Unlike Mr. Saul reported, Jen Olsen did attend, she was just a bit late. There was never a set time anyway. Both the reporters present had to leave to file their stories, so they didn't stay the whole time.
I didn't see Alderman-Elect Dumas there, but I believe he was.
Alderman Ambrose was the ONLY current alderman to not attend.
Neither Alderman-Elect VanFossen or his opponent Mr. Gibbs attended. I didn't see Mr. Franken, but I suspect he was there also.
Keith Meyer did show up, although him and his opponent didn't get together to buy each other drinks. I was told that Alderwoman Bushek and soon-to-be Alderman Hammerlinck did chat.
Craig Malin attended. I didn't see Ed Winborn. Some of the LOLs attended. Clayton and Dee did not.
In the name of full disclusure, I had drinks bought for me by Alderman Barnhill and Candidate Boom's campaign manager, Bruce Kenady. I don't plan to go any easier on either Barnhill or Boom, but I did appreciate the drinks. They clearly understand Rule #3.
However, since several people do not understand civility among political opponents, or do not agree with it, Fly was entirely within his right to not out himself. A comment from supposedly-Fly was posted over at SoLo, saying that he was there. I'm not sure if its really him that posted the comment though. I'm not sure if he was really there or not. There was a pretty good turnout altogether, and I'm sure Mac's appreciated it. Thanks to all who attended.
P.S. Maybe Fly WAS there?
Candidate Boom and QCI (and Fly) show off some yard signs that fortunately aren't still in yards.
10 comments:
That comment on SoLo wasn't Fly.
It said
"
Anonymous said...
I was there.
Fly
"
If it was really Fly, it would have said
"
Fly_guest said...
I was there.
"
It's a small difference, but he was consistent about it.
Damn. I'm having full blown DDP withdrawal symtomps.
Yeah, I agree. Or "Fly-retired."
I'd suspect that we won't hear from him as Fly, ever again.
I'm still not sure how attending or buying each other drinks has anything to do with civility.
Hypothetical: Somebody is your 'unit' is a jerk to you every day for a year. Somebody says lets all go out for a drink. Of course you are going to hesitate to go. Maybe you just don't, but Now YOU look ungracious, so against your better judgement maybe you go. Isn't it much easier for the 'jerk' to be gracious and attend rather than those s/he was a jerk too?
The mantra of 'can't we all just get along' sure works out better for the jerks.
Hey QCI, why don't you do an entry on the "Best of DDP" with some of the best topics/comments before fly nukes it?
conservative democrat here
1:43 wants a 'best of fly" ???? Hmm, sounds like a cult in-the-making, an odd one at that.
And 10:28 has it correct about the PC-ism of "can't we all just get along". Nothing is more duplicitious than insincere comity.
I don't think Fly was talking about only pretending to get along for 1 day every 2 years. I think he was talking about having a party to show that we can all sit around having a good time, in the hopes that people would realize that their opponents aren't bad people.
nice visual, QCI!
I'll repeat, why would you want to sit arround and "have a good time" with somebody who has been a jerk to you?
Because maybe that's the first step to them realizing you aren't that bad, and not being a jerk to you anymore.
Hate to say it but, dream on.
Post a Comment