Comments on: Chicago’s impound accounting

By: CarLitGuy

CarLitGuy — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 23:00:05 +0000

In reply to SPO. I would hope that the generally reasonable commentators here, partisan though many be, can agree there are ample examples, present and historical, of the dangers of single party dominance in various political entities, whether local board, city, county, or state.

By: SPO

SPO — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 18:28:36 +0000

In reply to Walter Olson. Is it fair to note that Chicago's dysfunction is, in part, attributable to one-party/machine politics?

By: Walter Olson

Walter Olson — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 14:35:37 +0000

A general warning: although political parties and the pluses and minuses of an incumbent administration occasionally come up as topics on this blog, and more leeway will be allowed for venting of partisan or candidate loyalties when they do, I am not going to let the Overlawyered comments section turn into a general forum for ongoing partisan and candidate recriminations. We all know where that leads: toward a running argument where enmities of that sort intrude into every discussion of every post.

For those who want to talk regularly about the merits of the two national parties or the current or past administrations, there are approximately 738,924 other places on the Internet where you can do that.

By: SPO

SPO — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 13:20:04 +0000

Chicago is tough on things that can generate revenue—but if a relative of a mayor commits an unprovoked assault which kills someone or an alderman messes with someone’s building permit, not so much. Chicago’s government stinks on so many levels.