Maybe it's not just liberals, maybe it is everybody -- but it sure seems odd that one can break a rule or a legitimate requirement, be stopped, and then claim he can't be stopped, lose the claim, then appeal, and ask that he not be stopped during the appeal. That's amazing in itself. And that's exactly what the Illinois Supreme Court has done for Mr. Emanuel, the former chief of staff for B.O., who now wants to run for mayor of Chicago but who does not qualify because he didn't live in Chicago last year. The supreme court of the state has ordered the Chicago election people to print the ballots with his name on them until this is settled.
Maybe the rule is simply there because one needs to be intimately familiar with what's going in Chicago right now or recently before he tries to lead Chicago. I think that's a good rule.
Anyway, I don't know all the pros and cons of this from a legal perspective, but I do know that if you or I wanted to break a condition that has stood the test of time, we simply couldn't just say "let us keep violating the rule" while our Appeal is heard.
Let me give you an example (which I know will be criticized by the opposition as most examples are criticized by any opposed to the point being made). Let us suppose that a university had a club (I don't know what you call a club that is compliant with all the laws of the land -- it does not discriminate against sex, age, sexual preference, religion, etc.). Anyway, this club has one key criteria for membership: members must have taken a full degree program and graduated from that university. So, I come along and I argue that I took 51% of my graduate degree at that university, so I want to be a member of that club and furthermore, I want to run in the upcoming elections which allow any member, even though they have been a member only one day, to run. The local powers say "no" -- 51% does not equal 100% and you can't join. The University supports the findings. I appeal. But now the appeals court says, I may well be a member until they rule otherwise, and I can run for office -- so please print the club's ballots accordingly. What's that you say? How absurd! You got it. Welcome to America run by the liberals and the leftists -- courts making decisions that won't upset the "elite" and their friends in higher office.
And you think Christianity and the Jewish people really have a chance? Just saying.
Maybe the rule is simply there because one needs to be intimately familiar with what's going in Chicago right now or recently before he tries to lead Chicago. I think that's a good rule.
Anyway, I don't know all the pros and cons of this from a legal perspective, but I do know that if you or I wanted to break a condition that has stood the test of time, we simply couldn't just say "let us keep violating the rule" while our Appeal is heard.
Let me give you an example (which I know will be criticized by the opposition as most examples are criticized by any opposed to the point being made). Let us suppose that a university had a club (I don't know what you call a club that is compliant with all the laws of the land -- it does not discriminate against sex, age, sexual preference, religion, etc.). Anyway, this club has one key criteria for membership: members must have taken a full degree program and graduated from that university. So, I come along and I argue that I took 51% of my graduate degree at that university, so I want to be a member of that club and furthermore, I want to run in the upcoming elections which allow any member, even though they have been a member only one day, to run. The local powers say "no" -- 51% does not equal 100% and you can't join. The University supports the findings. I appeal. But now the appeals court says, I may well be a member until they rule otherwise, and I can run for office -- so please print the club's ballots accordingly. What's that you say? How absurd! You got it. Welcome to America run by the liberals and the leftists -- courts making decisions that won't upset the "elite" and their friends in higher office.
And you think Christianity and the Jewish people really have a chance? Just saying.
-- Thanks for dropping by. Sign up to receive updates. -- Ken B. Godevenos, Church & Mgmt. Consultant, bringing you relevant information from all sorts of sources. Subscribe free to Epistoli or follow us by clicking on the appropriate link in the right side bar. An don’t forget to “share” this blog with your friends by clicking the “Share” link on your Navigation Bar.
It would be great if you would share your thoughts or questions on this blog in the comments section below or on social media.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comment.