* NBC 5’s Mary Ann Ahern asked Bruce Rauner today about the Ray Rice punchout video and the child abuse charges against Adrian Peterson…
Ahern: You are part owner, a minority owner with the Pittsburgh Steelers. Have you spoken to your group about how the NFL has handled Ray Rice and Adrian Peterson? Are you onboard with what’s going on?
Rauner: “I have not spoken with the Steelers organization at all. Not in many months.
Ahern: Why would you not want to reach out and find out what…?
Rauner: “I am working here in Illinois to win an election and transform our government so it’s working for the people again. That’s 100 percent my focus.”
Reporter: So, would you also comment, though, could you comment on the situation?
The candidate moved on to another reporter instead of answering that last quesiton.
* The Question: Fair questions or not? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
polls
*** UPDATE 1 *** The Quinnsters were apparently ready for this one. From a press release…
Amidst the NFL controversy sweeping the nation about standing up against abuse of women and children, Lt. Governor Sheila Simon and State Senator Toi Hutchinson (D-Chicago Heights) today criticized Republican billionaire Bruce Rauner’s Tax Plan for the devastating impact the budget would have on at-risk families in Illinois, particularly those struggling with abuse and violence. While Rauner’s Tax Plan puts $1 million into his own pocket, it leaves an $8 billion hole in the state budget. Most of the burden of this massive funding deficit will fall on education - which would suffer an unprecedented cut of $4 billion - but crucial programs helping women, children and other victims of domestic abuse would also be significantly slashed by Rauner’s proposal.
Today Rauner, a part owner of Pittsburg Steelers, refused to stand up for battered women and children when asked directly about the NFL controversy sweeping the nation. Rauner become an owner of the team in 2009, shortly after an abuse scandal was brushed off by the team.
“Bruce Rauner needs to answer specifically for the radical reductions he proposes, which will harm some of the most vulnerable individuals in Illinois: the children and spouses who are victims of abuse,” Lt. Governor Simon said. “Time and again Rauner has failed to explain how exactly he would preserve critical programming with such unrealistic economic projections. Few specifics have been provided by his campaign at any rate.”
“A billionaire and self-proclaimed member of the .01 percent, Bruce Rauner has made much of his ability to invest and make money,” Senator Hutchinson said. “Investing in abuse prevention and intervention has been proven to provide long-term returns to the state of Illinois, but when it comes to domestic abuse and its victims, Rauner always seems willing to put politics ahead of people.”
Once implemented, Rauner’s Tax Plan would have a devastating impact on critical programs funded by the state.
And then it goes on and on like their usual press releases.
* But a Republican, on background, wants you to know this…
State Funding For Domestic Violence Shelters Has Been Cut 13.7% From FY2009 To FY2015 - Nearly $3 Million. (Appropriations Report - FY2009, Illinois Comptroller, p. 204; Enacted FY2015 Budget By Line Item, Governor’s Office of Management and Budget)
*** UPDATE 2 *** He shoulda just answered this one to begin with and scored some points…
*** UPDATE 2 *** The full response from the Rauner campaign did not come from Rauner himself…
“Bruce thinks what Ray Rice did is deplorable and the NFL has badly mishandled the situation. As a husband and father of four daughters, Bruce stands for women’s health and safety everyday. Sadly, Pat Quinn has done just the opposite and cut funding for domestic violence shelters by nearly 15 percent. That never should have happened, but Pat Quinn was too busy funneling millions into his own political slush fund that is now the subject of two federal grand jury investigations.” - Rauner spokesperson Lyndsey Walters
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:09 pm:
Fair question, and he’s gonna get ripped in 3, 2, 1….
- Anon - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:10 pm:
Rauner insists he’s a leader who takes responsibility. Except when one of his companies gets into trouble, then he transforms into Sgt. Schultz.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:11 pm:
I think it’s a fair question given that he has a stake in the league and it is a current hot-button issue in the NFL. Doesn’t surprise me that he can’t bring himself to comment about it. He’s good at having no real comment about anything.
- Nearly Normal - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:13 pm:
Fair question and can’t believe that Rauner has not spoken to the Steelers in months.
thought he was a hands on owner. Oh, right, but not when there is a screw-up.
- Bogey Golfer - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:13 pm:
Is anyone polling all the owners of the Green Bay Packers? There’s only a few hundred thousand. Seriously, Rauner is a glorified stockholder and he likely has zero info on the day-to-day running of the team. Ahern took a drop in credibility with me.
- Anonymoiis - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:14 pm:
Not fair. She’s fishing trying to stir controversy and create a story. He’s not the GM nor does he have nearly enough stake in the team to actually have a say in what they do.
- Decatur gal - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:14 pm:
Yes I think it is a fair question for any owner. And his response is that he can only focus on one thing at a time?
- Sandy Champion - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:16 pm:
Absolutely fair, he’s part owner of the Steelers. What I find interesting is he stated he’s more concerned about the election than women and children being abused? It was too easy of a question to blow off. Que: 🎶”How low can you go…?”🎶
- lake county democrat - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:16 pm:
It would have been unfair if she pressed on the first two questions, but she went to the third: a general comment on Ray Rice. ANY pol should be ready to answer that.
- AlabamaShake - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:16 pm:
It’s absolutely fair.
And, further, Rauner should be asked about ditka’s comments supporting both Ray Rice and AP.
- Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:17 pm:
It’s totally fair. The guy’s running on his alleged business career and acumen. But this will be another example of Rauner refusing to give a substantive answer on anything meaningful.
- Illinoise - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:17 pm:
It is absolutely fair because he is running for Governor using his experience in businesses. Saying he hasn’t spoken to the team, one of his business investments, and will not be reaching out, sends the message that he is an absent owner and not engaged with his own businesses, particularly in times of turmoil. The question will be asked, is this how Rauner plans to run the state as well?
- Anonymoiis - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:18 pm:
Since Coach K had endorsed Quinn, Will she also now ask Quinn to respond to allegations throughout the years about Coach K and his players, how he spurned Illinois, or how most Illinois fans despise him?
- Wally - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:18 pm:
Has anyone seen YDD and Brooke Anderson in the same room?
The Rooney brothers are majority owners of the Steelers. They, along with the president and CEO of the team, would address this issue. Not someone who is a small shareholder.
Need to maybe bone up how front offices of sports team operate.
- From the 'Dale to HP - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:19 pm:
They’re fair questions but I don’t think they’re very good questions.
- zatoichi - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:19 pm:
Does he have any say in operations (then a fair question) or is he just a stockholder (may not be fair but it is a hot social issue right now)? He’s going to be asked these question so he might as well get used to them.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:20 pm:
===Has anyone seen YDD and Brooke Anderson in the same room?===
And you probably never will, but not for the reason you seem to be implying here.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:21 pm:
Not fair he has ZERO to say about the team
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:21 pm:
Here is exactly why it’s fair.
The second Bruce invested in the Steerers, Bruce invested in the NFL; with Super Bowl seats…and arrest records and socially inexcusable behavior.
You own it, you eat it, you owe an answer…for every time you boasted to other .01%ers… “I own part of the Steekers”
- pundent - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:22 pm:
While I think this is a “fair” question there are at least a dozen other questions that Mary Ann could ask that are far more relevant and might actually reveal something about the candidate. This isn’t exactly journalism at it’s finest. And I generally hold Ahern in high regard.
- Percival - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:22 pm:
Fair. He’s a part owner. He could have given a far better answer.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:28 pm:
Tough call, but I lean a tad unfair, seeing as he is a minority owner with little to no say in how the team operates. I wouldn’t doubt if the ownership group is told not to comment on team/league issues except through the team’s PR department and majority owners. The fact that he hasn’t dealt with them in months shows he doesn’t have much of a say.
- Walter Mitty - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:28 pm:
Not Fair… WHO CARE’S what his opinion on the subject is? He doesn’t own enough to have any impact. How about her asking, “What is your response that it’s alleged you had no African Americans in key positions at your company?” I think his response is what I want to hear from him. I am trying to win an election. Or he could say.. “I strongly condemn these acts.” I lost respect for the tabloid question…Although, TMZ may win a Pulitzer…So there is that!
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:29 pm:
===Since Coach K had endorsed Quinn, Will she also now ask Quinn to respond to allegations throughout the years about Coach K and his players, how he spurned Illinois, or how most Illinois fans despise him?===
So…you want to equate questions of child abuse and violence against women to questions Quinn might get about Coach K?
- Louis G Atsaves - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:29 pm:
The first question she asked was fair. The second unfair. “Why would you not want to . . . ?” question was complete nonsense and assumed a negative implication.
It put him in a position of being damned no matter what he said in response.
Great reporting? Nope.
- Judgment Day (on the road) - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:30 pm:
“The Rooney brothers are majority owners of the Steelers. They, along with the president and CEO of the team, would address this issue. Not someone who is a small shareholder.”
————
There’s the answer. If those questions are the best Ahern can do, she’s way over her head.
Btw, as there’s likely to be a whole lot of litigation going on over all of the NFL related issues, why would any minority partner want to start making statements that could be incorporated into litigation?
- Stones - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:30 pm:
It depends on what % share of the Steelers that Rauner owns. I’m not sure where that line is but it needs to be more than a couple of percent.
By the logic some are suggesting here, you can criticize anyone who owns a share of the Green Bay Packers as well.
- Sunshine - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:30 pm:
Fair question. He’s smart to stand aside on this one for many reasons….in particular it is still playing out with the ‘real owners’ and advertisers. I think he could have given a better answer but it doesn’t imply anything one way or the other.
- Spliff - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:33 pm:
As a Steelers fan the only thing Bruce has going for him is his ownership in that team. This is a time he could show leadership, that he cares about what is going on, heck even acknowledge what is going on. But again we have Bruce focused on what HE wants.
- Anarditka - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:33 pm:
Not fair. Steelers are not under scrutiny here. Also, he has investments all over the globe. If one of those investments is in oil production, should Rauner be questioned about Obama’s reversal for boots on the ground in Iraq? In 2011 Exxon invested $100 billion upgrading fields in southern Iraq. If Rauner invested in a power plant in South Korea, should he comment on Rodman visiting North Korea to ease tensions? Ray Rice, Iraq, and Dennis Rodman are inconsequential questions to the mess Illinois is currently facing.
- Wensicia - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:34 pm:
Rauner: “As you know, I refuse to take a position (publicly) on social issues. This includes anti-social behavior.”
The questions were fair.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:35 pm:
The question was neither fair nor unfair. It was stupid.
- Mokenavince - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:35 pm:
Not fair,what would she have him do? Sell his stock? Not everybody lives on a 24 hour news cycle.
She should ask him how he’s going to fix workers comp and the minimum wage.
- LincolnLounger - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:37 pm:
Oh, come on. Ridiculous.
Fair question, but equally fair response. Many of these NFL teams have lots of owners. To expect a minority owner to be leading the charge in any of these situations is poppycock.
I don’t like Rauner one bit, but if people want to be outraged they should check out the performance of the Governor’s DCFS. It’s a cesspool.
- Modest proposal - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:37 pm:
I’m in the “it’s a fair question, but it’s a stupid question” catagory.
I wish that was a voting option.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:40 pm:
So…Bruce can’t say…”as a part owner, a very small part, I don’t have an answer specific to the Steelers, but as a Dad and husband, I am sickened, like everyone, what am learning about these instances.”
Nah, just have no social agenda, and say you haven’t talk to the Steelers in a very long time.
Dope.
- Been There - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:42 pm:
At first I thought what kind of question is that? Until I remembered he owned part of the team. That makes it fair. Not necessarily a good question. I would rather hear others.
And now that its been asked to Rauner I guess it would now be fair to ask Quinn.
- Big Muddy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:43 pm:
Meh. I voted not fair only because there wasn’t a irrelevant option.
I own stock in BP. Bought more after the gulf spill. I control nothing of the day to day operations but there are some out there who can’t stand BP and think those of us that own the stock as greedy who have little concern for the environment. Simply not true and a stretch to say otherwise.
It’s an investment people. Nothing more. Now if he is a Packers fan, well, that changes everything.
- nothing to see here - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:46 pm:
well… the steelers qb did have those problems
- Anonymoiis - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:47 pm:
Since the city owns Soldier Field, when will Rahm be asked these questions?
- girllawyer - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:53 pm:
Fair. You don’t have to be a majority owner of anything to have an opinion about domestic violence and child abuse. Can’t recall Rauner ever even acknowleging the existance of either issue. Maybe he hasn’t heard of them.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:53 pm:
- Anonymoiis -,
You may want to lay down.
The MN Governor weighed in, since the state of Minnesota is in to the new Vikings building for half a billion…
So sure, Quinn, Rahm, Bruce…
How difficult is it to say you are against domestic violence and child abuse and mean it?
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:53 pm:
Didn’t Bruce Rauner do a TV commercial with some sort of NFL tie-in?
- Casual observer - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:54 pm:
I’m not sure if the question is fair or not but what a missed opportunity. Isn’t he trying to woo women in the suburbs? He should have seen this coming and had a response teed up.
- VM - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:56 pm:
It’s a fair question, but not because it’s relevant. It’s fair because a Governor (or any elected official) is often asked and expected to take a position on things over which he has no power. Seeing his response to the question is very telling about the bully pulpit role we expect elected officials to play.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:57 pm:
Bruce Rauner pro violence? Well he sure doesn’t like Gov Quinn’s anti-violence program.
Before someone has to ask, yes, that is snark.
- Western Ave. Doug - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 1:59 pm:
==Funding For Domestic Violence Shelters Has Been Cut 13.7% From FY2009 To FY2015 - Nearly $3 Million==
WOW! Maybe Quinn could have used some of that NRI money given to his buddies Thorton Township and funded this worthwhile program.
- Then again... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:00 pm:
I don’t know about “fair”. I’m not really sure what that means, in the context of a campaign.
I do think it was a “dumb” question and was only meant to stir up controversy like others have said here. Because, you know, there’s not enough inflammatory crap going on in this race…
Dumb question, but also a dumb answer. Let’s run through this a different way:
A: “Mr. Rauner, what do you think about domestic violence.”
R: “I really don’t want to say.”
Alrighty then.
- Jocko - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:03 pm:
“not fair” by a stretch, given that Ahern was fishing for a sound bite.
Someone needs to tell Rauner that “less is more” when you answer a question.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:05 pm:
He is a husband, a father and he wants to be Governor, Wally.
He should have been livid.
But, he doesn’t want to get on Mike Ditka’s bad side.
Might get popped in the mouth.
- JS Mill - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:07 pm:
Question- Fair but stupid, particularly the follow-up.
Rauner’s response- Weak sauce. You have to be able to respond intelligently to these “gotcha” questions and anything else that comes up. Running the state is about more than answering financial questions, you have to have more than one trick in the bag.
- Levois - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:09 pm:
While I voted for unfair, he probably should’ve commented on this. Since he avoided this topic it’ll make this campaign even nastier.
- Peoria guy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:11 pm:
I suppose any question is fair in love and war and politics, but Quinn’s subsequent attack was stupid and not justified.
- circular firing squad - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:11 pm:
Fair..schmair
On the mark and totally Destroys Mitt secret plans to women in ‘burbs on his side…Can not believe Mr. SHRIMP or the big tickets consultant did not expect and prepare
Huge blunder
- MrJM - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:12 pm:
“I am working here in Illinois to win an election.”
And Bruce won’t answer any questions or take any responsibility for anything that doesn’t further his goal.
– MrJM
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:12 pm:
Levois -
Anyone running for governor ought to have a position on domestic violence and child abuse.
Unless its just in his “I don’t have a social agenda” box.
- OLK 73 - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:12 pm:
You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
- Keyser Soze - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:15 pm:
Had the reporter ever been in a hotly contested campaign she would know that the candidates are absolutely consumed with the task at hand. She might has well asked what Rauner thought of “Dancing with the Stars.” Instead she wasted her access, and her opportunity to ask a serious question, say on taxation, job growth , etc., etc. Show biz as usual.
- Wally - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:18 pm:
YDD, are you as outraged about the domestic shelter cuts in Illinois and the mess at DCFS as you are about a minority NFL owner refusing to answer a stupid question about Ray Rice???
Of course you are not!!
- Wally - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:19 pm:
If the players in question played for the Steelers, it is a fair question. They don’t.
- Mason born - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:23 pm:
I put unfair however in honesty i don’t think there is a fair. I think it is irrelevant.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:24 pm:
Right, Wally.
All of those millions of Americans who think that Rice and Peterson shouldn’t be playing, or that the NFL should take a tougher stand…they are just wrong.
After all, domestic violence is a private affair.
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:26 pm:
The question? It is a fair one.
The issue? The cuts to domestic violence shelters in Illinois are significantly more important.
Strange choice of things to focus on by Mary Ann Ahern.
- MrJM - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:29 pm:
“You’re damned if you [take a position on domestic violence & child abuse] and damned if you don’t [take a position on domestic violence & child abuse]?”
Really?!?
– MrJM
- Amalia - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:29 pm:
Yes, it’s fair. the NFL owners are being idiots in not trying to do better all around the issue. Playing while awaiting case resolution just will not cut it.
and while we’re at it, Roger Goodell hires 4 white women to work on the issue? what planet is he on? These women certainly know their subject, but Roger is totally tone deaf on how to create a better community to talk about the issue and make changes. It’s offensive. He should have included African American women and he could even have included a man. There is no law that says only women can talk to men about what should and should not happen with domestic violence issues.
Rauner, what do you have to say about the teams and how they handle things, and what Roger is or is not doing? You have a financial interest, why don’t you take a personal interest?!?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:32 pm:
===Strange choice of things to focus on===
A better candidate could’ve handled that with ease. Blast the NFL and blast Quinn, then propose EVEN MORE SPENDING along with tax cuts.
lol
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:32 pm:
===If the players in question played for the Steelers, it is a fair question. They don’t.===
Ben Roethlisberger was accused, was Bruce a part owner then?
How difficult is it to be AGAINST child abuse and domestic violence?
It could have been a softball pitch, but Beuve is focusing other places.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:32 pm:
Fair. This is among the most talked about stories of the moment. A candidate for office should have no trouble articulating a position on domestic violence and/or child abuse. He owns a small part of an NFL franchise. He produced and aired an ad with Mike Ditka as his co-star.
And his supporters think Ahern’s question was unfair? Wow. It strains credulity to think he doesn’t have an opinion on this.
And it’s not like he has some Steeler’s stock in his 403 (b). Other than the Packers, it’s pretty rare to be offered the chance to own part of a team. For Rauner, it’s just another exclusive club he belongs to.
No flag on this play.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:38 pm:
Okay Bruce, you stand for women’s health and safety. Now how about children beaten bloody with a switch? How do you feel about them?
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:38 pm:
Rich - spot on. There was no pivot there. Though in this race, it is surprising he didn’t conclude with
“This is a serious matter to me. In fact, a Rauner administration will make this a priority by opening new Domestic Violence Shelters across the state. At least one in every county in Illinois.”
“Concurrently, we will be cutting taxes to negative 10 percent. Thank you, and have a good day.”
- Amalia - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:41 pm:
for anyone concerned that the NFL has appointed 4 white women to helm this important work, see this discussion….
NFL’s Social Responsibility Team: All White Women?
http://newsone.com/3052220/controversy-over-the-nfls-social-responsibility-team/
When people with money don’t weigh in on things, the result is on them.
- nothing to see here - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:42 pm:
He should’ve said (on someone’s advice), i’ve told the steelers buy me out as soon as a possible, and i’ve sent back all the crap they gave me, the nfl is an embarassment and i want no part of it, and i’ve fired ditka.
- DuPage Bard - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:52 pm:
Imagine if Goodall just fell on the sword and said my bad, I resign. The owners can then point the finger and take the heat off themselves.
My bet is the owners would find Goodall a nice “consulting” job pretty quickly.
- Frenchie Mendoza - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:53 pm:
So he has no comment until he talks to Shrimp et al.
Then he has comment. And it’s what he should have said in the first place.
All around — applause.
- Amalia - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 2:58 pm:
Note to Rauner, and everyone else take note as well, you don’t have to be a husband or a father of daughters to get that Ray Rice is a criminal. or a parent to understand that Peterson is a criminal. you don’t have to be anything more than a person to understand lots of issues. stop with the pandering qualifying.
and do something with your financial interest in the Steelers. You have a place to ask them to push Goodell. Oh, wait, the Steelers owners are a part of the two person investigation committee looking at Goodell, right? it’s the Rooney and Mara owners doing the looking so you really can say something to them and make them do something. do it.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:00 pm:
===“Bruce thinks what Ray Rice did is deplorable and the NFL has badly mishandled the situation. As a husband and father of four daughters, Bruce stands for women’s health and safety everyday. ===
Bruce Rauner had to… think …about this response?
Pretty pathetic you can’t remember your a father or husband … or that you are against domestic violence or child abuse?
Goodness gracious, how sad.
Yea Bruce. You come around to being against violence.
Congratulations.
- McLean Farmboy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:02 pm:
What he needs to say now is that as a part-owner of a team in the same division, he did not want to get accused of tampering by providing an opinion.
- too obvious - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:03 pm:
Didn’t the Steelers have a similar sexual assault problem surrounding their own QB? Someone would need to confirm but I think that’s right.
- Robo - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:07 pm:
It’s unfair they picked his deaf ear.
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:12 pm:
Because the guy with four daughters… hates women? Makes sense.
Domestic violence is nothing to trifle with and he should have gotten it right without having to pause or even catch his breath, but some are taking the one-sided “righteous indignation” too far.
Downward spiral continues.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:12 pm:
Holy Cow, how did the guy not go yard on that? I can’t believe it.
You need a script to handle a gift-wrapped question about Ray Rice and beating women, about Adrian Peterson and beating kids? Are you kidding me?
You’re the only person in America who can’t readily voice opinions on the subjects?
He wouldn’t have had to get in the weeds about his ownership stake. All he had to do was talk about his disgust for the acts, his support of the Rice indefinite suspension, the Mueller investigation, and his commitment as governor to combating domestic violence in all forms.
And it all would have been on free TV.
You need the cheez-whiz kids to vet a response on domestic violence before you speak?
Is this guy bad on his feet or what?
- Aldyth - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:13 pm:
It’s a fair question. Rauner has his scripts written for him, so why didn’t they write one for this?
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:22 pm:
==If the players in question played for the Steelers, it is a fair question. ==
How many women have accused the Pittsburgh Steelers QB of rape?
If Rauner is incensed by Ray Lewis, what’s he told the Steelers organization about Ben Roethlisberger?
Did Rauner call for him to be let go? Traded?
- A guy... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:22 pm:
=== wordslinger - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:12 pm:
Holy Cow, how did the guy not go yard on that? I can’t believe it.====
Agreed with Sling. Could’ve kicked this one 200 yards.
First the UNFAIR part. He is not Dan Rooney. He doesn’t speak for the Steelers. I’m sure that’s a rule written or not for every “investor” in the team who isn’t a principal owner.
Had he been completely on top of it he could have started with, “Not speaking for the Steelers, the NFL, or anyone else…I’m a husband and a father…
Then condemn away. The question was unfair in it’s premise, but it was a teed up tomato to hit hard.
- hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:22 pm:
He’s an NFL owner who is running a commercial touting an endorsement from a former NFL player and coach who is currently a commentator on NFL’s Monday night broadcast.
How is it “unfair” to ask him to weigh in on the current NFL controversy?
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:23 pm:
The obvious follow-up question: in Bruce Rauner’s mind, what is the distinction between the allegations against Ray Rice and Ben Roethlisberger?
- dupage dan - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:24 pm:
Mr Atsaves said the first question was fair but the second wasn’t. The second question wouldn’t have been asked if the first one was answered, right?
This was a lobbed question - a softball. I’m not saying Ms Ahern meant it to be but it was a simple - “yes, it’s a mess - the NFL has gotta fix it” kinda question. Rauner blew it.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:26 pm:
Did Bruce Rauner buy a stake in the Pittsburgh Steelers after the allegations against Ben Roethlisberger were public knowledge?
If so, it makes Rauner’s statements about Ray Rice seem insincere.
Unless it’s more ok for White QBs to rape women than for Black running backs to beat women.
- Arthur Andersen - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:28 pm:
Fair question, terrible non-answer.
You think if she asked him about the Dow closing at an all-time high he wouldn’t have had something?
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:40 pm:
I can’t believe the Quinn campaign would try to paint this guy as out of touch!!! Well thank goodness he isn’t throwing any fuel on the fire…..
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:42 pm:
Given that Pittsburgh is led by a guy that has paid money to make rape allegations go away, methinks Bruce Rauner is going to hear more of this kind of question.
Wonder how coddling rapist NFL players plays with suburban women.
- Anonymous 88 - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:46 pm:
Voted fair question because Rauner touts his experience as a businessman as his calling card for the highest elective office in the state. His part ownership of an NFL team is part of his business experience. That “industry” is currently under scrutiny due to some pretty serious issues among its players and the league’s leadership. Totally reasonable to ask the man what his take is on this issue in one of his chosen “industries.”
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:47 pm:
Bruce Rauner: he won’t hire Black people that will have access to his investments but he has no problem with a White guy who rapes women working for him.
- Norseman - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:48 pm:
As a 1/5,011,557th owner of the Packers, I think it’s important for the NFL to take aggressive action against domestic violence and child abuse. I’ll tell Roger Goodell that during the next owners meeting. Hopefully, they’ll remember my invitation. Over my 16 years as owner, they seem to keep misplacing them.
- Ahoy! - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:49 pm:
Realizing everything is probably fair in politics, I voted unfair, especially since I don’t know how much of the company he owns. I own stock in Yahoo and tons of other companies, it doesn’t mean I’m calling them on controversial issues and it also doesn’t mean they give a rip what I think.
I know it might be hard for “Joe six-pack” and “Joe the plummer” to understand minority ownership doesn’t mean you call them every time there is an issue in the industry they are in.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:49 pm:
Nyberg, you’re a jerk.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:50 pm:
Had he responded in the first place we wouldn’t even be talking about this. Rauner can’t seem to get his thoughts together very well when it comes to being asked questions. What was so hard about saying what his campaign ended up saying? Sheesh.
- my two cents - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:52 pm:
Lately the only thing Rauner has done right is to refuse to meet Quinn to debate.
- The Schuss - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:53 pm:
Fair question. Quinn answered the question yet Rauner avoided it? Which is why Rauner won’t win in November.
It’s actually not that complicated, either you think the NFL isn’t doing enough or they are. That their response wasn’t appropriate or it was. Yes or No. Either he can think on his feet or he can’t. Apparently he can’t.
Rauner is already in a polling deficit with women voters in Illinois, and this will lose him more votes in that key demographic.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:54 pm:
===What was so hard about saying what his campaign ended up saying? Sheesh.===
Rauner will get back to you as to why it was so hard after Schrimpf tells him why.
Pathetic Shop, Clueless Principle on his feet.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 3:55 pm:
Huh, Quinn got asked about Rice today. Guess that was unfair too, huh?
Rauner supporters ought to be dismayed by this story. Beyond the Baron’s shameful response (is he the only person in America with no opinion?), it exposes the team around him as being woefully underprepared. That doesn’t bode well for November.
I’ll grant that he probably is bound by certain covenants in his ownership agreement with the Rooney’s, but that wouldn’t stop him from forcefully denouncing the NFL, calling for Goodell to resign and selling off his portion if he wanted to. Plenty of spots to park that money, I’m sure. Just maybe not as clubby.
- A guy... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:04 pm:
Sorry about abusing the policy here, but that comment is jerky beyond the pale.
- calling you out - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:05 pm:
Seriously this is what most everyone is concerned about, a question about an NFL Player. This is what voters are willing to consider as serious, with everything that Illinois has going on, businesses leaving, unemployment rate rising, debt, and this is what its about. Sad day that voters will raise issues about this when there is so much more to worry about! I see politics has and is heading to an all new low…. Its an irrelevant question……
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:07 pm:
Norseman - I’ve been saying it for years. “Ever since he bought 1/5,011,557th of the Packers, that Norseman sure has changed.”
Enjoy the view from the owners box at the next game
And try not to look down on us little people below.
- Nony - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:14 pm:
So clearly fishing for a sound bite so I said unfair.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:15 pm:
You may not like the comment, but it is factually accurate.
Rauner doesn’t hire Blacks who would have access to his money and investments.
But he has not problem being invested in a NFL team which has a guy who has settled multiple sexual assault allegations with big payments. Some of these sexual assaults were probably rapes.
But Bruce Rauner wants to run government like he runs businesses.
It’s looking more like Quinn is going to thump Rauner, not just eke past him.
But Rauner and Griffin got to show they could burn piles of money and they’re still rich.
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:46 pm:
== Rauner doesn’t hire Blacks who would have access to his money and investments. ==
Not a single black employee ever worked at or helped lead a single one of the firms he invested in? Not a single person he invested his money, time and effort in were not black? Now that really would be shocking.
Your posts add a lot to the discussion here, Carl, and your reflections the other day on the figures you interviewed on radio in college were really interesting read. But this stretches things too far.
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:49 pm:
That should be == were black? == rather than == were not black? ==
- Filmmaker Professor - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:52 pm:
Fair question but irrelevant.
- paddyrollingstone - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 4:54 pm:
Fair and easy question - a 16 inch softball over the plate: “Mary Ann, I have not spoken to them but that type of behavior is reprehensible and people like that belong in jail not on the field.”
- my two cents - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 5:08 pm:
It’s a fair question and he was tripped up the same way Sarah Palin was when asked what she likes to read. It’s telling that he’s unable to answer even the most basic questions.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 5:21 pm:
I wonder if the weirdo pretending to be Coach K really thinks he’s doing Rauner any good or is just engaging in self-gratification?
- walker - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 5:26 pm:
Golden opportunity missed in the first response.
Seem like Rauner’s been trained not to answer random questions for which he doesn’t have a prepared answer.
- Wensicia - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 5:26 pm:
I’m relieved to see we have spokespeople for Rauner telling us what thinks, since he can’t seem to tell us hisself.
- Norseman - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 5:34 pm:
=== Enjoy the view from the owners box at the next game ===
Not yet FKA, the architect is still trying to figure out the logistics of building an owners box to fit a few hundred thousand owners. Her problem is that we’ll have to sell stock to pay for the box. Then she’ll have to redo the plans to address the new owners.
=== And try not to look down on us little people below. ===
Never FKA. When the box is done, I’ll invite you up.
- circularfiringsquad - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 5:55 pm:
Anyone else notice Mitt did not roll out Mr. Shrimp for the mulligan on the response? Hmmm
Another bad day for Mitt. Better get Slip&Sue out to handle this one…..not
Fire, Aim, Ready.
- Honest Abe - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 6:30 pm:
If you’re running for Governor and want to be the leader of this state you should be able to answer any question that you are asked of you. This guy can not be trusted. He is a tax dodger and anyone that hides his money can not be trusted nor should he be the governor of this state.
It’s a fair question. The people need to know where he stands on every issue. What is he afraid of by answering a simple question.
- Amalia - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 6:33 pm:
and when you play it like that, here’s the headline you get from Chicago CBS local….
Rauner, Partial Owner Of Pittsburgh Steelers, Sidesteps NFL Domestic Violence Question
Heckofajob, Bruceie
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 6:42 pm:
== When the box is done, I’ll invite you up. ==
Mighty fine of you, Norseman. Maybe we can make it a Steelers game and wave at Bruce across the way?
“Pardon me, Bruce. Can you pass the Grey Poupon?” lol Have a good one
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 7:01 pm:
Does anyone besides me find it grating that spokespersons tell us what “Bruce thinks” or says? It could be a statement from the candiate, it could be a statement from the campaign, it could even be “Bruce asked me to tell you” but we get people telling us what other people think. Same applies to both campaigns but I don’t find it so often with Quinn’s folk?
- Just the Way It Is One - Wednesday, Sep 17, 14 @ 11:35 pm:
It’s just utterly UNbelievable that he would evade MaryAnn and not answer the question directly from the get-go! I mean–c’mon–What?! Walks away and ignores her? After this subject has been literally DOMinating the TV and Airwaves for days on END now!!Goodness Gracious, Rauner:it’s a NO BRAINER! One couldn’t even HOPE for more of a Softball for a querie…!
Kind of makes me wonder back to a Quinn Campaign Theme from 4 years ago when ya hear stuff like this: Just “Who IS this Guy???” (’Cuzz he sure ain’t one of US–the 99.99%, that is)…!
- mot250 - Thursday, Sep 18, 14 @ 12:46 am:
Irrelevant question designed to to shock and misdirect the voters from Quinn’s actual history of failures as the Governor of IL. Note the later reports on the reductions in support of women’s protection and recovery programs from domestic violence that has occurred under Quinn’s rule. The State of IL can’t handle another 4 years of Quinn’s known corruption.