Emanuel is finally talking about quitting because Obama isn't ruthless enough?
Oh, please let that be true!
Rahm Emanuel gets thrown under the bus for the Obama oil spill....
Too funny.
I guess it's sort of true.
is that what rush told you
I agree. Thuggery is unattractive. Ineffective thuggery even more so. Which may be one reason so many Americans have been reacting negatively to the response of Barack Obama and his administration to BP's gulf oil spill.
Take Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's remark that he would keep his "boot on the neck" of BP, which brings to mind George Orwell's definition of totalitarianism as "a boot stamping on a human face -- forever." Except that Salazar's boot hasn't gotten much in the way of results yet.
President Obama's oil spill speech revealed, once again, how stunningly shameless he is. This relentless ideologue is not even marginally competent at masking his ongoing crusade to apply a wrecking ball to every sector of our economy and remake it in his own image.
And I do mean "his" own image. Once again, his speech was loaded with first-person references, from "I refuse to let (Gulf Coast residents lose their way of life)" to "I expect (the new commission tasked with determining the cause of the explosion) to do that work thoroughly and impartially" to "I am happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party."
Or consider Obama's undoubtedly carefully considered statement to Matt Lauer that he was consulting with experts "so I know whose *** to kick." Attacking others is a standard campaign tactic when you're in political trouble, and certainly BP, which appears to have taken unwise shortcuts in the gulf, is an attractive target.
Obama's MO is so predictable that sophisticated practitioners of Marxist transformation should be embarrassed. Then again, Obama doesn't need to be subtle; he is the president -- a president who rejects the constitutional limitations that applied to his mortal predecessors.
After sitting on his hands for months, he comes out rhetorically swinging with both barrels of his teleprompter blazing. First, declare a crisis -- meticulously distorting the facts, especially those relative to what caused the crisis. Second, isolate a scapegoat (along with the awful, resource-exploiting, oil-inhaling, pre-Obama America) to be demonized and bullied into conspiring with him to launch his transformational solution -- a solution that has nothing to do with solving the "crisis." In the meantime, shield the true culprits from any blame. Third, unveil his grandiose plan for salvation by the federal government, provided it first acquires structurally new powers. All the while, he not only downplays the government's culpability in all of this but also overstates its (and his) response to date. o_O
He wants to be mayor of Chicago. The mayor has more power than Obama and it pays better in kick backs.
he's quitting because he's going to be indicted for murderRahm Emanuel is finally talking about quitting because Obama isn't ruthless enough?
Good riddance to him! I would prefer he leave now, rather than waiting 6-8 mos. If it doesn't pan out for him to run for Mayor of Chicago, he can always go back to ballet dancing...read he was very good at that when he was in school.
it looks like rham is going to be the next mayor of chicago, i would be amazed if he losses that election. looks like he did enough work to get support to keep destroying chicago.Rahm Emanuel is finally talking about quitting because Obama isn't ruthless enough?
Oh, please let that be true!
Rahm Emanuel gets thrown under the bus for the Obama oil spill....
Too funny.
I guess it's sort of true.
is that what rush told you
I agree. Thuggery is unattractive. Ineffective thuggery even more so. Which may be one reason so many Americans have been reacting negatively to the response of Barack Obama and his administration to BP's gulf oil spill.
Take Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's remark that he would keep his "boot on the neck" of BP, which brings to mind George Orwell's definition of totalitarianism as "a boot stamping on a human face -- forever." Except that Salazar's boot hasn't gotten much in the way of results yet.
President Obama's oil spill speech revealed, once again, how stunningly shameless he is. This relentless ideologue is not even marginally competent at masking his ongoing crusade to apply a wrecking ball to every sector of our economy and remake it in his own image.
And I do mean "his" own image. Once again, his speech was loaded with first-person references, from "I refuse to let (Gulf Coast residents lose their way of life)" to "I expect (the new commission tasked with determining the cause of the explosion) to do that work thoroughly and impartially" to "I am happy to look at other ideas and approaches from either party."
Or consider Obama's undoubtedly carefully considered statement to Matt Lauer that he was consulting with experts "so I know whose *** to kick." Attacking others is a standard campaign tactic when you're in political trouble, and certainly BP, which appears to have taken unwise shortcuts in the gulf, is an attractive target.
Obama's MO is so predictable that sophisticated practitioners of Marxist transformation should be embarrassed. Then again, Obama doesn't need to be subtle; he is the president -- a president who rejects the constitutional limitations that applied to his mortal predecessors.
After sitting on his hands for months, he comes out rhetorically swinging with both barrels of his teleprompter blazing. First, declare a crisis -- meticulously distorting the facts, especially those relative to what caused the crisis. Second, isolate a scapegoat (along with the awful, resource-exploiting, oil-inhaling, pre-Obama America) to be demonized and bullied into conspiring with him to launch his transformational solution -- a solution that has nothing to do with solving the "crisis." In the meantime, shield the true culprits from any blame. Third, unveil his grandiose plan for salvation by the federal government, provided it first acquires structurally new powers. All the while, he not only downplays the government's culpability in all of this but also overstates its (and his) response to date. o_O
What do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
Obama's Failed Appeal for Chicago Games Seen as 'Teachable Moment'
Matthew Mosk
President Obama's failed Olympic gambit Friday was a blow to his image on the world stage and a very public humbling experience for a man who has grown unaccustomed to losing elections.
After carving out 20 hours to try and secure the games for his hometown of Chicago - about 15 of them spent in the air between Washington and Copenhagen, where the International Olympic Committee ultimately voted for Rio de Janeiro to host the 2016 Summer Olympics - Mr. Obama emerged sheepishly from Marine One Friday afternoon and loped, head down, across the South Lawn. During brief remarks a few moments later, he congratulated the people of Brazil, and expressed no regrets.
"I believe it's always a worthwhile endeavor to promote and boost the United States of America," he said.
Whether the Copenhagen defeat will carry lasting implications for Mr. Obama's image back home, though, remained a subject of intense debate even after the president returned to the Oval Office with a commitment to focus on more substantive matters, such as the latest flagging employment numbers.
To many of the president's allies, the episode represented a brief political diversion that was worthwhile on the chance it could elevate Chicago's bid at a time when Brazil was emerging as a sentimental favorite.
To Mr. Obama's critics, the trip resonated as a sign that the White House has begun to overestimate the value of Mr. Obama's personal magnetism and the power of a well-delivered speech. The episode was, in the view of Republican strategist Todd Harris, something the president might call a teachable moment.
"I think there's an arrogance that permeates just about everything the Obama administration does," Mr. Harris said. "I don't think the IOC's decision will hurt him politically, but it is illuminating and hopefully will be a learning experience about how much influence he does or does not have abroad."
Inside the White House, the decision to jet to Copenhagen to make a last-ditch appeal to the members of the International Olympic Committee, while not the original plan, began to look like a worthwhile risk. From the vantage point of seasoned Olympics watchers, even Republicans like former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, the move seemed inspired.
Mr. Romney told reporters he thought the president's personal outreach would seal the deal. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva thought it would, too.
"We saw a plane, President Obama's plane, Air Force One, arriving and the television was showing all the time President Obama. And my friends were saying 'Oh, we've lost now. President Obama has arrived and we're going to lose," he said Friday in an emotional interview.
But the high expectations only made it look worse when Chicago's bid was knocked out in the first round of voting.
"The president put his prestige on the line and to have him lose, it was really a slap in the face to the United States," said John Feehery, who served as top aide to former Republican House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. "I do think this is instructive about how seriously the international community takes Obama. It seems they don't take him very seriously."
Mr. Obama's supporters said the sting of the defeat will only be momentary.
Robert Zimmerman, a public relations executive and Democratic National Committee member from New York, said the 24/7 news cycle will initially draw attention to the defeat.
"This will be a major story for the pundits, and it will be replaced in the next 24 hours by something else," Mr. Zimmerman said. "That's the strength and weakness of the 24/7 news cycle. Nothing is forever, neither the good news nor the disappointments."
Democratic strategist Howard Wolfson said the outcome reminded him of the trip New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg made four years ago in an attempt to secure an Olympic bid for his city.
Mr. Wolfson, now an adviser to Mr. Bloomberg, said when the mayor returned empty-handed, voters still thanked him for the effort.
"I think it was right for President Obama to go and make the pitch," Mr. Wolfson said. "They clearly went in another direction. But the president needs to be able to go and make a strong case for the country."
How the public responds may help future presidents assess whether the Olympic bid process is an appropriate stage for an American president, said Dana Perino, who served as press secretary to former President George W. Bush.
Unlike other countries, Ms. Perino said, "the tradition in America has been that we don't use our government to influence our Olympic team, and presidents typically leave it to the private sector to win that bid."
But she, for one, does not fault Mr. Obama for breaking with that tradition and making the effort.
"I think President Obama sincerely wanted to help his hometown and the country to get the Olympics because itWhat do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
Another example of his inability to place the public above the greed and corruption he dragged with him into the White House.He expected to gain from supporting his Chicago cronies back home with the IOC selection of Chicago, but it blew up in his face once more, because he never learns.
I think we should be proud that Obama made the effort. We have no reason to scorn him for not succeeding.What do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
I bet it was BS and he was just using us to take Michelle on yet another Euro trip for shopping.
All I heard when listening to his speech was 'me, me, me, me ,me' and not why the Olympics would be good in Chicago and how Chicago could improve the Olympics. He was not a salesman selling his product which he should have been.What do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
His ego took a big kick. So bet it. He should have stayed home and saved all of us taxpayers some bucks. But does he ever think about that? No way...he thinks about his image first, always his image first! Disgusting, and this "show" of his importance indicates that he's definitely losing his "glow". Thank God for that!
BY THE WAY, I NEVER COMPLETELY READ QUESTIONS THE LENGTH OF YOURS. YOUR QUESTION COULD HAVE BEEN POSTED WITH A LOT LESS WORDS, BELIEVE ME.
I think it is about time that Obama quit promoting himself and finally do something as a president. He certainly accomplished nothing as a US Senator A president has to be able to do something other than vote present. It is like he doesn't want to do anything for fear of damaging his own self image.
Just like he doesn't want us to know anything about his years at Harvard Law School., he continues to have a fear of us discovering things that he feels the need to stay hidden.. For some reason he will not open up his hand written long version of his birth certificate in Hawaii.
He has certainly been doing an incredible job of damaging the image of the United States in the eyes of our foreign countries. We have totally lost the respect of our enemies and they don't fear us, as a strong country. Actually, we are the laughing stock of Iran and many other countries. Now, Obama has damaged his self-inflated image in the eyes of foreign countries. He has finally proven himself to be a empty suit with over used words that he uses to promote himself.
Obama needs to learn to stay out of the private sector. He is not the president of the IOC and had no logical reason to have gone to Denmark with Michelle and Oprah. I think his appearance hurt Chicago's chances.
Simply put, Obama cannot control everyone and everything. He nees to roll up his sleeves and do the job he is being paid to do. America needs a leader, not a world-wide celebrity, who spends his time apologizing for America.
Oh please... get over it... and would you people please stop using the zero when you write Obama's name. You did it in your question. It's really immature.
Matthew Mosk is an idiot. I mean, he can write articles and get published, I guess... but this is a load of tired partisan drivel.
The Obamas went to the Olympic Commission and supported the bid to have the Olympics in the U.S.A. That's nice. I don't mind. Kind of nice, in fact.
Chicago is the adopted hometown of the Obama's. That's nice. Now it even makes more sense to me why they might want to strongly support the U.S. bid for the Olympic games.
Big freakin' woop.
People can moan, cry and complain about Obama and say "Oh, that was a bad move" or "Oh. Look at that. The Obama's failed."
But... you know what? What I see is that my President stood up and spoke out for having the Olympics in the United States.
I don't have a problem with that.
Mr. Mosk's tiring article is petty, nit-picky and, frankly, uninteresting to me.
I know what my President did - and I liked it.
Teachable moment. LOL. Where was the teachable moment when that teen was just beaten to death in Chicago? http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Rev.Jackson鈥?/a>
i would guess he will be the first and last sitting president to make such an appeal. while i am neutral on his involvement, i hope it was a learning moment for him. this is the first olympics ever held in south america and i say good for them, i would rather be in rio than chicago anyway.
If Obama says " I believe its a worthwhile endeavor to promote and boost the United States of America" then why does he continuously trash us on the national and world stage ? Let me rephrase that for you MR OBAMA !! What you really meant to say was this "I believe its a worthwhile endeavor to promote mine and boost my political cronies best interests" God im so sick and tired of this man Obama , his lying , his half truths and obvious political patronage"
What a crime for the President of your country to try and help seal the Olympics for Chicago.
Obama is the best thing that happened to the USA in the last 50 years - though it seems its only the rest of the world that see it!
Matthew Mosk
President Obama's failed Olympic gambit Friday was a blow to his image on the world stage and a very public humbling experience for a man who has grown unaccustomed to losing elections.
After carving out 20 hours to try and secure the games for his hometown of Chicago - about 15 of them spent in the air between Washington and Copenhagen, where the International Olympic Committee ultimately voted for Rio de Janeiro to host the 2016 Summer Olympics - Mr. Obama emerged sheepishly from Marine One Friday afternoon and loped, head down, across the South Lawn. During brief remarks a few moments later, he congratulated the people of Brazil, and expressed no regrets.
"I believe it's always a worthwhile endeavor to promote and boost the United States of America," he said.
Whether the Copenhagen defeat will carry lasting implications for Mr. Obama's image back home, though, remained a subject of intense debate even after the president returned to the Oval Office with a commitment to focus on more substantive matters, such as the latest flagging employment numbers.
To many of the president's allies, the episode represented a brief political diversion that was worthwhile on the chance it could elevate Chicago's bid at a time when Brazil was emerging as a sentimental favorite.
To Mr. Obama's critics, the trip resonated as a sign that the White House has begun to overestimate the value of Mr. Obama's personal magnetism and the power of a well-delivered speech. The episode was, in the view of Republican strategist Todd Harris, something the president might call a teachable moment.
"I think there's an arrogance that permeates just about everything the Obama administration does," Mr. Harris said. "I don't think the IOC's decision will hurt him politically, but it is illuminating and hopefully will be a learning experience about how much influence he does or does not have abroad."
Inside the White House, the decision to jet to Copenhagen to make a last-ditch appeal to the members of the International Olympic Committee, while not the original plan, began to look like a worthwhile risk. From the vantage point of seasoned Olympics watchers, even Republicans like former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, the move seemed inspired.
Mr. Romney told reporters he thought the president's personal outreach would seal the deal. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva thought it would, too.
"We saw a plane, President Obama's plane, Air Force One, arriving and the television was showing all the time President Obama. And my friends were saying 'Oh, we've lost now. President Obama has arrived and we're going to lose," he said Friday in an emotional interview.
But the high expectations only made it look worse when Chicago's bid was knocked out in the first round of voting.
"The president put his prestige on the line and to have him lose, it was really a slap in the face to the United States," said John Feehery, who served as top aide to former Republican House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. "I do think this is instructive about how seriously the international community takes Obama. It seems they don't take him very seriously."
Mr. Obama's supporters said the sting of the defeat will only be momentary.
Robert Zimmerman, a public relations executive and Democratic National Committee member from New York, said the 24/7 news cycle will initially draw attention to the defeat.
"This will be a major story for the pundits, and it will be replaced in the next 24 hours by something else," Mr. Zimmerman said. "That's the strength and weakness of the 24/7 news cycle. Nothing is forever, neither the good news nor the disappointments."
Democratic strategist Howard Wolfson said the outcome reminded him of the trip New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg made four years ago in an attempt to secure an Olympic bid for his city.
Mr. Wolfson, now an adviser to Mr. Bloomberg, said when the mayor returned empty-handed, voters still thanked him for the effort.
"I think it was right for President Obama to go and make the pitch," Mr. Wolfson said. "They clearly went in another direction. But the president needs to be able to go and make a strong case for the country."
How the public responds may help future presidents assess whether the Olympic bid process is an appropriate stage for an American president, said Dana Perino, who served as press secretary to former President George W. Bush.
Unlike other countries, Ms. Perino said, "the tradition in America has been that we don't use our government to influence our Olympic team, and presidents typically leave it to the private sector to win that bid."
But she, for one, does not fault Mr. Obama for breaking with that tradition and making the effort.
"I think President Obama sincerely wanted to help his hometown and the country to get the Olympics because itWhat do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
Another example of his inability to place the public above the greed and corruption he dragged with him into the White House.He expected to gain from supporting his Chicago cronies back home with the IOC selection of Chicago, but it blew up in his face once more, because he never learns.
I think we should be proud that Obama made the effort. We have no reason to scorn him for not succeeding.What do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
I bet it was BS and he was just using us to take Michelle on yet another Euro trip for shopping.
All I heard when listening to his speech was 'me, me, me, me ,me' and not why the Olympics would be good in Chicago and how Chicago could improve the Olympics. He was not a salesman selling his product which he should have been.What do you think about THE 0bama's FAILED grandstand for the Chicago Olympics?
His ego took a big kick. So bet it. He should have stayed home and saved all of us taxpayers some bucks. But does he ever think about that? No way...he thinks about his image first, always his image first! Disgusting, and this "show" of his importance indicates that he's definitely losing his "glow". Thank God for that!
BY THE WAY, I NEVER COMPLETELY READ QUESTIONS THE LENGTH OF YOURS. YOUR QUESTION COULD HAVE BEEN POSTED WITH A LOT LESS WORDS, BELIEVE ME.
I think it is about time that Obama quit promoting himself and finally do something as a president. He certainly accomplished nothing as a US Senator A president has to be able to do something other than vote present. It is like he doesn't want to do anything for fear of damaging his own self image.
Just like he doesn't want us to know anything about his years at Harvard Law School., he continues to have a fear of us discovering things that he feels the need to stay hidden.. For some reason he will not open up his hand written long version of his birth certificate in Hawaii.
He has certainly been doing an incredible job of damaging the image of the United States in the eyes of our foreign countries. We have totally lost the respect of our enemies and they don't fear us, as a strong country. Actually, we are the laughing stock of Iran and many other countries. Now, Obama has damaged his self-inflated image in the eyes of foreign countries. He has finally proven himself to be a empty suit with over used words that he uses to promote himself.
Obama needs to learn to stay out of the private sector. He is not the president of the IOC and had no logical reason to have gone to Denmark with Michelle and Oprah. I think his appearance hurt Chicago's chances.
Simply put, Obama cannot control everyone and everything. He nees to roll up his sleeves and do the job he is being paid to do. America needs a leader, not a world-wide celebrity, who spends his time apologizing for America.
Oh please... get over it... and would you people please stop using the zero when you write Obama's name. You did it in your question. It's really immature.
Matthew Mosk is an idiot. I mean, he can write articles and get published, I guess... but this is a load of tired partisan drivel.
The Obamas went to the Olympic Commission and supported the bid to have the Olympics in the U.S.A. That's nice. I don't mind. Kind of nice, in fact.
Chicago is the adopted hometown of the Obama's. That's nice. Now it even makes more sense to me why they might want to strongly support the U.S. bid for the Olympic games.
Big freakin' woop.
People can moan, cry and complain about Obama and say "Oh, that was a bad move" or "Oh. Look at that. The Obama's failed."
But... you know what? What I see is that my President stood up and spoke out for having the Olympics in the United States.
I don't have a problem with that.
Mr. Mosk's tiring article is petty, nit-picky and, frankly, uninteresting to me.
I know what my President did - and I liked it.
Teachable moment. LOL. Where was the teachable moment when that teen was just beaten to death in Chicago? http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Rev.Jackson鈥?/a>
i would guess he will be the first and last sitting president to make such an appeal. while i am neutral on his involvement, i hope it was a learning moment for him. this is the first olympics ever held in south america and i say good for them, i would rather be in rio than chicago anyway.
If Obama says " I believe its a worthwhile endeavor to promote and boost the United States of America" then why does he continuously trash us on the national and world stage ? Let me rephrase that for you MR OBAMA !! What you really meant to say was this "I believe its a worthwhile endeavor to promote mine and boost my political cronies best interests" God im so sick and tired of this man Obama , his lying , his half truths and obvious political patronage"
What a crime for the President of your country to try and help seal the Olympics for Chicago.
Obama is the best thing that happened to the USA in the last 50 years - though it seems its only the rest of the world that see it!
How do i research a local car accident?
there was a pretty bad car accident right outside my house. i would like to know how to find out what happened. i live in chicago. are there police records or accident reccords or any public records i can look at? it happened on Carmen and Ashland.How do i research a local car accident?
I was told that the two people in the Wisconsin car that blew the stop sign were killed. I've looked and looked for a report about it to no avail. It was a terrible tragedy....how can it go unnoticed? If you are able to find out anymore about the victims or the details, please post.
I was told that the two people in the Wisconsin car that blew the stop sign were killed. I've looked and looked for a report about it to no avail. It was a terrible tragedy....how can it go unnoticed? If you are able to find out anymore about the victims or the details, please post.
Should I buy a house or condo?
Hello. I am looking to buy a place in Florida. I am retired, but I'm 47. My wife sadly passed two years ago. I have found two really great places in Palm Beach Gardens.
1. There is a condo in a high rise building that is for sale. I've looked at it, and it looks great. The elevators go directly to your own private lobby or foyer. It is a 3 bedroom 4 bath. Huge views of the Atlantic ocean everywhere. A wraparound Lanai, tile flooring, huge walk in closet, huge master bath with his and her showers, jacuzzi. The building also has a pool, private beach, hot tub, sauna, steam, bar, dining room, and theater. It is 24/7 secure, 24/7 concierge and room service. The only problem is, I love golfing, so I would have to purchase membership at a club 3 miles out, and play there. Also, valet and a garage and dock for boat.
2. The second place is a house in a golf/resort gated community also located in Palm Beach. Again, it is 24/7 security and gate house. The house is a 4 bedroom, 5.5 bath. My taste for interior is modern white flooring, with modern dark wood furniture. However, since this house was built in 1990's, it is very old looking. I would definitely need to re model most of the house. It comes with a pool, hot tub, and dock. Also, the house has theater, elevator, living, huge kitchen, huge dining, huge master, huge master bath. The best thing though, is that this house is in this wonderful community. Two 18 hole courses, public pool and hot tub, spa, sauna, steam, tennis courts, bridge room, four different dining rooms, business center, and hotel/resort/concierge style staff that cater to any desire, also, I could drive a golf cart around the community. They also have food delivery, catering, and geat big parties throughout the year. I even hear, that in the more expensive deleopment across the street, Michael Jordan is building a house. But, I would also have valet service.
so I'm really stumped on which to get. I have a pretty large boat and a car. I have a small apartment in Chicago, so I would probably be down south in the fall, winter, and a little in the summer. The condo would be great for being on my own, and I like it because it is high up, and for the views. But the house is in a huge community where I could socialize. Please help me.Should I buy a house or condo?
I would definitly go with the house! Good luck in making your decision.Should I buy a house or condo?
You dont mention if either is oceanfront etc or even price. IF there is a big price difference, that could be your deciding factor... but from your writing, it sounds like whatever the price, it is not a problem for you. Both places seem nice and have extra services, etc.. but I think for you, you would be happiest with the home and the bigger social scene, where you can get to know your neighbors and have some fun--especially since you will be spending a lot of time there.
good luck and enjoy!!Should I buy a house or condo?
I've lived in a condo before...what I liked about it was that it was (mostly) maintenance free. I bought a house a little over a year ago (in FL) and of course, I have to keep up with the maintenance, etc. I have to say though, I'm happier now that I have a home, my own yard, etc plus, like you mentioned, it's easier to socialize and be out there. Goodluck :)
1. There is a condo in a high rise building that is for sale. I've looked at it, and it looks great. The elevators go directly to your own private lobby or foyer. It is a 3 bedroom 4 bath. Huge views of the Atlantic ocean everywhere. A wraparound Lanai, tile flooring, huge walk in closet, huge master bath with his and her showers, jacuzzi. The building also has a pool, private beach, hot tub, sauna, steam, bar, dining room, and theater. It is 24/7 secure, 24/7 concierge and room service. The only problem is, I love golfing, so I would have to purchase membership at a club 3 miles out, and play there. Also, valet and a garage and dock for boat.
2. The second place is a house in a golf/resort gated community also located in Palm Beach. Again, it is 24/7 security and gate house. The house is a 4 bedroom, 5.5 bath. My taste for interior is modern white flooring, with modern dark wood furniture. However, since this house was built in 1990's, it is very old looking. I would definitely need to re model most of the house. It comes with a pool, hot tub, and dock. Also, the house has theater, elevator, living, huge kitchen, huge dining, huge master, huge master bath. The best thing though, is that this house is in this wonderful community. Two 18 hole courses, public pool and hot tub, spa, sauna, steam, tennis courts, bridge room, four different dining rooms, business center, and hotel/resort/concierge style staff that cater to any desire, also, I could drive a golf cart around the community. They also have food delivery, catering, and geat big parties throughout the year. I even hear, that in the more expensive deleopment across the street, Michael Jordan is building a house. But, I would also have valet service.
so I'm really stumped on which to get. I have a pretty large boat and a car. I have a small apartment in Chicago, so I would probably be down south in the fall, winter, and a little in the summer. The condo would be great for being on my own, and I like it because it is high up, and for the views. But the house is in a huge community where I could socialize. Please help me.Should I buy a house or condo?
I would definitly go with the house! Good luck in making your decision.Should I buy a house or condo?
You dont mention if either is oceanfront etc or even price. IF there is a big price difference, that could be your deciding factor... but from your writing, it sounds like whatever the price, it is not a problem for you. Both places seem nice and have extra services, etc.. but I think for you, you would be happiest with the home and the bigger social scene, where you can get to know your neighbors and have some fun--especially since you will be spending a lot of time there.
good luck and enjoy!!Should I buy a house or condo?
I've lived in a condo before...what I liked about it was that it was (mostly) maintenance free. I bought a house a little over a year ago (in FL) and of course, I have to keep up with the maintenance, etc. I have to say though, I'm happier now that I have a home, my own yard, etc plus, like you mentioned, it's easier to socialize and be out there. Goodluck :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)