Squirrel

Pseudo, I'm sorry, but get a grip. You are taking an extreme point of view and making mine extreme in another direction. I'm speaking specifically of New York and various supporters railing against the system because they weren't prepared. I'm sorry, but that's what it was and was not an example of voter suppression. If what happened there is so egregious to warrant another election, then there should be redos in every. single. state. Especially the states that hold caucuses, which is even worse, by far. Why are you not railing against those states, huh? Maybe you are the one who should look in the mirror when you start lecturing me about Democracy. And you are trying to paint what happened in New York as an intentional fault of a party. It's the laws of New York and they are not nationally mandated. And maybe they should be. And election costs are NOT paid by the party, they are paid by the states. And you obviously have never served as an election judge. Same-day registration is simple not viable in densely populated areas ... and it's not a cost matter, it would be a mess. But should that stop any state from making things easier? No, absolutely not. There are ways to get people registered ahead of time and everything should be done to do so. But come on ... some of this is the responsibility of the voter.

Chicago has changed a lot, too, in recent years. And, frankly, more could be done, everywhere. But it's not a case of voter suppression. I also have lost a vote here and there because of moving (in and out of country), but that was a while ago now. Now, what happened in Arizona ... they should redo that election ... that was definitely a case of new laws designed intentionally to make it more difficult. The thing is, you can't pick and choose based on how your candidate did. If NY is a case for this, then I'd want to redo Michigan, too ... and every single caucus state. What I find hypocritical is the 'outrage' of this from supporters in one state, and not in others ... in the state Sanders lost but not in the states he won.

It was a bait and switch. Had to go out to PP for a screen test, with my cello. Got a call the next day that I 'passed,' and to be out there by a certain time, and bring with me any 'sexy, black' clothing I owned. All the black I had was concert attire. Anyway, showed up out there, there were 6 of us total ... all string players. We were told we'd be in a video for the song 'Damn U' on his 'glyph' album ... not sure what it was called. They gave us some music to read through so we knew the song (all tracks had already been recorded). After a while we got 'costumed.' What I brought to wear wasn't sufficient enough, so they handed me a skirt to try on. It was a spandex mini skirt ... I play the cello ... you figure that out. I came out of the changing room to say 'This isn't going to work if you want me to be able to play the cello,' and Prince was standing right there. He was tiny, and I wish I had those eyelashes! After he left, they put me in a different skirt ... still mini. Then had us do hair and make up ... think Robert Palmer 'Addicted to Love' models. Then we were told that Prince had enough footage and that we were going to film a video with one of his ... I'm not sure how to call it ... discovery? protege? So they took us out to the Arboretum and we filmed there. Then back to the studio to do more filming there. We got to meet and hang with his band for the day, though. (NPG) They took still shots and promised to send them to us, but it never happened. And since this was during the time of his issues with Warner Bros., anyone under his umbrella was also 'owned' by Warner Bros., so I'm not sure whatever became of the video. I was told that VH1 had purchased it ... but to my knowledge it never aired anywhere.

Separate thread for Prince discussion here, in case you didn't spot it first.

OMG! He was a brilliant musician. Wow, just wow. I was hired to be in one of his videos in the early 90s ... wow, just shocked.

No, they aren't, Pseudo. These laws have been in place for a long time ... it's NOT difficult. Turn 18, go register to vote. An election is coming up ... and this primary season has been going on for OVER A YEAR ... go register. I get cards in the mail well before deadlines reminding me to register if I haven't, or telling me how I am currently registered so I can change my party designation if I want to, and, again, giving me the deadlines. And telling me when and where I can do these things, and what the hours are, and what I need to register or change registration. These things are designed to get people up to date and in the know so they can be ready. I can't imagine that New York handles things that differently than Illinois, but these processes are well outlined and well publicized here. Too many people just take voting for granted. It's not just a right but is also a responsibility. While, yes, perhaps there are things that New York, and other states, can do and should do to make it easier, but this was not a case of voter suppression. This was a case of many people not knowing what to do when or where and not taking the steps to do so timely. Same day voter registration is a mess in a densely populated area, and if you've ever been an election judge you'd know this. But to ask for an immediate change to laws, on the day, doesn't point to suppression but points to persons not taking the responsibilities to get it done and wanting, once again, to have things immediate and handed to them because they can't be bothered otherwise. Things HAVE changed here to allow for greater voting ... early voting, open polling places during early voting, more notification, publicizing how, when, where ... but you have to take the steps to register and vote. Again, NOT suppression.

Same day registration is great in theory. But have you ever served as an election judge? In a small community it wouldn't be as much a problem, but in a huge city like NY or Chicago, with densely populated precincts? People show up with the wrong kinds of ID's or no IDs at all, no neighbors to vouch for them, no bills, nothing to indicate they are a permanent resident where they say they are, students who have out of state IDs wanting to register locally. While I think registration laws should be made easier, and access to registration made easier, same-day registration can be a big mess. And, again, in NY, you can't just change the laws in place that same day to accommodate those who didn't act sooner.

Not if you were a new voter; you had until 2-3 weeks before. You had to register by Oct. 15 to switch parties. Still ... how long has this been in play? A long time. These aren't new laws in NY, and this primary season has been going on well over a year. Do I think there should be changes? Absolutely. But there is no excuse for people not knowing the voting laws and have themselves to blame for not getting around to it in time. Their ambivalence to voting is part of the problem, but it's their ambivalence that is the problem and not some grander scheme to suppress votes. But each state has their own election laws. If there is blame to pass around here, it's not on either national party ... it's on those who represent NY on the state level. Should there be national laws here and everyone have the same? I think so. Still, there is no reason for people not to have known what was what for this election. If they can't stomach the D or R by their names for a short amount of time in order to vote, well, that's another whole can of worms and their choice. And if all those caucus states were open, or even closed primaries, would Sanders have won? There's a big question mark there, too. Caucuses are far worse, imo. Closed primaries at least serve the purpose of trying to curtail spoiler voting, and still gives anyone who wants to, an opportunity to vote. The disenfranchisement of voters in caucus states is far more egregious. Primaries are a completely different thing from general elections. Frankly, and I've said this before, the only way to get people more involved is to have more than two major parties to choose from. Again ... where was the outcry in this prior to NY? It's only because Sanders lost that people are crying 'foul.'

I just think it means different things depending on who you talk to ... and I'm not dismissing anyone or anything, but it's become such a generic word to use whenever you don't like what currently is. There has always been this 'fight' against 'establishment' my entire life.

I'm curious ... what does 'establishment' mean to you? Having a party system at all? As for Hillary being part of the 'establishment,' maybe. But I look at it a little differently. She is most definitely not part of the same establishment that Harry Reid and John Kerry are from, or even Obama, to an extent ... far from it.

I love Garrison Keillor: http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/04/no_dementia_for_president_plea.html

I choose wisely because I am wise.

Lol ... and what purpose would that serve, but to ensure their hatred toward my kind continues? No, I'll fight my fight without violence.

You mean, like ... Violets are blue, Roses are red, The sidewalk is cracked, And so is your head. But I have liked this one, too: i carry your heart with me (i carry it in my heart) i am never without it (anywhere i go you go, my dear; and whatever is done by only me is your doing,my darling) i fear no fate (for you are my fate,my sweet) i want no world (for beautiful you are my world,my true) and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant and whatever a sun will always sing is you here is the deepest secret nobody knows (here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud and the sky of the sky of a tree called life; which grows higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide) and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart i carry your heart (i carry it in my heart) (ee cummings)

And a woman president would be revolutionary indeed! I remember in 1972, when I was 10 years old, going door to door ... yes, door to door as a 10 yr old ... handing out literature and asking for voters to consider supporting this candidate ... a woman ... and having middle-aged white men slam the door in my face, or worse, yelling at me, saying how they weren't going to vote for 'no God-damned woman,' ... having a woman president, finally, after 40+ years of that incident ... this will be revolutionary indeed.

When Sanders got into this race, I was fine with it and thought, 'Well, good for him. This will be interesting.' And I waited to see before making a decision who to go with. And I'm not opposed at all with the issues he's raising, although I do question some of his solutions. I don't think he really has a coherent plan that will work. But now you have his campaign manager who is saying they will stay in it all the way through the convention; and, further, that they will be trying to get the super delegates to vote for him so that he will be the nominee in November., despite Hillary having the most delegates and the popular vote. So, he's going to continue being divisive and undermine what voters want ... how is that democracy? How is that Sanders not wanting to take down the party? While I'm not one that thinks things need to stay the same, and they aren't. I grew up during Vietnam, I know what involvement is; I might have been younger, but I was still old enough and aware of what was going on; I have been going to meetings, marches, parades at various points my whole life, and know many others who have as well; I have worked for candidates I've liked; I've voted for others that I don't because the other is worse; I've volunteered and given my time and energies, and when I could afford it (more so now that I am older) to causes I've believed in ... do NOT lump me, or anyone else here who might be older, into a category of past status quo complacency. My 87 yr old mother could run circles around any one of you for all the work that she has done in her lifetime. Just because her energies went toward a particular party, one she believed in ... does not make her status quo establishment, either. You have no idea what she and others like her have done to better the lives of those around her. It's not the past who has been complacent. While I am all for change, I while I agree that things are broken and need fixing, I don't think the answer is to just tear it all down for the sake of tearing it all down, because it's not how some ... a minority of people, who think they know better ... like it. As for the voters in NY who are crying 'foul' over the election laws in that state, because they all of a sudden realized they either weren't registered correctly or at all, shame on them. Maybe next time they'll know better because they will have learned what they need to do. This nomination process has been going on a very long time ... well over a year at this time ... and NY is at the tail end of it. For them to not know dates and times of when and where and how ... that I'm sure were well publicized there as it is here ... that's on them. They are the ones who have been so complacent, so much so that they didn't even know what to do and failed to do it, ... maybe now they'll wake up and start working towards change. And maybe by next time, there will be a different system in place, don't know.

Brian, come out from behind those legs!

****!!!!!!!

And I usually find you, lost and wandering through the cast iron leg things.

Brian, do you still have my address? If so, go to the website I gave and compare that to their locations.

Geez ... I guess pulling him is the right thing to do ... but we're going to miss his bat in the lineup.

Lol, the address on the one Brian gave is for Jason's Deli which is not South Loop Markets. http://www.southloopmarket.com

Jason's Deli isn't South Loop Markets.

Oh, Brian, next time you and the cousins do a Baseball Odyssey Tour and you come through ChiTown, we'll have to try the Chicago Beef sandwich at Portillo's. One is opening near me.

Too far away. But SouthLoop Market is close.