In yet another effort to contain the political damage from her ill-advised vote to raid the state's pension payments to pay for pork projects and jobs for the Governor's cronies, State Rep. Naomi Jakobsson will be at a "panel discussion" about the pension "reforms." From yesterday's comments:
Tuesday at 11:45 in room 314A at the Illini Union there will be a panel discussion about the “pension reforms” and how they affect members. On the panel will be Mitch Vogel, SURS Board President; Steve Rugg UI VP for admin services, Naomi Jakobsson, State Rep; Janette Wetherall, Illinois Education Association and Fred Gierts, UI Economics Professor and former SURS board member.
If you are planning on attending, please go to SaveOurPensions.org, download and print out this petition, and politely and quietly collect signatures.
And, on the off chance that Jakobsson will actually take questions, please politely ask her “Will you support a budget this spring that continues the pension raid by diverting another $1.1 billion from the systems, or will you pledge today not to vote for any budget that does not reduce the pension raid next year?”
And please try to get a clear answer from her. She'll probably try to have her staff answer the question for her, but try anyway.
(Thanks to the commenters who posted the links and the question.)
UPDATE: There are more suggested questions here.
saveourpensions.org has been spamming UIUC like crazy. Not just individual addresses, but aliases as well. I will not support an organization that pushes its point through blatant spamming.
Really? You're absolutely right - that's completely unacceptable.
Who is financing SOP?
What is their agenda?
Who operates their website?
Why do they want legislators to vote against a budget that might potentially give UofI an increase?
Who is financing Jakobsson?
What is thier agenda?
Who controls her legislative agenda?
Why do they want Jakobsson to vote for a budget that cuts payments to the pension funds of her constituents?
IP have you found one constituent who has received a cut in their pension payment?
In our zeal to the spread the word, we have tried to communicate with every possible pension system member we can locate. We are a volunteer organization and don't have a budget so we rely on e-mail to communicate. We try to do our best to send information only to those who we feel will be interested. We apologize to anyone who has received our information in error.
If someone has received our updates or other communications in error or does not want to receive them, we place an "unsubscribe" link at the bottom of every e-mail we send out. Click the link and you will not receive further updates.
Having sent out thousands of messages since last summer, we have received only two "spam" reports. We apologize to those individuals, but we are doing the best we can to make sure that those who receive our information want to receive it and the results would indicate that is happening.
To date, over 1,000 individuals have taken the time to sign and return our petitions. We appreciate the many individuals who have gone to the trouble to do so.
One final note to a previous post-er. Budgets are not "either/or" items. You negotiate the components of a budget. A budget can be negotiated that includes funding for higher education and responsible pension funding. In fact, during the over time legislative session of 2004 that was exactly what happened. The final budget included more money for higher education and more money for pensions than either the budget proposed by the Governor or the budget pushed through the Illinois Senate by Senate President Emil Jones.
Have I ever mentioned a cut in the payment to an individual? I realize that you're being deliberately obtuse, but you should be able to tell the difference between when someone is talking about cuts to benefit payments to retirees and cuts in the state payments into the funds.
Notice what I said above: "cuts payments to the pension funds of her constituents." Even you should be able to understand that.
Actually, IP, one could argue that SB 27 does contain cuts in at least four ways:
1) Salary cap imposed on end-of-career salary increases. Since universities and local school districts won't have the money to pay the increased pension costs, educators are effectively limited to 6% salary increases regardless of any new duties, assignments, or promotions they receive. salary caps = benefit cuts
2) Suburban/downstate teachers contribute 7.4% of their salary to the pension system under SB27. The Chicago teachers contribution remains at 7%. The Additional .4% contribution has been called the “Mattress Plan,” because the net effect for suburban and downstate teachers is the same as though the money were stuffed in a mattress for 35 years. The state is allowed to spend or invest the additional .4% annual contribution throughout the teacher's career. If a teacher takes early retirement the state keeps the .4% contribution. If a teacher does not exercise the early retirement option the state refunds the .4% contribution without any interest or earnings. Lost interest for teachers = a cut.
3) Suburban and downstate teachers exercising the early retirement option must now pay 11.5% of their salary for each year of service they need to buy. Chicago teachers keep the 7% rate. Higher contributions = a cut
4) The interest rate for the money purchase option will now be set by the Comptroller. All experts predict a lower interest rate. A lower interest rate means less money for teachers who elect to use the Money Purchase Option. Mainly affects University Employees, who use the option much more frequently than elementary and secondary teachers. Reduced interest calculation = a cut
"The interest rate for the money purchase option will now be set by the Comptroller. All experts predict a lower interest rate."
The comptroller set the rate at 8.5% for this year the same rate that SURS set last year. This is not correct.
Just wait till after the election to see a lower interest rate to help balance the budget. Then everyone who actually voted for that system can blame the Comptroller.
More scare tactics and hysteria. No Basis. Keep It up guys.
Right-Wing Militia of Misinformation,
You're right! As long as we Democrats keep ignoring points made by people like Anon 10:35 and keep calling them scare tactics and hysteria over and over again, then eventually EVERYONE will discount them. Well, at least that's what Madigan told us, and he's never let us down before! Keep up the great comments, Naomi! Victory in '06! Go Donkeys!
This is interesting... Ok so the saveourpensions.org is registered to an Edward Marshall of Chicago Illinois. Also listed as a contact e-mail is drbomba@mac.com. Googleing drbomba & Edward Marshall turns up the site http://www.drbomba.com/. This is the site for an Edward Marshall Productions. This company specializes in direct mailing, telemarketing, etc. So, taking a little trip over to Illinois.gov's telephone directory... ok, so there is an Ed Marshall working for the state in Chicago. His department is Senate Republican Staff. Now maybe this is a pure coincidence. After all, the Ed Marshall working for the state is probably too busy helping out the Senate Republicans...
Another operation exposed. Let's pack it up and move on. I will get you majormajor.
Our terrible lies are unfolding...all lies...whyyyyyyyyy
IP,
Since you have been promoting this SOP, as well as anti-union print shops, I was wondering if you could do a post exposing SOP as the Republican front group that acts like a Wolf in Sheeps clothing.
MajorMajor Says:
"saveourpensions.org is registered to an Edward Marshall of Chicago Illinois. Also listed as a contact e-mail is drbomba@mac.com. Googleing drbomba & Edward Marshall turns up the site http://www.drbomba.com/. This is the site for an Edward Marshall Productions. This company specializes in direct mailing, telemarketing, etc. So, taking a little trip over to Illinois.gov's telephone directory”¦ ok, so there is an Ed Marshall working for the state in Chicago. His department is Senate Republican Staff. Now maybe this is a pure coincidence. After all, the Ed Marshall working for the state is probably too busy helping out the Senate Republicans”¦"
I do not know how effective this organization is anyway. I was at the Union of Professional Employees question and answer and I did not see one person circulating petitions from this organization that is evidently Republican back.
Unfortuantely, not one person attack Naomi or screamed at her for her vote. Not one person even said they were not going to vote for Naomi because of it. No one asked the questions that SOP was trying to get asked.
I can only imagine that not only is SOP, with the backing of Senate Republicans, incompetent but it is obvious, to someone who hates Naomi that this pension issue has no legs.
I heard none of the panelists say the word raid and no member of the audience said the word raid. What is going on to all of the factual statements, or at least I thought were factual, that Illinipundit and my fellow haters of Naomi were saying.
Seems like it would have just been easier to go to the website and read the front page: "www.SaveOurPensions.org is a growing coalition of pension system members, taxpayers and concerned legislators ”“ legislators who voted against the pension raid ”“ who are working for real and meaningful changes to protect future benefits and assure that future generations will not be driven into bankruptcy to pay for today's excesses."
Sounds pretty straightforward to me.
Why did IP and other lackeys repeatedly deny that this is a Republican backed organization? Even the previous anon is admitting this is Republican backed and its goal is to spread information and scare people into thinking the system will "be driven into bankruptcy."
We try to do our best to send information only to those who we feel will be interested. We apologize to anyone who has received our information in error.
This is false. I have received about 15 emails from pensionnews@saveourpensions.org in the last 2 weeks. Most of them have been sent to aliases that could only be culled from spiders crawling the web for email addresses (probably on uiuc.edu domains). These aliases, as they commonly are, go to an unlisted set of people. In my case, they are reaching some UIUC academic professionals (who are already receiving saveourpension spam at their netid address), but mostly student employees...a group definitely not interested in this spam. Any group that spams aliases is a blind marketing spam operation, and should be boycotted.
If someone has received our updates or other communications in error or does not want to receive them, we place an “unsubscribe” link at the bottom of every e-mail we send out. Click the link and you will not receive further updates.
Again, untrue. I tried several of these listed at the bottom of my saveourpension spams, and get this:
Link No Longer Available
Sorry, but the page that you requested cannot be found. Please check with the sender of the email for more information.
Having sent out thousands of messages since last summer, we have received only two “spam” reports. We apologize to those individuals, but we are doing the best we can to make sure that those who receive our information want to receive it and the results would indicate that is happening.
Yes, because most people know that responding to spam is pointless anymore. That's why the university now spends 100's of thousands or perhaps millions of dollars on controlling, storing, identifying, and deleting spam for the 40,000+ email accounts it supports. I accept your apology but reject your suggestion that you are doing your 'best' to reach those who want your information.
I must say I talked to a U of I student today who also said that he always receives "spam" from the apparently Republican backed save our pensions.
Have benefits become so generous that students are now receiving pension payments?
IP,
Since it is obvious that save our pensions, the Republican backed group that is using state employees under the direction of Frank Watson to spread misinformation, is spaming individuals including students, people who have nothing to do with the pension system, and professors, will you renounce such underhanded tactics by refusing to post the Republican front group that is spamming individuals on an almost daily basis?
Will you also stop giving free advertisement to anti-union print shops that do not support a livable wage and is not looking out in the best interest of working families and unions?
Flick,
I am a volunteer with SaveOurPensions. For the record, I don't get paid to do this and I do it on my own time. I do it because I truly believe that our public pension systems are headed for disaster if the pension diversions are allowed to continue.
I'm not a technical person, so I can't answer your questions very well. But, I have forwarded your post to the technical person -- also a volunteer -- to get these problems fixed. I was particularly concerned that the "unsubscribe" link may not be working. That will get fixed.
I will also ask the technical person to do whatever he can to clean up the list so that it doesn't go to people who are not interested. I don't know what can be done, but I'll try. If you have any suggestions, I'd appreciate them.
I don't know if you are a member of SURS. If you are, do you find the information of any interest? We have tried to send out information that we think pension system members will find of interest and, quite frankly, the response has been quite positive. Everytime we send out an update, a huge percentage of recipients open the mail in a short time and the website shows quite a bit of activity, with most people going to the petition page. That makes us think that we are filling a demand. We also get a lot of positive e-mails and comments and very few negative ones.
Honestly, most of the information has been geared to elementary and secondary school teachers, but we are trying to add coverage that will interest University employees as well.
Obviously, it is in our best interests to provide people with information they want and to NOT send information to people who don't want it. If the unsubcribe link is not working and you want to immediatly be taken off our mailing list, you can go to the website and use the "contact us" form to request that your e-mail or e-mails be removed. We do not solicit anyone so you won't end up on any marketers list.
Since you are obviously much more technologically sophisticated than I am, I'd like to offer you the opportunity to volunteer with SaveOurPensions, since clearly we could use your expertise. If you do not want to be involved with our group, I would still encourage you to research this issue and make up your own mind. I believe that when public employee pension system members really understand what has happened and what is likely to happen, they will get involved with or without SaveOurPensions.
The Republican volunteer who is also a state employee said:
Republican front group Save Our Pensions "We do not solicit anyone so you won't end up on any marketers list."
Why solicit when spamming is better. You might not sell information but according to your website you "share information with other groups and public officials dedicated to the same goals."
Again you are a Republican group that is playing politics with people's pension. You don't care about the unions that were affected. You care about getting people's information, either through theft or trickery, to help Republican candidates.
"Again you are a Republican group that is playing politics with people's pension."
- It was the Democrats that underpaid the pension 1.6 BILLION so the they could continue their pay-to-play agenda with the state's budget.
It is the Republicans who are using state employees to set up front groups to steal people's personal information and pass it along to Republican candidates.
The petition itself is false. It says that for every dollar rescheduled now $13 will be paid back later. This was based on a Teacher Retirement System estimate based on a proposal that was not even voted on in Springfield. So not only are Republicans using state employees to steal people's personal information they are knowing lying about this issue.
"Will you also stop giving free advertisement to anti-union print shops that do not support a livable wage and is not looking out in the best interest of working families and unions?"
- Naomi, will you stop posting such silly comments here are a way of distracting from your union-hating, 1.6 BILLION dollar, system payment swiping vote?
Fellow Democrats and Naomi supporters,
Madigan's instructions that he gave you all to move the focus to an insignificant group like SOP as a way of keeping the heat off of Naomi for shorting the pension system 1.6 BILLION dollars seems to be working! As long was we keep to Madigan's script and avoid reality we can't lose! Go Donekys!
This issue here is that:
save our pensions "is registered to an Edward Marshall of Chicago Illinois. Also listed as a contact e-mail is drbomba@mac.com. Googleing drbomba & Edward Marshall turns up the site http://www.drbomba.com/. This is the site for an Edward Marshall Productions. This company specializes in direct mailing, telemarketing, etc. So, taking a little trip over to Illinois.gov's telephone directory”¦ ok, so there is an Ed Marshall working for the state in Chicago. His department is Senate Republican Staff. Now maybe this is a pure coincidence. After all, the Ed Marshall working for the state is probably too busy helping out the Senate Republicans”¦”ÂÂ
This organization is stealing personal information, according to their website, and pawning it to Republican candidates.
At the same time they are lying to people and using figures that are not even based on the proposal that was voted on in Springfield. Not one person believes that the rescheduling of payments will cost the state 13 times. Republicans are spreading misinformation with this front group that is playing politics with people's retirement while taking their personal information and giving it freely to Republican candidates who might be supporting abortion, anti-union measures, and instituting intelligent design in high school science classes.
"It is the Republicans who are using state employees to set up front groups to steal people's personal information and pass it along to Republican candidates."
- Thank God no one is expecting you to provide evidence to back this up, otherwise your cover would be blown, Naomi. Keep up the good work! Go Donkeys!
Actually Edward Marshall is the state employee who works for Senate Republicans and using taxpayer money to come up with this front group whose goal according to their website is to take people's information, either through theft or tricking them, and pawn it to Republican candidates who support school vouchers and intelligent design in high school classrooms.
"ok, so there is an Ed Marshall working for the state in Chicago."
- Whew! Hopfully none of these Republican readers will realize there is more than one Ed Marshall living in Illinois, at least we Democrats would never think of that (unless Madigan told us). Keep up the baseless claims my fellow Dems! Then we'll never have to face our support of a 1.6 BILLION swipe from the pension system payment. Go Donkeys!
Why are Republicans lying about this issue when it doesn't have any legs with their lying?
If it's has no legs, why do you insist on having this farcical debate with yourself?
I think everyone else has given up trying to decipher what you mean when you're posting incomprehensible gibberish with your 14 different identities. I don't think you've made one single factual point since you began posting here last week. Now you've moved onto spam and intelligent design, which is really strange...
Sweet post above, Naomi! Those Republicans will never figure out who you are! Posing as "Ed Marshall", pure brilliance!
Remember...keep the focus on SOP and not your 1.6 BILLION swipe from the pension system payment. Go Donkeys!
"Typical Democrat" said to keep focused:
save our pensions “is registered to an Edward Marshall of Chicago Illinois. Also listed as a contact e-mail is drbomba@mac.com. Googleing drbomba & Edward Marshall turns up the site http://www.drbomba.com/. This is the site for an Edward Marshall Productions. This company specializes in direct mailing, telemarketing, etc. So, taking a little trip over to Illinois.gov's telephone directory”¦ ok, so there is an Ed Marshall working for the state in Chicago. His department is Senate Republican Staff."
Great work Naomi, er, um...Anonymous! Remember, the SOP group is what's important, not your 1.6 BILLION swipe from the pension system payment.
Just keep repeating to yourself:
Avoid discussing my 1.6 BILLION swipe...
Avoid discussing my 1.6 BILLION swipe...
Avoid discussing my 1.6 BILLION swipe...
Go Donkeys!
Thank God we're talking about the SOP now. I was getting really tired of thinking about how Naomi and the Democrats screwed the pension system by taking 1.6 BILLION from its payment.
ILD,
Are you talking about the over 1 BILLION Naomi & Co swiped this year, or the over 1 BILLION they plan to swipe next year?
Sorry, I meant the 1.6 BILLION pension system payment swipe from THIS year.
How can there be honest debate on this issue when Republicans are saying this cost the state 13 times as much.
Some might remember this number from a column Deb Feinen submitted to the N-G, that was written for her by House Republicans. Unfortunately, for Deb this column was inacurrate and continued the trail of lies.
Speaking of Deb she attended the UPE THM and Naomi's Social Security event hoping to hear people bashing Naomi about the pension vote. Unfortunately, for Deb it did not happen either time. What is she going to run her campaign on? Based on her column and 2004 campaign it will be on lies.
"Typical Democrat" I am getting off topic. Your right the real issue is that Republicans are stealing people's information and forwarding it to Republican candidates that do not reflect those individuals values.
Absolutely! The real issue certainly isn't Naomi and my fellow Democrats swiping 1.6 BILLION from the pension payment system. I'm glad Madigan told you to bring up Deb, I wasn't sure if the SOP group was going to be enough distraction from our 1.6 BILLION swipe!
If we stick to Madigan's script of distraction, then we can't lose, regardless of swiping 1.6 BILLION! Keep it up Naomi! Go Donkeys!
At least answer why did Deb lie in her column using numbers that from a proposal that was not even voted on in Springfield?
Why are Republicans lying about this issue when it doesn't have any legs with their lying? People realize that their retirement is secure.
Why are Republicans directing state employees to steal people's e-mail accountants and spam them? Why are Republicans stealing people's e-mail accountants and pawning them to Republican candidates that support school vouchers, anti-union measures, and intelligent design in science classrooms?
Yes! Keep the foucs on Republicans and not our 1.6 BILLION swipe, just like Madigan directed us to! Great job Naomi! Igonore the swipe! Go Donkeys!
I don't care if someone posts as "Right Wing Militia of Whatever" and tries to mock the positions taken by me or others. But when you post, falsely, using someone's name and use that to make accusations about public officials, I'm going to delete the comments - as I did with one from an "Ed Marshall" above.
IP said:
"I don't care if someone posts as “Right Wing Militia of Whatever”ÂÂ"
Do you care if you are knowingly posting organizations that are Republican front groups who are playing politics with people's retirement security to steal their personal information and pawn it to Republican candidates who do not support their values?
We already know that you do not care advertising for anti-union print shops.
IP said:
"Now you've moved onto spam and intelligent design,"
You were the one posting factually inaccurate informaiton by posting the Republican front group save our pensions that is stealing people's personal information and pawning it to Republican candidates.
After the Republican front group was exposed you still deny. How can any reader take your comments seriously.
Do you care if you are knowingly posting organizations that are Republican front groups who are playing politics with people’s retirement security to steal their personal information and pawn it to Republican candidates who do not support their values?
No, I don't care about that at all. I'm pretty sure every blogger in Illinois knew that SaveOurPensions.org was linked to the Senate GOP, because they were emailing updates to us last Spring.
Why should the fact that they're connected to the GOP bother me? Do you think I should be bothered by the fact that you're connected to the Democratic Party? Because I'm not. We have two political parties that oppose each other. Why do you try to act surprised when they actually, you know, oppose one another?
We already know that you do not care advertising for anti-union print shops.
Again, why should I care? I don't know whether CafePress is union or non-union, and I don't really care. And, frankly, I didn't "advertise" for them, as they weren't paying me - although I'd be much, much happier if they were.
IP said:
"I don't care if someone posts as “Right Wing Militia of Whatever”ÂÂ
Do you care when you post as Typical Democrat?
You were the one posting factually inaccurate informaiton by posting the Republican front group save our pensions that is stealing people's personal information and pawning it to Republican candidates.
After the Republican front group was exposed you still deny. How can any reader take your comments seriously.
Huh? You have absolutely no connection to reality. "Factually inaccurate information?" You mean like the Chicago Teachers Pension stuff that you were caught red-handed lying about - and you were proven to be lying by information from the Chicago Teachers Pension website?
And when have I ever denied that the SaveOurPensions.org group was partisan? Can you point me to one statement, or is actually asking for evidence going to make your head spin?
Do you care when you post as Typical Democrat?
I post as IP and only IP. I don't even post as "Anonymous" on other blogs, let alone this one.
Lets Get Back to the Real Issue Here:
save our pensions “is registered to an Edward Marshall of Chicago Illinois. Edward Marshall turns up the site http://www.drbomba.com/. This is the site for an Edward Marshall Productions. This company specializes in direct mailing, telemarketing, etc. Ed Marshall works for the state in Chicago. His department is Senate Republican Staff.”ÂÂ
According to the save our pension website their goal is to play politics with retirement security by lying and stealing people's personal information to "share information with other groups and public officials dedicated to the same goals.”ÂÂ
These public officials will support school vouchers, limits on reproductive freedom, and intelligent design in the classroom.
Lets Get Back to the Real Issue Here:
So I guess asking for facts and evidence has caused you to lapse back into your talking points, eh?
I think I've found a new, more annoying version of He Who Shall Not Be Named.
Sweet job Naomi, er, um...Dylan! The SOP, vouchers, abortion, and intelligent design distractions will certainly keep people noticing from our fellow Democrats 1.6 BILLION swipe from the pension system payment. Madigan's distration strategy is working as planned! Soon EVERYONE will forget about our 1.6 BILLION swipe! Go Donkeys!
In all honesty, I'm getting really tired of this thread, and starting to get tired of this blog because of it.
Let me sum up, if I may, the pension situation.
The republicans blame the democrats, locally Naomi, for screwing with the pension system which might cut payments in the future, or increase the taxes that will have to be paid in the future.
The democrats say it didn't happen that way, it was a smart move, and the republicans are making way too much about it.
Partisans from both sides are flaming, some anonymously, and it has become a pi**ing match.
I'm tired of it. I keep deleting the RSS feeds, but this topic keeps coming up. Bah.
I know it's a big issue, and has particular local imapct because we have so many state pension qualified people here, I'm one of them, but come on, haven't you all killed enough electrons yet? Are you close to agreement on this issue, or are you going to remain locked in an epic, never ending battle? Let's move on.
"Do you care when you post as Typical Democrat?"
- IP is certainly no Democrat and not even an ally of ours. He/She is actually AGAINST swiping money from the pension system payments, while we Democrats are supportive or such swipes, and then of course we lie, mislead, and use distractions to try to cover it up! Hey, whatever it takes to keep us Democrats in power! Besides, with such leadership of Madigan and his puppets, er, um...supporters like Naomi, we will remain firmly in control of Illinois, regardless of how we abuse state finances. Bring it on IP and your GOP! We Dems can't lose! Go Donkeys!
In all honesty, I’m getting really tired of this thread, and starting to get tired of this blog because of it.
Let me sum up, if I may, the pension situation.
The republicans blame the democrats, locally Naomi, for screwing with the pension system which might cut payments in the future, or increase the taxes that will have to be paid in the future.
The democrats say it didn’t happen that way, it was a smart move, and the republicans are making way too much about it.
Partisans from both sides are flaming, some anonymously, and it has become a pi**ing match.
I’m tired of it.
I keep deleting the RSS feeds, but this topic keeps coming up.
Bah. I know it’s a big issue, and has particular local imapct because we have so many state pension qualified people here, I’m one of them, but come on, haven’t you all killed enough electrons yet?
Are you close to agreement on this issue, or are you going to remain locked in an epic, never ending battle? Let’s move on.
I agree with you. But if I stop posting about the pension issue because of one annoying Democrat commenter who keeps repeating the same crap over and over and over again, then I'm letting them dictate what goes on here.
Another alternative is to put them on the "Varble plan," in which their comments will be moderated and deleted if they have nothing substantive to add to the discussion.
Regular Reader said:
"In all honesty, I'm getting really tired of this thread, and starting to get tired of this blog because of it."
I think everyone sympathizes with you. Including supporters and opponents of Naomi.
The fact is it is Illini Pundit, Republican hacks, with Republican front groups like save our pensions who steal peoples personal information and spam people, who are distorting this debate and spreading lies.
For IP, even to threat to cut off debate on topics he brings up is not only anti-democratic but shows his true colors.
Supporters of Naomi have consistently refuted every lie that IP and others have espoused repeatedly using sources like SURS, TRS, and the Bi-partisan commission on government forecasting and accountability. Yet at the same time he just discredits those sources because they are not espousing his agenda.
I think a fair agreement is that IP and hacks quit telling lies and initaiting posts that do not honestly debate retirement issues and since the issue is not being brought up Lovers of Naomi do not have to discredit their lies and respond with posts exposing their front groups and distortion.
IP said:
"if I stop posting about the pension issue because of one annoying Democrat commenter who keeps repeating the same crap over and over and over again, then I'm letting them dictate what goes on here."
The fact is IP consistently and repeatedly brings this debate up and distorts the picture. IP talks about freedom of speech on the internet but it is his speech he thinks should be free and no one else.
The FACT is IP brings up this debate and it is only proper for people to call him out when he lies.
I think everyone sympathizes with you. Including supporters and opponents of Naomi.
If you were at all reasonable in your debating style, this wouldn't be a problem. But you're not. You post the same crap over and over, without evidence, and when challenged you attempt to change the subject.
The fact is it is Illini Pundit, Republican hacks, with Republican front groups like save our pensions who steal peoples personal information and spam people, who are distorting this debate and spreading lies.
For IP, even to threat to cut off debate on topics he brings up is not only anti-democratic but shows his true colors.
Actually, it shows that this is my site, and I can and will do whatever I please on here. I think that I have got a great track record of openness and discussion, but I've also shown I'm willing to restrict the activities of an individual if they're making the site less pleasant for everyone. You are rapidly approaching this point.
Supporters of Naomi have consistently refuted every lie that IP and others have espoused repeatedly using sources like SURS, TRS, and the Bi-partisan commission on government forecasting and accountability.
You're acting alone, and you've refuted nothing, and you've brought no evidence whatsoever to the table, yet you keep insisting somehow that you have.
Yet at the same time he just discredits those sources because they are not espousing his agenda.
I think a fair agreement is that IP and hacks quit telling lies and initaiting posts that do not honestly debate retirement issues and since the issue is not being brought up Lovers of Naomi do not have to discredit their lies and respond with posts exposing their front groups and distortion.
I think a fair agreement is that I get to decide what happens, because it's my site. I've had constructive discussions with opponents on any number of issues, including pensions. It's you that's the problem - and it's a problem that I'm perfectly willing and able to address if you persist.
The fact is IP consistently and repeatedly brings this debate up and distorts the picture. IP talks about freedom of speech on the internet but it is his speech he thinks should be free and no one else.
The FACT is IP brings up this debate and it is only proper for people to call him out when he lies.
I'm OK with people calling me out when I lie - but you haven't done that. You just keep screaming "liar, liar!" until you drown out everyone else. And that's unacceptable.
IP may be a conservative, mostly, in views, but hardly a republican hack.
I know, because I am a republican hack, and IP never comes to the meetings. Heck, IP does even pay dues.
Seriously, sometimes I agree with IP, sometimes not, but IP runs a wide open blog. IP invites comments, and some may come from hacks, but it goes both ways.
IP is opinionated, sure, but doesn't lie, as far as I can tell.
And IP has blocked one person before, and only one, not because of content, but because that person is just so annoying.
So stop being annoying, and you have nothing to worry about.
"You're acting alone, and you've refuted nothing, and you've brought no evidence whatsoever to the table,"
Seems like your opinon. According to your comments above your opinion warrants grounds for removing anyone.
Sorry, IP does NOT even pay dues.
According to your comments above your opinion warrants grounds for removing anyone.
Actually, it does. That's a benefit of being the person who is paying for and created the site. If you don't like it, start your own site.
OMG, I'm defending IP!!!
I wish I had the guts to out myself.
Maybe soon, maybe soon.
One thing we can agree on is that I found your repetitive bringing up of the pension system in a distorted picture as annoying as you found my constant rebuttals of Republican misinformation.
One thing we can agree on is that I found your repetitive bringing up of the pension system in a distorted picture as annoying as you found my constant rebuttals of Republican misinformation.
So get your own site. I'm not going to let you ruin this one for everyone else, let alone for me.
IP, it doesn't matter how many times you post about the 1.6 BILLION swipe we Democrats made from the pension system payment this year. We will continue to use whatever means necessary on this site to divert the issue, whether it be the SOP, abortion, intelligent design, Deb Feinen, or how you run your own blog.
Madigan has directed that we label all valid criticisms as lies, misinformation, and deception. He also said we should claim that the swipe will actually produce saving and use ComGFA as a source (even though their website says no such thing) and also SURS and TRS which are stacked with appointees from our Democratic party. You can't stop us now and you won't be able to stop us from swiping another BILLION+ next year. We Democrats will do whatever Madigan thinks..er, um...we think is best for our state finances. Swiping BILLIONS = Saving BILLIONS!!! We can't lose! Go Donkeys!
Typical Democrat,
While I appreciated your support before, dragging this out any longer isn't helpful.
And I'd really appreciate it if people would stop posting, tongue-in-cheek, as the people they're trying to attack. It's quite annoying, and doesn't add a single damn thing to the discussion. And, yes, I know you didn't start it.
What are you talking about? No one person on this blog has seen those numbers. Now you are being obtuse and not willing to honestly debate. The numbers stand as is. Go look at the budget.
You just keep re-posting the same crap, without any links to any external evidence whatsoever. I'm not willing to tolerate it any longer, so you've been added to the moderation queue. If you have something new to add, please post it in a comment, and I'll review it and decide if I should allow it to be posted.
You've had several days and dozens of comments to make even a single lucid point or add just one piece of evidence to constructively contribute to the discussion. I warned you this morning that I was nearing the end of my patience. Another commenter weighed in with a similar sentiment. Yet you had to get in one more annoying attempt.
You've got no one to blame but yourself.
You just had to make the same, without-evidence comment one more time, eh?
Unless you've got something new to say, or care to actually introduce some facts or evidence into your usual gibberish, your comments will be held. If you disagree with this policy, or wish to discuss it, please email me.
So how did the meeting go? Did the republicans nail her with their "facts" and did the audience giver it to her? Or did she calmly explain what her position was based on the truth?
I thought the meeting went well for everyone. Nobody nailed Naomi and no audience members gave it to her. This is pretty telling. Actually Steve Rugg from the administration was receiving some of the toughest questioning.
For the criticism that Vogel has received from IP and others I would say his position was advocate for SURS member above all else.
All panelists added to the debate and presented themselves well with few exceptions.
Thanks UPE, that helps to explain a lot. I guess union members have yet to be persuaded by their new best friends, the GOP.
Thank you IP for raising the standards of debate!
It seems to me from reading this “debate” that the intention of the first posts was to publicize the UPE meeting in the hopes people would download petitions from a group called saveourpensions and ask questions that railed against Naomi.
From the beginning someone posts questioned saveourpensions because they spammed individuals.
Possibly someone else posts information to strongly suggest that saveourpensions is a Republican front group with an agenda, whether someone cares or not, this does hurt their credibility to an outside observer. At least it will for me when they post on IP.
All hell breaks loose with posts from people against the pension vote and supportive of the pension vote with BOTH sides reiterating their comments many times especially with someone called “Typical Democrat” saying something over and over about swiping pension funds and possibly someone else bringing up multiple times that saveourpensions is a Republican front group.
It is mentioned by people who went to the UPE meeting that no one railed against Naomi and no one was passing saveourpension petitions
IP and others who were hoping for a worst case scenario suddenly get annoyed with people criticizing saveourpensions but at the same time “Typical Democrats” repetitive comments are ignored.
After that it is hard for me to follow because it seems that IP deletes comments he/she is referring to for his/her justification for moderating someone who now no one can see evidence why she/he moderated that person but everyone can see that “Typical Democrat” still said repetitive things but was not moderated.
From one observers perspective freedom of speech is allowing those to speak who you do not agree with. If blogs don't want the government to regulate it, it seems somewhat hypocritical to think that you can only moderate those who disagree while ignoring those you support.
IP and others who were hoping for a worst case scenario suddenly get annoyed with people criticizing saveourpensions but at the same time “Typical Democrats” repetitive comments are ignored.
I ignored Typical Democrat because it was my impression that they were simply responding to the initial, incessant posting by the person who was using "Right Wing Militia" and 17 other screen names. I was pretty sure if I could stop the latter, the former would fall into line.
After that it is hard for me to follow because it seems that IP deletes comments he/she is referring to for his/her justification for moderating someone who now no one can see evidence why she/he moderated that person but everyone can see that “Typical Democrat” still said repetitive things but was not moderated.
From one observers perspective freedom of speech is allowing those to speak who you do not agree with.
If you think that I'm somehow limiting the speech of only those with whom I disagree, then I apologize for leaving you with that impression.
First, there are dozens of commenters who are very active here despite my never agreeing with them.
Second, I now limit the ability of only two individuals to post here, and in both cases, I did it because the individuals were impacting the ability of others on the site to have constructive discussions, and the individuals wouldn't respond to my repeated requests to alter their behavior. I was not asking RWM to alter their position, but rather to alter the way they argued their position so that the discussion could be somewhat constructive. They refused, repeatedly, despite my warnings about the consequences.
And even, given that, one of the individuals in question (He Who Shall Not Be Named) has largely modified his behavior to the point where the restrictions no longer make sense. Every single moderated comment that he's submitted has been approved, and his actual ability to post, while originally limited to only smoking-related topics, has in fact not been restricted at all. The same situation applies to RWM - if they'd like to comment, they're free to write what they wish. But if it's the same comment they've been posting non-stop for the past week, I'm not going to approve it. If it's something new, and constructive, then I welcome it and welcome the opportunity to share it with others.
If blogs don't want the government to regulate it, it seems somewhat hypocritical to think that you can only moderate those who disagree while ignoring those you support.
While it might be hypocritical of me, there are compromises I am forced to make in order to keep this site functioning. I don't want to moderate comments - do you think I enjoy the extra work that involves? But some people have demonstrated that they're not capable of interacting with others and discussing sometimes emotional issues in a constructive way.
And, the bottom line is that I pay for this site, and I built it, and I'm going to do whatever I wish. I offered to help RWM set up their own site where they could copy-n-paste to their heart's content, but they weren't interested - only interested in annoying the readers and commenters on here.
Again, I apologize if you feel I acted improperly. If you have an alternative solution, or if you know a way to persuade the commenter in question to correct the behavior, I'd be happy to un-moderate them.
I miss Big Debbie, although I didn't agree with everything she said, at least she participated in the debate and came up with some good points, based on facts, and helped me to see things in a different way on some issues. Too bad the level of debate on this site has spiraled downward pretty fast.
I miss Big Debbie, although I didn't agree with everything she said, at least she participated in the debate and came up with some good points, based on facts, and helped me to see things in a different way on some issues. Too bad the level of debate on this site has spiraled downward pretty fast.
I miss Big Debbie, too.
And if you think the level of debate on here has declined, I always welcome suggestions for how to improve it.
It is, IMHO, impossible, and maybe even unwise, to try to "improve" the level of debate.
While I don't think that commenters reflect a true cross section of society, they do show the passion felt by one side or another.
When the debate degenerates, other commenters just ignore those posts, or just move on to other threads. "Abusive" shouldn't be the standard, but, again IMHO, repeated abusive posts should be moderated.
The IP blog is very popular, and attracts commenters from both sides of the aisle, and even those not in the building. Hot button issues will attract not only reasonable debate, but also flakes. Flakes are ok, but repeated abusive flakes are not, again, IMHO.
If IP wants to discuss sidewalks, it will get no play. If IP wants to to discuss MTD, or pension refom, or even the Chief, comments will fly.
Just like speaking in a group in person, some will go over the top. Anonymous blogging is good, because, other than the abusers, or jokers, good points are made on both sides.
My momma taught me to ignore the wackos. Chuckle at them, but then ignore them.
Sometimes, we have to glean the gold from the mud. So be it.
ARR has some good points. One basic rule of the Usenet groups can be applied here: Don't feed the trolls. It just gives them the attention they crave.
It is, IMHO, impossible, and maybe even unwise, to try to “improve” the level of debate.
While I don't think that commenters reflect a true cross section of society, they do show the passion felt by one side or another.
When the debate degenerates, other commenters just ignore those posts, or just move on to other threads. “Abusive” shouldn't be the standard, but, again IMHO, repeated abusive posts should be moderated.
I don't know that they were being abusive (wait a minute - yes they were - they were nothing more than name-calling...), but they were certainly repetitive and without merit.
The IP blog is very popular, and attracts commenters from both sides of the aisle, and even those not in the building. Hot button issues will attract not only reasonable debate, but also flakes. Flakes are ok, but repeated abusive flakes are not, again, IMHO.
If IP wants to discuss sidewalks, it will get no play. If IP wants to to discuss MTD, or pension refom, or even the Chief, comments will fly.
Exactly. And usually, despite the sometimes emotional topics, the commenters do a great job of regulating themselves.
Just like speaking in a group in person, some will go over the top. Anonymous blogging is good, because, other than the abusers, or jokers, good points are made on both sides.
My momma taught me to ignore the wackos. Chuckle at them, but then ignore them.
Sometimes, we have to glean the gold from the mud. So be it.
That's the nice thing about the internet. Nobody is forced to read the stuff on this site, and everyone can open up a site to "compete" with it, and if their site is better, they'll get more readers and more participation. The internet is great at seperating the wheat from the BS, so to speak.
ARR has some good points. One basic rule of the Usenet groups can be applied here: Don't feed the trolls. It just gives them the attention they crave.
I usually follow this rule, and followed it for too long in dealing with He Who Shall Not Be Named. But I've realized that this is my site, not a Usenet group, so I can actually do something about trolls. And I'm not going to allow someone to post the same worthless repetitive name-calling garbade in every thread I post on a topic, because it was chasing away legitimate dissenters with whom I wanted to have discussion. If someone is posting on here and their clear intention is to drive other people away, I'm not going to tolerate it.
Wow what a debate of some sort.
I think moderation is needed sometimes. With debate and drinking.
At the same time I disagree with anything that is selectivly enforced:
For example, typical democrat said almost a dozen times "Madigan told you" or "1.6 BILLION swipe from the pension system payment. Go Donkeys!"
While another obnxious person(s)? wrote almost a half dozen times "save our pensions is registered to an Edward Marshall of Chicago Illinois. Also listed as a contact e-mail is drbomba@mac.com. Googleing drbomba & Edward Marshall turns up the site http://www.drbomba.com/. This is the site for an Edward Marshall Productions. This company specializes in direct mailing, telemarketing, etc. ... ok, so there is an Ed Marshall working for the state in Chicago. His department is Senate Republican Staff.”ÂÂ
After that it is hard to follow because there seems to be post missing, even from you IP the posts don't make sense or are responding to something else.
Either way you moderated someone and not typical democrat. This seems like selective enforcement to an outsider observer, to be up front I do lean Democrat but cannot stand Flagovich. Even afterwards typical democrat continued to post the same repetitive stuff after seeing someone get moderated for it.
Any policy should be fair to all and not selectively enforced.
Just as someone observing this site, I would like to ask IP who exactly deserves the right to decide who is a proverbial "troll". Is it you, IP, with you obvious right wing Republican slant? Is it some Urbana crazy who smells like pot? Who decides which opinions are more than the mere intellectual mud you so detest. It is clear to me that you should not supress any opinion unless it is offensive, or you run the risk of maintaining a site dedicated to mere right-wing propaganda. I hope you have an interest in allowing others to express their views in the manner they were intended, even if they are antithetical to yours.
Either way you moderated someone and not typical democrat. This seems like selective enforcement to an outsider observer, to be up front I do lean Democrat but cannot stand Flagovich. Even afterwards typical democrat continued to post the same repetitive stuff after seeing someone get moderated for it.
Any policy should be fair to all and not selectively enforced.
I'm not here to be fair. My goal is to quickly address the situation and return the site to a normal atmosphere of discussion. To do that, I needed to moderate RWM and not Typical Democrat, because I feel that TD was only responding to RWM. And, as you can see, TD went away went RWM went away.
And I don't care what looks fair or doesn't look fair. I only care about what works. And if you feel that is going to ruin your experience on here, feel free to stop reading this site or start your own.
Just as someone observing this site, I would like to ask IP who exactly deserves the right to decide who is a proverbial “troll”ÂÂ. Is it you, IP, with you obvious right wing Republican slant?
Yes, it is. And I don't label someone a troll based on their politics, but on how they present their opinions. There have been some right-wingers on here that have come close to moderation, but when I confronted them, after some heated exchanges, they modified their behavior.
But, in the end, I get to decide - because I built this, and I'm paying the bills.
Is it some Urbana crazy who smells like pot? Who decides which opinions are more than the mere intellectual mud you so detest.
Again, the quality of the opinion doesn't matter to me - it's how it's presented, and whether or not someone is trying to disrupt the normal constructive atmosphere of discussion. RWM clearly was trying to do that with their copy-n-paste, no-facts-allowed comments posted identically in multiple threads over several days.
They were trying to drive people away by being annoying.
It is clear to me that you should not supress any opinion unless it is offensive, or you run the risk of maintaining a site dedicated to mere right-wing propaganda.
It is clear to me that I'm not going to allow you to tell me how to run this site. And if you feel this strongly, you should start your own.
I hope you have an interest in allowing others to express their views in the manner they were intended, even if they are antithetical to yours.
I do have an interest in that - that's almost exclusively why I maintain this site. I enjoy debating those who disagree with me, as Matthew, foleyma, Douglas and others will attest. But I'm not going to put up with someone ruining the atmosphere of the site - whether I agree with them or disagree with them.
I'm sorry that we don't agree on how this site should be run, but I hope you're beginning to understand my motivations. And if you are interested in starting your own site, I'd be happy to help. The more the merrier, and I think the more "online magazines" we have in Champaign County, the better off we'll all be.
IP stated:
"But, in the end, I get to decide - because I built this, and I'm paying the bills."
This is great. IP, me and a few other friends are big D&D fanatics and we were wondering if you would join us and play the creator aka Dungeon Master. Your GOD complex with this site is amazing.
Again, I'm sorry - I know what I've written here sound incredibly arrogant. But if you've got a better way of doing things within the framework of the criteria I've laid out, I welcome ideas.
However, I don't think you do - I think you just want to complain. In which case, I think you should take your ideas, and build your own site, where everything is perfect and no one ever tries to ruin anything. Please let me know when you get it set up, because I'd like to watch how you operate it and learn from it.
This discussion is now over.
Yours,
IP
IP: Please go ahead and use the "Varble" plan or some such to manage the site. Some of the posting are silly, trivial and hystrionic distractors from the criticisms the Balgo budgets deserve. Whenever someone criticises Naomi, him and the Dems, they get the vapors.
They should pay some attention. It won't hurt much. Many of the critics are Dems, or independents and would like to hear other critics somewhere. I would hope this site is one where people take issue with bad government. We voted for better. Too bad Naomi gets caught in this, but she made choices. Those choices were not forced on her, Blago, Jones, Madigan and the Dems by some circumstances or a lack of other options.
Warlord,
IP OWNS this site, and may do whatever IP chooses to do. It is not democracy, it is not necessity, it is not public, it is a private web log, a web based diary that the owner author allows others to comment to. Sometimes.
You have no rights to it. None. Just as if you made a web blog, you could do as you please, without interference from IP, me, or anyone else.
IP has told me to take a hike before (different posting name) and I played around with IP (remember IlliniPunditt?, that was me) but I settled down. "All in good fun" is different than malicious. And I always realized that here, IP is the boss. Simple as that.
MSM, the News Gazette, for example, may publish what it wants. May publish columns, opinions, letters to the editor, advertisements, whatever it chooses. Same here.
Strong words, quite a bit as hyperbole, but IP IS God on this site. Deal with it.
If IP is God on this site, I think we all know who that makes Satan, don't we?? ;)
And, for the record, I am firmly in the "Urbana liberals who smell like pot are trolls" camp.
Last week, I saw a long comment thread over at IlliniPundit's blog that made me curious. It seems that the website for SaveOurPensions.org was designed by one Edward Marshall, which also happens to be the name of a Senate Republican staffer. Was there a connection, a commenter