Exclusive Joe Won't Talk Video
With the election 3 years and 11 months away, Joe wants to get a jump on the competition. Joe Moore was spotted shaking hands and campaigning along with his political sidekick Dave Fagus at the Morse Avenue EL stop this morning.
While Joe will claim he was operating some sort of mobile service office, gathering service requests for his ward, one wonders what he did with the thousands of service requests that have been called, emailed or sent into his office by constituents over the years that never got worked on?
18 comments:
It remains to be determined by Mr. Fitzgerald & Co. if Moore and Fagus are an Aldrerman and political sidekick or a couple of co-conspirators.
In the meantime, it behooves those in the 49th Ward to see that those responsible for the many problems faced by the community are brought to justice for their actions.
Poor Joe! Between Toni & Craig right about now Joe's probably wondering if he is going to hear about his racist pink postcard mailing every time he appears in public for 4 years.
Here's a link to more on Moore's racist pink postcard mailing, including a link to images of the postcard
Another Threat To Silence the TRUTH
Hint for Joe: might be best to get ahead of this one. Looks like it's not going away.
Craig,
you are as big an asshole as I am.
I am proud of ya.
However, your assholetude and my assholetude combined is still merely 1/8th of the moronatude of Joe Moore.
Moranatude=stupidity combined with a knowing attitude
face it craig, you are a stalker.
Did Fagus get laid off?
Seriously Craig, you need to get a life. You sounded seriously unhinged on this video. If I was Moore I'd get a restraining order on you.
A restraining order? A stalker?
Do you have any idea what you are saying?
Sourpuss said...> "If I was Moore"
The community can be thankful there is only one Joe. We'd be in a double heap of shit if Joe had a twin.
His eyes are shifty sometimes and crazed at others. Kind of scary.
stalker, yes. restraining order? yes.
just because he is the alderman does not mean that unhinged nutjobs can do as they please. i could easily see charges of interfering with official business of an officer of the city of chicago. do you really think that this kind of behavior would be allowed at city hall? how is this any different? do you think that other "journalists" behave this way?
besides, here he is, trying to do what you all swore you wanted him to do, and craig goes out there and makes it impossible. do you really think that a constituent would stop to talk to their alderman in the middle of that? and end up on youtube? guess what- people are entitled to control the use of their images. i doubt you had a release for broadcst of this. again, aldermen still have rights.
you think you have the right declare "an illegal hangout" of people in front of their own buildings, something that you have completely made up, and then think that this kind of harassment is ok. because? really, this is so far over the line that it is actionable. it is harassment. i know joe is hoping that you will just go away if he doesn't pay attention to you. but i hope next time you pull a stunt like this he quits turning the other cheek.
Been There, when I have a little more time, I am going to make a transcipt of every word on that came out of Craig's mouth on the film posted on this blog.
Then I will post it.
Then we can all decide in the cold light of day whether it reads like an "unhinged nut job" or whether his questions were relevant.
Really, it's too bad we don't have you speaking your rant above on tape to compare them to...
beenthere- I find your point of view strange. Craig is just asking him pointed questions and is being persistent. He was probably there for all of 10 minutes most. Not like he stood there and interfered with them for the whole time.
Thank God Joe Moore doesn't think like you do-that sounds very totalitarian to me. The man is a public figure and Craig has a right to ask him questions. I am sure he can take it- he's not a wilting lily.
I think you need to lighten up a little.
Personally, I don't know why Joe doesn't just answer Craig's questions. It might be in part because he's on camera.
Good points Jocelyn. Moore knows the limits of the law and they made him read the U.S. constitution back in law school. He's not simply a public figure; he's an elected official and, quaint as this may seem, he is accountable to us.
And he has never been known to shy from a camera when it served his purpose.
You could probably use Moore's skin to retread a tire. His demands for "politeness" are comical. Does he seem like someone who reads etiquette books?
Been There,
Part of being a public figure is having to answer to the press. Craig was no more "in your face" than any reporter trying to get a story. Rude? No! Persistent? Yes! As any good reporter must be. If Joe cannot and or will not answer to allegations then he deserves to be addressed in a persistent manner Joe has had a 16 year grace period, now we are demanding more. It is time that the man ante up.
no, really. there are boundaries. this is not an isolated incident. the level of flat out slander that i have read on these blogs just boggles my mind. don't try to pass this kind of smear off as democracy. democracy requires a level of truth and decency that is just not here.
and i reiterate, just because someone is an elected official does not mean that any yahoo with a video camera can call himself a journalist, harass them on the street and interfere with their attempts to do their job. if he been in his office at city hall, craig would not have gotten in the door.
you forfeit your claim to fairness when you show yourselves to be propagandists and liars. what goes around comes around. i would have called the cops. i would have gotten a restraining order a long time ago. especially from a guy who thinks that you aren't allowed to stand on your sidewalk for more than an hour if you are black and unemployed.
like it or not, the majority of people in the 49th ward WANT joe as their alderman. that is democracy. grow up.
The majority of the people of the 49th ward didn't vote at all. Period.
Craig's questions were reasonable and should have been answered.
IrishPirate - Shouldn't it be "Mooronitude"? ;)
BeenThere - Most of what has been posted has not been slander. It has been facts, tactics and questions for which Moore and cronies do not want to be held accountable.
The number of voters who actually voted for Moore is a minority of the registered voters in the ward. Moore got barely over 50% of the votes. Only 1/3 of the registered voters actually cast ballots. Do the math. Votes in support of Joe = 1/6 of all registered voters in the ward, far from a mandate.
I find Fargo's tortured math about Moore's lack of mandate amusing given Gordon's lawsuit.
Quoting from the suit:
"When all the votes in the foregoing precincts are discounted, the election is reversed and Plaintiff Don Gordon is the winner and Defendant Joe Moore is the loser because Gordon will then have 2,120 votes and Moore will have 1,574 votes, and Gordon will be the winner with a majority of 546 votes."
So if Gordon's suit were to prevail, that means he would have support of what? 1/10th of registered voters? So Fargo and Rebecca, I guess you would have to say Gordon didn't have a mandate either right?
Post a Comment