AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.
Click here to visit the new home of Politics Daily!
A day later, the state Supreme Court, in a one-page order, said the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners should include Emanuel's name on any ballots being printed in advance of the Feb. 22 primary.
"Almost 300,000 [of the 2 million total] ballots had actually already been printed. Now, they're re-formatting the ballot to include the name of Rahm Emanuel on the ballot and that printing will then begin again."
There were three Appellate Judges, two who were black ladies and one white male. The two black Appellate Judges voted against Emanuel while the white Appellate Judge voted for Emanuel. Yes, even in the high court, there is, unfortunately, racial divide. I think these ladies should be investigated for their true motive.
January 27 2011 at 7:37 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyBeing a " FORMER " resident of Chicago, I can now sit back and chuckle about the political hacks and all the underhanded Democratic controlled tricks to control the city - hope he gets the boot - and if he does, then look for his buddy, THE ANOINTED ONE, to put him back on the Gov't payroll in Washington - he WILL be on someone's payroll, you can make book on that !!!!
January 26 2011 at 6:26 AM Report abuse Permalink +1 rate up rate down ReplyThe big question isn't what the law says, but what the intent of the law is. The intent of the law is to prevent outsiders, non-Chicagoans, persons without knowledge of Chicago and without daily living in Chicago from running for mayor. I'm not a Rahm fan, but if justice is fair I think he should be allowed to run. Chicago was, is and will be his home. Being "at the service of the President" should not disqualify him.
January 26 2011 at 2:40 AM Report abuse Permalink -1 rate up rate down ReplyThis whole situation is an attempt to subvert the peoples choices. Let him on the ballot and give the people the choice. If we want him as mayor we want him. We don't need political wrangling to limit our options. It would be grievously wrong to punish him for going to Washington to serve the people and we use it as an excuse to say he is no longer a "Chicagoan." I'm sure when he finished serving the people of the United States he would return home to Chicago. I'm assuming people would apply this same logic to others who choose to serve the larger populous as a whole. Would you all feel the same way if the same logic was applied to the troops that serve our country? This whole argument against his candidacy is a sad manipulation,
January 26 2011 at 12:32 AM Report abuse Permalink -1 rate up rate down ReplyWhen they told Ole Rahm that he could not run for Mayor in Chicago he simply went out and bought a few dead fish at the market. He wrapped each one in newspaper and delivered them and presto Ole Rahm is back on the ballot.
January 26 2011 at 12:30 AM Report abuse Permalink +1 rate up rate down ReplyIn support of common sense, he has deep roots and ties to Chicago for decades. The intent of the law was to keep carpet baggers out and the power structure in place. The law does make it clear he cannot become Mayor this time but that doesn't matter here in Chitown. He will be on the ballot.
January 25 2011 at 11:02 PM Report abuse Permalink +1 rate up rate down ReplyThis type behavior is what turns most Americans off. Corruption is at the root of this situation. He is above the law being from Chicago, and having a White House background, I can't begin to think of the political mischief he'll engage in. To think that the presidential 2012 re-election campaign HQ will be in Chicago, is an outright insult to our intelligence.
January 25 2011 at 10:30 PM Report abuse Permalink +15 rate up rate down ReplyAs i commented two weeks ago..this crook has friends in high places..and in reality could declare him-self the winner right now with no election..and the illinois supreme court would agree..and the citizens would simply shake there heads in agreement..well.. he would have won anyway, why go to all that trouble..
congrats chicago you deserve everthing you get..and more..
I work for the city of Chicago. I am required by my employment to RESIDE within the city limits. I CANNOT own a house here, rent it out, and live in another municipality. If I did, it would most assuredly cost me my employment. Why does anyone think that just because this individual is running for public office, that he can skirt the very rule of employment that ALL city workers must adhere to? The one and only reason that he may still be running for mayor is that he is part of the famous Chicago Machine. I hope that our Good Judges sitting on this issue uphold the very worthy decision of the lower court. Rahm Emanuel will ruin this city worse than his predecessor has already done.
January 25 2011 at 9:53 PM Report abuse Permalink +18 rate up rate down ReplyYou fail to point out that the Chicago employment policy allows new employees a time frame to establish a residency in the city limits. They do not restrict their hiring to current city residents. This is a poor analogy.
January 26 2011 at 12:23 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyWhy don't you people understand this is not about "residency"? It's about occupancy. It doesn't matter where you vote or where you pay taxes. The law is clear. You have to have LIVED in the city for the last year. He's not being penalized by taking a position with the president. He voluntarily stepped down from his white house position. He made a choice and now he has to live with it. He should have checked the rules before he quit his job. Lesson learned.
January 25 2011 at 9:24 PM Report abuse Permalink +17 rate up rate down ReplyFollow Politics Daily
POPULAR
News From Our Partners







Top News
More News
More on Aol
Local News
More Blog/Sites
Sites and Services
150 Comments