Thursday, November 09, 2006

dear chicago tribune,

i was reading an article in your fine newspaper today. you were discussing several democrats deciding not to run for mayor. that was informative coverage.

but, one of the lines in your article betrayed that whoever wrote the article1 is a moron who lacks basic knowledge of how the city of Chicago works. the article actually bothered to state, before stating the assumption that Mayor Daley probably will run again, that "Daley has not announced his candidacy."

the fact that someone would put that in an article leads me to think that this anonymous write actually believes that Mayor Daley has to announce his candidacy. we're talking about the same Mayor Daley that doesn't put his first name on his campaign signs or the signs of the aldermen whom he supports--the signs just say "Mayor Daley." we're talking about the same Mayor Daley who has served as Chicago's mayor for the last seventeen and a half years, the same Mayor Daley whose father served as Chicago's mayor for twenty-one years, who held the mayoral post from the time he was elected until he keeled over and died.

in other words...he's a Daley. that should mean something. he doesn't have to announce his candidacy. just as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, if there is an incumbent Mayor Daley, he will run again, and will remain the incumbent Mayor Daley.

if you're going to hire people to write for your Chicago newspaper, you really should make sure they know the city well enough not to even raise the question of Mayor Daley having to announce his candidacy. you don't print disclaimers by the sunrise and sunset times every day, saying that the sun hasn't declared that it's going to rise or set tomorrow.


1 it's a "tribune staff report", which only leads me to believe that the writer knows he is stupid, or the editor wants to cover the fact that the writer is stupid.

No comments: