Comments on: More on Cappleman vs. Shiller

By: emopage - by erik moe - this is not a fugazi blog. » Blog Archive » Goodbye Chicago, Hello Taxation Without Represention

Thu, 21 Jun 2007 01:43:33 +0000

[...] I hardly knew you. I already miss your irrationally exuberant municipal elections, your lovable but flailing transit system, and of course all of your amazing food. For those [...]

By: JP Paulus

JP Paulus — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 14:52:32 +0000

Uptown Girl is probably mistaking you with Kevin Robinson of the Chicagoist.

It seems to me that if a reporter or blogger that doesn’t agree at least 90% with the Anti-Shiller movement (or speak that language) they are considered by a minority with a loud view to be ignorant of the neighborhood.

It doesn’t seem to occur to people that it’s possible to have the same chronological experience in a nieghborhood and come up with different views of the same place.

By: Erik

Erik — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:17:25 +0000

Wait. Who’s Kevin? I’m the one who lived in Philly for the past five years and now live in the “Andersonville Terrace” appendage of the 46th. And I’m definitely not claiming to have everything figured out.

By: Uptown Gal

Uptown Gal — Mon, 26 Feb 2007 08:45:41 +0000

Kevin, So glad that you have everything figured out about Uptown, given you now live in Andersonville and spent the past 5 years in Philadelphia. I guess those 18 years I’ve spent living here don’t give me any insight into the waste of office that is Helen Shiller.

How many trees have you planted? Let me tell you, for those of us who’ve been doing for this for nearly 20 years, the AlderBeast will show up and start screaming that you are gentrifying the neighborhood and you’d better stop immediately – even when the tree is in your own front lawn. Take it from one’s who’s experienced it.

By: Erik

Erik — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 15:27:52 +0000

UptownRising – Thanks for the insight. I didn’t know Cappleman was active in the online community. That kind of open dialogue is definitely a good thing. I tried exploring the Buena Park Neighbors site a bit, but find the message board interface a little cumbersome. Is there an easy way to browse his contributions?

By: UptownRising

UptownRising — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 05:27:36 +0000

I wouldn’t assume too much about James Cappleman based on what a few rabid Helen-haters post on the internet. If you ever saw what James posted on Buena Park Neighbors, his posts were always calm and fair-minded… And certainly not representative of an angry condo-owner bent on ridding the poor from Uptown. James Cappleman supports affordable housing, but he wants it to be part of a larger urban planning strategy that creates an integrated mixed-income community instead of more segregated ghettos.

By: JS

JS — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 04:45:01 +0000

The rules of the Shiller-Cappleman debate were set by the League of Women Voters, which has a long, well-known history as a respected, non-partisan political organization. These rules apply to campaigning in every single ward in Chicago.

One of these rules states that the League claims sole ownership to all content from the Shiller-Cappleman deabte. Each candidate agreed to the League’s claim in press releases issued shortly after the debate was finished.

My point, therefore, is that it is irrelevant whether video from the Shiller-Cappleman debate was put on YouTube. YouTube is not the issue. The REAL issue is that the Shiller campaign should not be making use of video or content from the S-C debate FOR ANY PURPOSE AT ALL. For them to do so is a bad-faith violation of the very rules that they agreed to, and is yet another example of how Shiller flaunts the rules to achieve her own personal objectives and not those of the 46th ward.

By: JP Paulus

JP Paulus — Sat, 10 Feb 2007 02:49:31 +0000

i am not arguing about the Shiller camp being wrong to have, andthen post those videos.

But you have to look at WHY such a rule would be suggested in the first place. In other elections, YouTube is being positively used for candidates to state their positions and other things. Debates for other wards are appearing on public access.

The ONLY reason i can think of would be IrishPirate’s many videos. According to a poll on BuenaParkNeighbors, where IrishPirate regularly posts (his views & links to the latest video), at least 12 people say they are OFFICIALLY involved with the campaign. With that many, it’s hard to imagine that James Cappleman doesn’t know about those negative videos…meaning he has the ability to stop it, or at least post to say it should be stopped (not censored).

Those videos are like the ones done for the 6th district against Tammy Duckworth and Peter Roskam by the Parties’ National Congressional Committees. The candidates maynot have approved those messages, but they sure condoned them by not speaking out and having them stopped.

At the very least, a quick public suggestion by Cappleman to urge IrishPirate to make the videos positive.

By: KC

KC — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 23:11:32 +0000

Frankly, I don’t have an issue with the videos on You Tube, but rather the candidate posting it after agreeing not to do so. One could argue that both candidates are public figures and you can’t stop people from using their images, etc. on the internet. It was Shiller’s direct violation of the rules she signed that shows her true colors.

By: Erik

Erik — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 22:23:39 +0000

Point taken. I’ve changed “camp” to “supporters.” I did see the discussion of the video rule violation in the comments to Robinson’s Chicagoist post. Rules are rules, and the video should not have been posted.

Though it seems to me that in the YouTube age debates should be posted online in their entirety for the benefit of the busy and the less mobile. If both candidates are in favor of open government and open dialogue, shouldn’t this be a given? There would need to be a way for the videos to be non-biased. I write about documentary film in one of my real jobs, and I know that it would be easy enough for one side to look bad (even without being taken out of context) based on camera angles and lighting alone. Someone needs to give the LWV a grant to do impartial videos of these things.