Quote:
Originally Posted by nomarandlee
You don't need to have very specific ideas about what you want from the foundations perspective in order to say that you have no interest in building a structure in the park.
If they were committed to NOT building a structure in the park they would express that or at the very least they wouldn't have the University and going to bat for it. This is being driven by the foundation. You think the city or university would push the park issue if the foundation didn't want it at least open to them?
The foundation expresses what it wants (or at least have the option of) and wants other players to go out and fight and get it so as not have the office of the Presidency and his reputation besmearched by such fights (predictably but understandably).
|
This is a bit conspiratorial if you ask me. How does the foundation not being opposed to building in the park imply that they are pushing FOR the park land. Furthermore it would be quite presumptuous for the foundation to be committed to NOT building in the park. A city and it's citizens have the obligation and responsibility to make decisions about the use of city land for the public benefit. I certainly don't want some group of people who don't live in Chicago pushing opinions about how Chicago should use it's land.