Unless you can prove the signatures were indeed valid then there was NOTHING wrong with them being rejected. You're beginning to sound like a broken record you need to so show your proof.

From your own link: “I gave some thought to … should people be on the ballot even if they didn't meet the requirements,”

Are you telling us that these people he “ruthless eliminat[ed]” should have been on the ballot even though they didn't have enough signatures? Who's the one wanting to skirt around election laws?

I sometimes disagree with him (pro-business with too little reagrd for existing neighborhoods). I also sometimes disagree with city legislators when they squabble with him.
Always, I respect him..

His admonition doesn't surprise me. It's in character.

Of course, we're not dealing with a whisper campaign at TMV, we're dealing with a smear campaign.

Not that there's anything wrong with that . . .

Silhouette cites a story not in which Obama had anyone whacked (“ruthless elimination”), but rather one where he challenged the signatures of other candidates on the ballot in an Illinois election. Presumably he was successful in having them removed because the signatures were insufficient. Seems he's been a stickler for election rules for some time now.

Here's an example of concrete background information that stands in contrast to mere rumor:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-07…

This kind of information about Obama can be checked up on. The Chicago Tribune is a fairly respectable rag and probably would've done its homework before printing this interview with Obama surrounding his systematic and ruthless elimination of competition to run for political office.

So please, keep the whispers out of the din. There are so many other factual background checks we can do.

I hope he and others will stomp on any other whisper campaigns that will arise against both Obama and McCain.