23 Comments - Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 9:49 am: === At least he didn’t make you vote present === Bwahahahahahaha. Glad to know nobody has a will of their own. Sheesh. LOL - Centennial - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 9:52 am: Good to hear HGOP still has a sense of humor. No snark. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 9:55 am: Great to read, that exchange is hilarious. Great to read? Why? As unified as the Raunerite methodology makes the GOP, there’s at least a sense, right here, that, “yeah, Rauner, he’s ours, and we own that, but I’m not pleased about it.” It’s telling. I hope… Man, the things Rauner actually could get done with autonomous GOP Caucuses guiding and helping the governor with what is or isn’t possible… and getting things done… while still having control of the GOP by Rauner. Love that you shared this Rich, it’s just funny on its own, away from it all… and noteworthy too(?) - Dome Gnome - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 9:59 am: “Have all emoted who wish? Have all emoted who wish?” - Amalia - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:00 am: bipartisan/non partisan misery sharing makes us all feel a bit better. - Namaste - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:03 am: “a plague o’both your houses” - Anonin' - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:15 am: Good to hear HGOP still has a sense of humor. How could they not have a sense of humor and with the nonsense they portray everyday….Could you face being SlickHeadSandy without a big giggle? The questions are endless. - VanillaMan - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:20 am: If half your staff is sick, then you don’t have enough diversity within your staff. Or - half the staff needs to stop kissing up to the same rump that is making them sick. - Michelle Flaherty - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:31 am: Ron Sandack wants to know WHO sent this text? WHO, Rich? WHO? - BoBo - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:38 am: Oswego, It’s called a caucus position. Political parties are a caucus and take like votes on issues important to their party’s ideology and policy proposals. Members don’t have identical views but share enough common interests to utilize unity in an effort to affect change or preserve status quo. Republicans are utilizing the caucus position in an effort to bring about change. Democrats are utilizing the caucus position to preserve the status quo. I’m glad I could conceptualize this for you. Hope this helps. All the best in your future endeavors. BoBo - ash - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:42 am: Nothing like actually representing districts they were elected to serve. - Roamin' Numeral - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:42 am: ==Half our folks are sick. Unreal== Hang in there! - Jordan - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:44 am: Hahahaha. Hilarious. - Norseman - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 10:45 am: Michelle is always there with a good one. - ash - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 11:33 am: Bobo — is that like the clown? - Ghost - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 12:22 pm: is it a caucaus position if you ate inly behind it for money? i thought we used another word then caucus for people who sold themselves for cash….. but the antispecial interest gov has set up his own special interest cash funds to buy what he wants… the GOP in Il is for sale, and business is good…. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 12:26 pm: ===Political parties are a caucus and take like votes on issues important to their party’s ideology and policy proposals. Members don’t have identical views but share enough common interests to utilize unity in an effort to affect change or preserve status quo.=== The Raunerite Party? These aren’t GOP ideals, but Bruce Rauner demands. Welp… If ruining social services is a-ok with you for prevailing wage being elininated and collective bargaining removed… Then the Caucus wanting that, or being, themselves, held hostage to vote against their better selves and ordinary people, then Raunerites can own that too. - Michelle Flaherty - You never… fail. You never disappoint. - BoBo - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 1:10 pm: Oswego, I appreciate your enthusiasm, as a struggling expert on GOP ideals? I think you are still missing the point. It’s ok! Don’t panic, nobody is trying to ruin social services silly. The ideal is more likely the improvement of the state’s business economy. As the state becomes more attractive to business, big and small, these employers hire more people and expand operations. This improves social services by increasing the amount of tax revenue collected by the state, local governments, and Uncle Sam. By improving prevailing wage policies and collective bargaining rules Illinois would attract more business, more workers, larger paychecks. Governments will increase their revenues. Social services would improve yes, but the best outcome of all would be if the state’s economy improved for enough of those “ordinary folk” you describe to no longer be dependent on government. Instead they could be part of that improved business climate, leaving room in social services for those that can’t work. I hope you would agree that this would be the ideal for everyone Try to relax while our adversarial system works its self out. It will be ok, I promise. Always happy to improve your understanding. Good luck with all of your endeavors. BoBo - Oswego Willy - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 1:47 pm: People needing to make less money is not a Republican Ideal, but a Raunerite Ideal. ===Don’t panic, nobody is trying to ruin social services silly.=== Where are you living? Ask Ounce of Prevention. ===By improving prevailing wage policies and collective bargaining rules Illinois would attract more business, more workers, larger paychecks.=== Where are the charts, reports, to show that? What is the ROI on it. Saying it doesn’t make it true. === Social services would improve yes, but the best outcome of all would be if the state’s economy improved for enough of those “ordinary folk” you describe to no longer be dependent on government. Instead they could be part of that improved business climate, leaving room in social services for those that can’t work.=== Show your work. Thanks. - BoBo - Until you show your work how decimating social services is worth eliminating prevailing wage and collective bargaining, you are a troll, so stop trolling until you show the ROI. - olddog - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 1:52 pm: === Don’t panic, nobody is trying to ruin social services silly. The ideal is more likely the improvement of the state’s business economy. Don’t panic, nobody is trying to ruin social services silly. The ideal is more likely the improvement of the state’s business economy. === Like in Kansas, right? - JoanP - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 2:04 pm: I’m still laughing! - WhoKnew - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 2:08 pm: - Michelle Flaherty - Should that be: Who! Who-Who! - walker - Friday, Oct 30, 15 @ 3:19 pm: BoBo: Thanks. We all pretty much know how caucuses work. Your view is overly simplistic self-soothing. What we’re noticing is how much caucus solidarity is driven from above, and not resulting from all members actually agreeing with positions they’re being pressured to support. It is of interest, because sometimes the pressure can move upstream. It also appears that unanimity is more often a tool required by a minority party caucus than a majority one. (No criticism implied.) Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.