Politics: Where we struggle to kneel in the muck.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Is it possible that the tax base has been dropping because the section 8 housing has a lowr value?

That would be a great theory, but there are like 50 different communities out there (basically due South), and they are all slowly slipping under as the subsidies on Chicago's south side are sent a-packin. U of C/Hyde Park? Sorta, no. I lived all over Chicago at one time or another. My parents were the last white folks on their block. The experience of fleeing was common, in fact pervasive.

Sorry if you misunderstand the racial overtones to this. I'm not saying that you were the first guy to pack up when a black family moved onto your block (South Shore used to be Jewish, as did the area around Douglas Park). Nor the second. Or the third.

But at some point, in huge swaths of Chicago, whites who lived on the south side and the west side were between the first and the last. And I'm not saying any of y'all are any more guilty than me... though I once was an original gentrifier.

So if the proposition is acceptable to you and Sebby that section 8 would be okay (really, in some small measure) in your neighborhood or all others (and sure its okay in mine, just not 25%), than I feel like we are making progress here.

Great progress.

Hello

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
That would be a great theory, but there are like 50 different communities out there (basically due South), and they are all slowly slipping under as the subsidies on Chicago's south side are sent a-packin. U of C/Hyde Park? Sorta, no. I lived all over Chicago at one time or another. My parents were the last white folks on their block. The experience of fleeing was common, in fact pervasive.

Sorry if you misunderstand the racial overtones to this. I'm not saying that you were the first guy to pack up when a black family moved onto your block (South Shore used to be Jewish, as did the area around Douglas Park). Nor the second. Or the third.

But at some point, in huge swaths of Chicago, whites who lived on the south side and the west side were between the first and the last. And I'm not saying any of y'all are any more guilty than me... though I once was an original gentrifier.

So if the proposition is acceptable to you and Sebby that section 8 would be okay (really, in some small measure) in your neighborhood or all others (and sure its okay in mine, just not 25%), than I feel like we are making progress here.

Great progress.

Hello

You are assuming facts not in evidence about wonk. How are you so sure he's white?

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
He said "more likeable" not "likeable."

Nixon v. Kennedy = Kennedy
Nixon v. Humphrey or McGovern=Nixon

Exactly. Although one has to worry if Hank is the one doing interpretations for you. No offense Hank.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
Agree. The Dems need a coupla hard, pipe-hittin' muthafuckas. Have they ever had one? The Republicans have plenty.*

*but that's b/c they're always so angry. Old angry bitter white men telling the neighbor kids to "STAY OFF MY LAWN" while shaking their fists.

Poor form to take shots at Baggins while he's not around.

S_A_M

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Exactly. Although one has to worry if Hank is the one doing interpretations for you. No offense Hank.

The mind boggles at the thought that Nixon was more likeable than Humphrey or McGovern. Or that Johnson was more likeable than Goldwater. And I'm not sure that I buy that Ford and Dukakis weren't more likable than Carter and Bush. But in the hazy fog after an election, it's easy to decide that the person who won was bound to won because they were more popular, or something.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Several on this board have been passing along this myth (Ty, SAM), so I'm wondering what the lefty blogs have to say about this.



http://www.townhall.com/columnists/r...20040930.shtml

I don't know what the blogs have to say, but I think all I did was note the remarkable conincidence between the timing of the unprecedented relief of Shinseki early (forcing him into retirement) and the public statements re the amount of troops needed.

I may haev got the sequence wrong, but that wasn't my point (I think). A few weeks before or after -- the bottom line is the same. Do you think his statement in Congress was the first time he ever gave those estimates? Or, do you think he was telling the same things privately beforehand to his Boss (SecDef) and the other civilian morons Bush put in place at DOD?

Lots of professionals said things that Rumsfeld and/or Bush did not want to hear, which contradicted the new orthodoxy of the SecDef. If Rummy got tired of tuning them out, he weeded them out and put other people in place. I guess that's his prerogative, but the problem arises when the original folks were right and you just didn't want to listen.

This adminitration (particularly civilian DOD) has made a habit of pising on us and telling us its raining. I'm amazed at the number of people who seem to like it just fine.

S_A_M

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
I have about as much time for Oprah as I do for Drudge.

Ignoring successful business models. I like that. Bold.

For now on, I'm calling you Delorean.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

If there had been any doubt that Robert Novak deserves his own circle of Hell, this confirms it. Novak outed a CIA officer as the probably leaker of the National Intelligence Estimate. Burning sources is apparently OK if you're doing a Republican administration's dirty work, but not otherwise.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
An e-mail from Andrew Sullivan's site...

you know Andy's changed sides when I stop quoting him... and Ty picks him up.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If there had been any doubt that Robert Novak deserves his own circle of Hell, this confirms it. Novak outed a CIA officer as the probably leaker of the National Intelligence Estimate. Burning sources is apparently OK if you're doing a Republican administration's dirty work, but not otherwise.

Novak's an idiot. He should have died years ago - his mind hasn't been there since 1999, but for some reason, he keeps breathing and speaking.

Jon Stewart nailed Novak perfectly in his recurring bit "Robert Novak: Douchebag of Liberty."

Somebody put the senile fuck out of his misery.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Is it possible that Section 8 vouchers don't pay for much, and can only cover housing in the worst neighborhoods?

That wouldn't explain a shrinking tax base. In order for that to be the cause, one would have to assume that previously higher value housing was torn down and replaced with dilapidated housing.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
That would be a great theory, but there are like 50 different communities out there (basically due South), and they are all slowly slipping under as the subsidies on Chicago's south side are sent a-packin. U of C/Hyde Park? Sorta, no. I lived all over Chicago at one time or another. My parents were the last white folks on their block. The experience of fleeing was common, in fact pervasive.

Sorry if you misunderstand the racial overtones to this. I'm not saying that you were the first guy to pack up when a black family moved onto your block (South Shore used to be Jewish, as did the area around Douglas Park). Nor the second. Or the third.

But at some point, in huge swaths of Chicago, whites who lived on the south side and the west side were between the first and the last. And I'm not saying any of y'all are any more guilty than me... though I once was an original gentrifier.

So if the proposition is acceptable to you and Sebby that section 8 would be okay (really, in some small measure) in your neighborhood or all others (and sure its okay in mine, just not 25%), than I feel like we are making progress here.

Great progress.

Hello

I'm not sure about progress. The very first thing I posted on section 8 was that I felt it should be spread across an entire urban and suburban area.

I believe I first advocated that position in a high school history class. But maybe you were referring to Sebby when you spoke of progress.

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by taxwonk
That wouldn't explain a shrinking tax base. In order for that to be the cause, one would have to assume that previously higher value housing was torn down and replaced with dilapidated housing.

Different theory. Declining property values and fleeing businesses.

[SlaveNoMore]

Penske goes on hiatus, and all of a sudden, Not Me disappears.

Coincidence?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Penske goes on hiatus, and all of a sudden, Not Me disappears.

Coincidence?

Penske has a hoo-ha?