normiss 906 #1 January 24, 2011 NO! mayor.... What to do with all that donor money.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #2 January 24, 2011 Quote NO! mayor.... What to do with all that donor money.... Hopefully the SC of Il won't over turn it again.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #3 January 24, 2011 just kiddingWhat do you Chicago people think? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 906 #4 January 24, 2011 Loved one of the comments below the article.... "seeing that dead people have been known to vote in Chicago, why not a mayor that doesn't live there..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TriGirl 349 #5 January 24, 2011 So, did he live in Chicago before working at the White House? I think government service like that should be considered like it is for military. We all know that White House jobs are like a new duty station. Let them maintain a "home of record" where they are registered to vote and pay any applicable taxes.See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus Shut Up & Jump! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #6 January 24, 2011 Rahm is a fucking asshole. So HAH!"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #7 January 24, 2011 Quote So, did he live in Chicago before working at the White House? I think government service like that should be considered like it is for military. We all know that White House jobs are like a new duty station. Let them maintain a "home of record" where they are registered to vote and pay any applicable taxes. I don't think that he paid te appropriate taxes though. He rented his house out and had no other address. I can see that if even he had kept a PO Box, but he didn't do that either. Too bad - So Sad - Neener neener Neeeener . . . I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #8 January 24, 2011 Quote Quote So, did he live in Chicago before working at the White House? I think government service like that should be considered like it is for military. We all know that White House jobs are like a new duty station. Let them maintain a "home of record" where they are registered to vote and pay any applicable taxes. I don't think that he paid te appropriate taxes though. He rented his house out and had no other address. I can see that if even he had kept a PO Box, but he didn't do that either. Too bad - So Sad - Neener neener Neeeener . . . Now if only we could find the proof that Obama WAS ABSOLUTELY born in the U.S.A.! "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #9 January 25, 2011 Quote: Emanuel said; the "people of the city of Chicago deserve the right to make the decision on who they want to be their next mayor." He doesn't seem to think that the residency rules, or the opinions of the judges, matter. Besides, the people of Chicago created those residency rules, and appointed those judges. Now all of a sudden he thinks he's above all that, and shouldn't have to comply with the requirements or court findings. That's a bit arrogant... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TriGirl 349 #10 January 25, 2011 I rent out my house in Arizona, and I still pay property tax there (I did say "applicable" taxes). While I still had Michigan as my home of record, I had to file a state tax return and pay applicable state income taxes, and I didn't own property there. Under the current set-up, I know of no government civilians who retain state residency when they're doing their jobs elsewhere. I'm just saying maybe we should consider that option.See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus Shut Up & Jump! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 906 #11 January 25, 2011 I think it really opens the door to a non resident running for office though. We should have local residents representing local citizens regarding local issues. If someone is paying New York state taxes and spending most of their time there do you really think they honestly care about local issues in Bumfuck Kansas (sorry Kansas, only an example....)? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,507 #12 January 25, 2011 I have lived in Oklahoma AND several states at the same time. In some cases, over the residency requirement for the State I was living in. I paid taxes in both States and my accountant would have to recover the taxes paid in the State in which I was living. When a cop pulled me over down in Texas (state income tax aside), he asked me where I was living and told him. He asked me how long I'd been in Texas and I told him a little over a year. He told me I needed to get a Texas Driver's License. I explained that I did not and told him, "Ya know what? They got a form for that." Said I had lived in many States and they all got a form for something. He chuckled also, and said, "Ya know, you're right." Here's your form... for speeding (we both laughed at this point). Thank you, Sir. Trust me on this... even in the military as trigirl suggests... there's an HOR; but there's also an SLR Form.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #13 January 25, 2011 QuoteSo, did he live in Chicago before working at the White House? I think government service like that should be considered like it is for military. We all know that White House jobs are like a new duty station. Let them maintain a "home of record" where they are registered to vote and pay any applicable taxes. For voting, that seems to be more or less the case. Candidacy, however, requires that the candidate also have been resident in Chicago for a year preceding the election - a more stringent requirement than for simply voting. Quote(65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-5) (from Ch. 24, par. 3.1-10-5) Sec. 3.1-10-5. Qualifications; elective office. (a) A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment, except as provided in subsection (c) of Section 3.1-20-25, subsection (b) of Section 3.1-25-75, Section 5-2-2, or Section 5-2-11. NB: exceptions in the quote are concerning aldermen for newly created districts after a census.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #14 January 25, 2011 Quote NO! mayor.... What to do with all that donor money.... Rahm and his buddy Obama have used this type of tactic to win elections before (getting someone kicked off the ballot on a technacality) nice to see it go against him this time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyBoyd 0 #15 January 25, 2011 For those who are interested, here is a link to case documents filed in the Illinois Supreme Court. http://www.state.il.us/court/SupremeCourt/SpecialMatters/2011/111773.asp The Ill. Supreme Ct. will hear the case on an expedited basis. Because of new regulations at work, I cannot comment publicly on the merits of this case. In the unlikely event anyone is interested in my opinion on the case, p.m. me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,184 #16 January 25, 2011 Quote Quote NO! mayor.... What to do with all that donor money.... Hopefully the SC of Il won't over turn it again. Have you seen the other candidates?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #17 January 26, 2011 Quote Quote Quote NO! mayor.... What to do with all that donor money.... Hopefully the SC of Il won't over turn it again. Have you seen the other candidates? Did they send dead fish to people they disagreed with too?Or not pay their taxes until they got caught?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #18 January 26, 2011 Update: The IL State just overturned a part of the mid-level appellate court's ruling that had knocked Emmanual off the ballot. The latest order is that Emmanuel's name must stay on the ballot, and ballots must continue to be printed with Emmanuel's name on it, until the State Supreme Court issues its final ruling on the merits of the case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #19 January 26, 2011 Great. Hopefully the Court will take their time and Rahm will spend $millions campaigning only to be deemed unqualified as the election nears. Since we all know how corrupt any politician from Chicago is, it's reasonable to assume he will win only to have his election nullified later. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 3 #20 January 26, 2011 QuoteHopefully the Court will take their time Unlikely. The election is soon, so the case is fast-tracked. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 906 #21 January 26, 2011 Great. So his name WILL be on the ballot no matter what. This looks to be typical Chicago politics. I can see him getting majority votes but not allowed to serve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #22 January 26, 2011 Quote Quote Hopefully the Court will take their time Unlikely. The election is soon, so the case is fast-tracked. So we may have to wait to see if they paid off enough Judges, huh? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wayneflorida 0 #23 January 26, 2011 QuoteQuoteHopefully the Court will take their time Unlikely. The election is soon, so the case is fast-tracked. Early voting starts next Monday and election day is Feb 22, I believe. SC of IL should have ruling near weekend maybe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #24 January 26, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteHopefully the Court will take their time Unlikely. The election is soon, so the case is fast-tracked. Early voting starts next Monday and election day is Feb 22, I believe. SC of IL should have ruling near weekend maybe. And the actual ruling as I understand it (concerning the ballots) that until the SC of IL rules, no ballots shall be printed without his name. That does not yet mean he is on the ballot"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #25 January 26, 2011 QuoteAnd the actual ruling as I understand it (concerning the ballots) that until the SC of IL rules, no ballots shall be printed without his name. That does not yet mean he is on the ballot That's a bad approach, actually. If the court rules he cannot run, then they've got a stockpile of worthless ballots, and it's too late to print good ones in time for the election. And that will lead to scores of people claiming that their rights were violated because they couldn't vote. What they need to do instead, is print the ballots BOTH ways, so that whatever the outcome of the court decision, they're ready to go. Then just make darned sure that the boxes don't get mixed up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
