This past rather shady election in Peru that took place on April 7, does not seem to go away. I have let it go because it is over. Those that ran and lost seem to have done so too but lots of locals are still upset about the involvement of the currently elected officials that took part in the election. True I have lost any respect I had for any of the officials who took to the streets or to the postal service to endorse their chosen candidates.
This morning I again received a post (not made public) about how evil I was because I allowed people to post anon about what they perceived as unfair and "dirty" politics during the elction season. I am evil because I allow people to express their feelings about Peru politics and publicly name the individuals they are disappointed in who are currently serving us in Peru. These are not rumors they are the truth and that is why you see them here. The lame excuses I have heard about why it was done are just that lame excuses.
Once you become an elected official, you are responsible to the public and not to your fellow officials with whom you have become friends. Some of you will take criticism for a long time and you surely knew that when you ran for office.
I was not personally responsible for the activities and decisions that have resulted in local chatter about you. I am sorry that some families will not let it go also but this is Peru politics.
I also believe in an informed electorate and that means not hiding facts of the election.
32 comments:
Lois, in all of political history, federal, state, or local elections, show me when a sitting elected official didn't help another elected official get elected. From the top to the bottom deals are always made, going all the way back to our founding fathers. Be honest if the shoe was on the other foot and someone you support was helping someone else you support, I don't think this post would be on the blog this morning.
Lois,
I seem to be lost here, the candidates that lost the election have not let it go. I hear many comments around town from their supporters that they are angry. The comment you made about the locals being upset about elected officials supporting a candidate, referring to that as dirty politics is wrong. As an American I have the right to support whom ever I choose. Just because they are elected that right should not be taken from them. Republicans, Democrats support who they want to serve with them in public office. What you are asking is a violation of their constitutional rights. Now before you get upset and say that there was something illegal done please come forward and give it to the Election Board or the AG. If all this is sour grapes then move on.
The public officials are just like the general public and have the same rights to endorse whoever they want. You have your rights to be critical to whoever you want. I also think you may be overreacting to a few letters of endorsement for a few elected officials.
You did not read my post, I have let it go it is over with but if some others have not, that is their problem not mine.
Also some nasty person and I regret not posting their comment started this again and I just want it verified that people who do not want anything not so nice said about the officials cannot put it to rest.
When things like this election happen on a local level and it is right in your face, it is a lot different than when it is taking place on a state ot national level where we only know people by name and not personally so stop the comparisons, it is not the same.
There is no doubt that evil exists in this world of ours. Evil is out there and evil is present in Peru politics. Evil is present in the souls of some of Peru's elected officials and I will confess that evil is present in my soul as well. The evil that I possess is directly related to the frustration and helplessness that I feel due to the arrogant and elitist individuals currently manipulating Peru city government to benefit themselves and their friends and benefactors. The evil that I refer to will manifest itself as common emotions and feelings of "hatred". Let's be honest people, hatred and evil are always present in Peru politics. It hangs heavy in the air over the council chambers like a dense fog. The hatred is present and it is sent back and forth between city officials and their enemies in the gallery. Most of Peru's elected officials harbor strong feelings of "hatred" towards the activist citizens who dare question them and I am quite certain that many citizens have the same feelings of "hatred" that I have towards most of Peru's elected officials based on their attitude, their behavior, and their feeling that they are unaccountable for the decisions they make and the secretive and arrogant governing style they have embraced during the Harl administration. I am not proud to say it but I really do have great hatred for many of Peru's elected and appointed officials and I have no doubt they feel the same about those of us who question them. Some of my hatred is from frustration in knowing how inept most of them are as leaders and legislators and some of it is because at least several Peru officials are simply awful and despicable personalities. I'm sorry but it's the truth and their behavior is proof of what I say. From the broken campaign promises by Harl and the total disregard for the people who helped him get elected to the outward disrespect towards Alderman Perez by most of the aldermen, to the constant behind the scenes deals that continue to unfold without any effort by the administration to hold public discussions on the backroom deals in open meetings. For these reasons and other reasons I have to admit I have evil feelings of "hatred" for most of Peru's incompetent elitist officials. I wish I didn't have to feel this way but it is what it is. Thanks for letting me vent. AAAAAAAAHHHHH!
I read your post and the first three comments are spot on. The candidates who lost were just as much aligned if not moreso than the ones who won. The fact that you focus on this is strange.
Political candidates DO suuport each other and have every right to do so. There is NOTHING wrong with this. I am guessing you are also okay with it except that your candidates got beat.
Despite what you say your blog did more to support the candidates who won because of the nasty things that were said. Now I have read some of the comments about the city clerk and it is sickening.
Lies, rumors and innuendo is what you perpetuate along with how heavily you censor comments. Evil? Someone greater can decide that but what you perpetuate here is wrong on so many levels. The good news is that no one really cares about what miserable anonymous people think.
- A former regular reader of the blog
11:23 you need a therapist. If this causes you that much hatred I feel sorry for you. I have never been mistreated by anyone at city hall and I would know only one of them if they were not serving as they are. Of course there is the little fact that I treat them with the same respect I would want to be treated. Seriously if you feel hatred then it is not them with the problem. It is you.
11:09 Lois it is the same. You and a few others on here think Peru is so different but this goes on everywhere. The Ottawa High School board had a group run together and they won. Tell me was that unethical? That is a local election.
The fact that you don't get this is hilarious. No one even cares about the other candidates because the election wasn't even close.
What is unfair about the election? Most of them won by overwhelming margins. Some ran very aggressive campaigns and others were laid back. The last 4 elections you saw incumbents losing and newcomers arising. The arrival of social media allowed those to make anon. posts to endorse their candidate or derail the opposition. Do many believe blogs? Not likely. Endorsement groups like the unions were active in past elections, nothing noted in the recent election.
The point is that all candidates have groups that they identify with. It may be democrats or republicans. You have those that work with the candidate to get them elected. This recent election and our small town saw a few that worked together to get rid of the current group. And as a result those who were being targeted worked to get rid of the group working against them. It was all or nothing strategy. You have to be careful on that strategy because you sometimes miss on a good candidate that has no affiliated group or the baggage that those bring to the candidate.
To 11:44 AM, I have to disagree with your comment that Peru is not different than any other city election or school district election. Peru is different in that the voters in Peru pay little if any attention to the real issues. Peru voters not only disregard detailed and organized campaigning, they ignore the real issues that would dominate elections in other cities. Peru voters are lazy and uniformed. They deliberately ignore quality candidates and vote for those who will fall in line and do as they are told by the Peru establishment. Proof of that exists in those who are continually elected and those who are not. You can't fix stupid in Peru because they are the majority of those who vote.
Yes, everyone is entitled to support and endorse the candidate of their choice. However, in my opinion it is evil and wrong for a sitting government representative to openly endorse a candidate who has deliberately violated a city ordinance that they themselves established. How can you think they would be the better person to represent the people in their ward when they themselves defy government policy?
Wonder what would happen if a city worker openly campaigned and endorsed "the other guy". How secure and happy would their job become if that were the case?
12:28, they would be protected by laws put in effect in the 60's and also by the union. The old days are over with.
What governing body controls the rules of a election and what is to be done when local, county. and state laws and ordinances are violated? From what has been stated it appears that Peru has some candidates and backers that turned up on the losing side of the vote, unlawfully broke laws of the same ordinance that they are crying about and want certain rights taken away from incumbents in regards to whom they support. Fortunately if this magnification of sour grapes is the platform they stand upon they have been beaten.
12:28 In answer to your question regarding the city worker campaigning and endorsing the other guy, the answer is....he gone.
To all that have commented upon the avoidance of the lack of concentration on issues in the last election they are correct.
With so many large mistakes by a government body made in the last 4 years and to focus in on campaign signs as a issue was weak.
3:33, I'll try again, your wrong unless you can give an example, you are making statements without facts, as usual. It's sad that you can make a claim, but I can't ask a rebuttal question.
As for city clerk it last two elections he has either made public comment in paper about referendum and I know for a fact his personal back stab of a candidate to support another candidate.
What does he have at stake, maybe one candidate spent more at his restaurant then the other. I would say from first hand knowledge there will be a few less visitors to the supper club now.
The current council and clerk run a its us against them campaign and try to divide what informed voters there are. Using words like change and replace to scare people. This will be downfall of our city, if you believe test didn't pour thousands into city election your wrong. I have personally witnessed an alderman not be able to pay for a cup of coffee at johns multiple times but be in front cover in a 500 spot 3xs
To answer the question posed in the "headline" - absolutely not. Public Official - especially elected ones, but not limited to them - need to be publically need to be criticized vigorously. As a whole, that is precisely what is missing in our community. Just because someone holds an office does not mean that person should be placed on a pedestal free from all scrutiny. We do not have a news media that will do this. So it is up to the citizens to spread the word on any and all impropriety committed by a public official. We own the government - not the other way around. Until this attitude changes, the People of Peru and indeed the entire Illinois Valley are nothing more than a source of revenue for government officials and their cronies.
7:53 I agree that your elected officials should be held accountable.
What recourse does the elected official have when the general public, like most people on this blog spew half truths and exaggerate any piece of information that they hear in a bar or coffee shop. If the elected official were to say something about you then you would most likely run to a lawyer to sue because they slandered your name. Even though the official was elected and understand the scrutiny of their position, it does not give this blog or any one the right to be malicious with their statments. I have seen it all to many times on this blog and I find it very immature and a form of bulling.
8:22 AM
Many people have been bullied by the city council and I have seen it and some of it is on videotape. The anger exhibited publicly with disparaging comments and looks have come from the council and it sounds like either you were absent or chose not to hear it.
It is a total lack of communication between many residents and council members and since many of us do not frequent bars or coffee shops, I guess there is no way to reach a point of understanding. Many cities and city officials elsewhere take a day of the month or the week and have something like "Have coffee with "whomever is the hosting party". Would that work in Peru? Probably not because there is too much animosity that must pass and that will take new leadership.
The headline of the topic is off the rocks. Should Public Officials be Exempt for criticism!. Was that being sarcastic? If you are a public official you expect to hear critical comments and expect to be questioned. That is part of the choice you made when you ran for office. Are public officials human? Yes, and they should be treated as such. Should they get mad if someone calls them names or personal insults? Yes, it happens. Do they spend a lot of time on city matters? Most of them do. Are they paid? Yes. But not much.
With the media and the many public forums it is very easy to get personal with the campaign attacks on candidates. You hear very little about voting records and more about personal issues. Dirty politics is stuffing the ballot box, illegal contributions, false campaign information. Its not endorsing candidates!
To those of you who constantly refer to "the half truths": What proof do you have that the statements being made are not the "whole truth and nothing but the truth"? When a law or ordinance is established and put into action and then deliberately violated do you consider that a "half truth"? When you say that the "lady" made up the confrontation on her were you there to witness it or do you consider that another "half truth"? Some bloggers insist that their aldermen respond to them but the fact of the matter is I personally have emailed mine several times with legitimate questions and have gotten no response. I have personally attended council meetings where citizens have asked legitimate questions and been bullied and denied an answer. These are not your so called "half truth". These are facts. I'm just tired of people making excuses for the belligerent behavior some of our councilmen have publicly displayed towards the very people they represent and also toward their fellow counterparts. If you think this a "half truth" start attending meetings on a regular basis. Of course, things may be different now as this council has managed to get rid of their arch enemy and the people's friend.
9:37 AM
I have a question for you.
When a council votes on an ordinance after many meetings with discussions about this topic and finally agree as to the wording of it and vote to approve this ordinance and then.....
the next election they find that they don't think what they voted upon applies to them and they totally disagreed this ordinance, should they be given the OK and say OH "it applies to everybody but me?"
What is the message sent to the people of the community? Do they deserve a verbal slap at least?
9:37 AM
And maybe each council members who votes YES to any ordinance should be obliged to also sign an additional paper with something like and if I am ever in a situation where I might like to disregard this ordinance, I must remember and know that this was passed by the council and expected to be obeyed by all and that also INCLUDEES me (NAME). Applies to all elected officials.
I think they all violated the signs ordinance. One put up signs in December, another had two signs in yards, two placed large signs that had to be altered or taken down, all put signs on right of ways and even a few had light up signs. Whatever happened to those that run for office keeping the signs in their voter areas? The whole election was about signs and many forgot about the candidate.
10:33, you made some fair statements but also one false statement, your last. The council didn't get rid of their so called " arch enemy", the people in his ward did. You can spin anyway you want, inside the voting booth the people have spoken.
ok, were back on the signs. It was determined that it was constitutionally protected that signs can go up year-round, so tough luck. Ordinance or not!
Do you remember about a bike with a sign riding around the park advertising pickelball? That was free speech.
11:02 Read and re-read the sign ordinance and you will find that putting up a sign in December is 'NOT' a violation.
Yes, the sign ordinance is a very important issue which should have not been broken especially by those who wronged. Also city officials who have the designated responsibility of enforcing this law should have enforced the law to the fullest extent needed.
The sign ordinance should not have been ignored because of those involved and the city power they maintain.The lack of enforcement was unforgivable and a poor example to all of the treatment of citizenship by importance. If a few individuals had not acted the situation would have been completely ignored.
Now that the election is over those who defied the law should sit down with the code enforcement officer and develop the law as to what should be enforced fairly and equally to all.
Than this issue should be dropped until the next time it is actively being practiced. Somewhere and sometime city officials must learn that the laws are made for all and their only success is to enforce them in this manner.
We can't have political signs go up in December! All signs are unsightly. The homemade signs are public pollution at best. No signs with lights and no signs on corners. Size of signs should be no larger than a small yard sign 24 by 24 inch. I was in Oglesby and they had all kinds of signs and nobody thought they had a problem.
Historically, in the U.S., it is a fact that if you want to take part as a political representative you are going to be criticized.
Famous quote by President Truman was "If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen". Another President Harry Truman quote was "the buck stops here".
Has anyone ever noticed that politically when facts have a habit of not being disclosed, meetings are closed not open and people are puzzled as to what is transpiring in their government political environment is questioned to a larger degree.
This is especially true when people have their voice taken away at public forums with devices such as public comments rather than question and answer sessions.
The trust of government is not learning how to say transparency but in practicing it.
Post a Comment