* This banner went up last night at Roscoe and Halsted as the Boystown neighborhood preps for the annual Pride Parade…
* And this banner was hung yesterday outside a bar called Sidetracks…
That particular sign was paid for by the Quinn campaign because it owns the website listed. ADDED: I’m told that neither banner was paid for by the Quinn campaign. That particular banner was paid for by the bar’s owner.
* Some gay activists are obviously hoping to turn this year’s parade into an anti-Rauner event. From a press release…
LGBT Couples & Leaders Call for “Teachable Moment” on Rauner’s Record at 2014 Pride Parade
CHICAGO- As organizers prepare for this year’s Chicago Pride Parade, expected to attract record-breaking numbers past last year’s one million mark, LGBT couples and leaders will gather on Thursday, June 26th to make a significant announcement regarding Bruce Rauner’s record of opposition to marriage equality.
WHO: IL Representative Greg Harris, Lead Sponsor of Marriage Equality Bill
IL Representative Kelly Cassidy, Co-Sponsor of Marriage Equality Bill
Bernard Cherkasov, CEO, Equality Illinois
Art Johnston, Co-Founder, Equality Illinois
Jim Bennett, IL Unites for Marriage
Other elected officials and LGBT advocates and allies
Illinois families
Discuss.
- Johnny Q. Suburban - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 8:49 am:
Man, could you imagine the coal raking Kirk Dillard would be getting had he won the nomination?
- circularfiringsquad - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 8:52 am:
Hopefully they teach the difference between being a tax cheat and fee cheat like BizWiz Mitt and R8…failing to file reminds us of the late great mayor….perhaps Mitt will invoke that memory for cover
Seems like we have seen enough to know that Mitt and Slip & Sue not ready for prime time
- too obvious - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 8:59 am:
Too funny. Serves Rauner right. His pandering to the base in the primary comes back to bite him.
Reap what you sow Mr. Phony.
- Mighty M. Mouse - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 8:59 am:
Is Brucie going to march in the parade?
- Drew - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:01 am:
I hope the Quinn camp has larger plans for realrauner.com, otherwise it seems like a waste of money … After writing that I went and looked at the backend on the website and it appears they tried to use their own video hosting service (with the idea of adding more videos, I assume) but couldn’t get it to work, so they just stuck the youtube version of the video in there.
- too obvious - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:04 am:
Topinka and other Republicans regularly have events at that Sidetracks bar in Boystown. Will the anti-Rauner signage deter them? I doubt it.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:07 am:
What the Rauner Crew failed to learn in the Primary was understanding and overcoming “negatives”.
With a mere 10% negatives, the 17 point drop in just days, Rauner has no identifiable base of political constituency, and these banners and these negative images resonating with a true constituency is going to hammer and shake the Rauner Cake.
You can weather negative numbers rising, but only if you have solidified a base to build upon. Democrats and Indies, with no geographic center is NOT the best way to bake a cake.
Then add the alienating of traditional GOP voters and calling 22 members of the ILGA GOP corrupt, these banners for the Parade but into focus, “who exactly is Bruce Rauner looking to be in his winning cake, when he alienates GOP voters, unions, teachers, the LGBT, pro-life groups, conservatives…
… and no ground game to ID who is left for Bruce Rauner, and also to get them to the polls.
Quinn has a base, they can build a winning ground game, and vilifying Rauner, raising his negatives every day, will be a cake that Quinn can try to bake for victory.
These banners are more than a sign, the are “signs” that Rauner negatives will be more of a factor in GOTV, than Quinn’s positives bringing voters to vote.
If the Rauner Crew, embracing Democrats and Indies over the GOP, blows these banners off as “baloney”, this will be a moment to look back at and understand that Rauner having no base came back to haunt him.
- foster brooks - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:10 am:
Expect a flip flop from baron carhart
- allknowingmasterofracoondom - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:14 am:
OW - all good theories. This race is wide open and wild in my opinion. Rauner does not need to be very bold from here to November to win, he just needs to avoid a “moment” that would flush his campaign altogether. If he does that, my opinion is he wins. Quinn is just too easy to beat this time around…
Also, I am part of his base…….and I know his base.
- Angry Chicagoan - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:14 am:
“a bar called Sidetracks”. That’s an understatement. Sidetrack (no s at the end) is as I understand the largest-grossing bar in the entire state of Illinois by a large margin. There are actually five or six bar counters in it. Also lots of political fundraisers there. LOTS, of which this one is a classic example. You will notice Art Johnson’s name on that Equality Illinois list. He owns the place with as far as I know one other business partner.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:18 am:
This is conjecture of course, but I’d wager the overwhelming majority of attendees and participants will support Quinn over Rauner so the goal should be to drive turnout among that cohort. And, I think the emotional appeal of the banner with the quote is more effective to that end than the Sidetracks sign. I also hope they blanket the entire route with smaller versions of the quote banner - there are way more folks more or less stationary along the route than will be passing by that intersection.
Art owns Sidetracks, I believe
- John A Logan - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:20 am:
As Hillary said, what difference does it make. Those voters were never going Rauner, or any republicans way in November to start with. Rauner is mitigating the intensity with his “I have no social agenda” stance. A few banners at a gay pride parade mean little.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:22 am:
===Also, I am part of his base…….and I know his base.===
lol, you are the only one that knows his base, so who is Rauner’s base, since you are one, and where are they?
If you say, “the silent disenfranchised all around”, that is not a base, that is a smokescreen, disguised as a base, wrapped in winging and praying, (sorry to the chickens - “winging”)
- wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:33 am:
John, you really think there aren’t any gay Republicans or straight Republicans who support gay marriage?
Public opinion has forced politicians of all stripes to show their cards on this issue. Smilin’ Joe Biden had to push Obama off the fence, and good on him for that.
Rauner doesn’t get a weasel-word, flippity-floppity pass. No one does anymore.
- In Absentia - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:35 am:
I don’t know John A. Logan - when people are motivated to defeat you, they spread the word to friends and family. Lakeview residents are keenly educated voters and they tell their mothers who to vote for. The Pride parade is a powerful pulpit in Chicago so I thin this hurts Rauner a little to be completely cast out of the community…because not everyone up there really loves Quinn either. Please don’t think that all Lakeview residents are one-issue voters.
- Amalia - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:37 am:
turning up the volume could ensure that people will see and understand the undercurrent of most of the Republican party on this issue. this is a matter of trust. Choice advocates, take a lesson from this, as birth control rights are in danger everywhere. turn up the volume.
- anonymoose - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:38 am:
The “Equal Marriage” banner is p4retty darn effective.
The “no” Bruce Rauner banner at Sidetracks, is not a good banner. For all I know, Bruce may not be invited back due an off-key or off-color rendition of “Everything’s Coming Up Roses.” Seriously, not everyone can sing Sondheim. And another thing, for some people, like me, the “teachable moment” is learning not to sing along to show tunes in public:)
- abc123 - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:39 am:
What a crock. Those seriously interested in advancing acceptance of gays should be especially happy to see at least a tolerant head of the Illinois GOP, even if he has to stay quiet about it. Rauner is not hostile to gays, gay marriage is here to stay, and you know it. Get off it.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:41 am:
Here’s what I don’t quite understand; the LGBT movement scored a large victory with Gay Marriage legislation. If not for MJM, this wouldn’t have occurred until much later at the very least. It would lead you to believe that this was an uncomfortable issue for a lot of people who might be pro-marriage, but not anti-gay. Compassionate and good people who may have opposed this, but been happy for people when it passed anyway.
They’ve scored the victory. Why gild the lily. If you keep spiking the football, there might be some quiet, but large blow back. Most of the gay people that people sympathized with were quiet good and loving neighbors and friends. Maybe family members. This strikes of becoming militant about it and some sympathy just might not be as tolerable. To me it’s like poker. If you’re a big winner, thank everyone, smile, put your winnings in your pocket to count later and leave the table graciously so when you come back, you’ll be among friends. Just my opinion, but this could rub a lot of folks the wrong way.
I’ve come to respect your opinion, but don’t rub my face in it and gloat. Or you lose me.
- Responsa - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:45 am:
Politicians blatantly trying to use discrete constituencies for political purposes, and leaders of constituencies allowing themselves to be used for political purposes is as old as the hills. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t.
Generally, though, in the end I think statewide or national elections are won or lost by how individual voters shake out; voters who are primarily influenced not by the top-down endorsement/positions taken by a group constituency, but based on what’s going on at that specific time frame in their own family or their own personal economic situation.
- AlabamaShake - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:48 am:
**I’ve come to respect your opinion, but don’t rub my face in it and gloat.**
I have absolutely no idea how pointing out that Rauner said he would veto Marriage Equality is somehow gloating.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:53 am:
=== AlabamaShake - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:48 am:
**I’ve come to respect your opinion, but don’t rub my face in it and gloat.**
I have absolutely no idea how pointing out that Rauner said he would veto Marriage Equality is somehow gloating.====
This issue has been decided. Even the mob knows you only need to kill a guy once. The rest is a waste of bullets. Bullets that might come in handy later.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:53 am:
- abc123 -, and - A Guy… -,
Bruce Rauner said he would veto it.
I didn’t say it. Bruce Rauner said it.
So, are you both afraid of “Educating” constituencies on how “Your Guy”, - A Guy… - would have handled SSM?
No different than any issue already decided, but reminding voters, “you vote for ‘X’, they were never with you when it mattered.”
- wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:55 am:
–I’ve come to respect your opinion, but don’t rub my face in it and gloat. Or you lose me.–
Can you lose someone you never had? “Lose me” on what, anyway?
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:58 am:
True enough Willie. He also said on a big social change like this he’d like to see a referendum that took into account the highest number of opinions. We’ll never know. Despite passing (which ultimately is good- there’s no need to debate the issue anymore) there were people who were not for this. We’ll never know the real number, but it doesn’t make any difference. In my observance, society is accepting this and dealing with it in an intelligent manner. These displays could drive wedges where there simply is no need for that to happen.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:01 am:
=== wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 9:55 am:
–I’ve come to respect your opinion, but don’t rub my face in it and gloat. Or you lose me.–
Can you lose someone you never had? “Lose me” on what, anyway?====
slinger, if there were ever an issue that had what could be a majority trapped in the middle, it was this one. No side of it ‘had’ enough. The middle was composed of compassionate people who struggled both ways. Many I speak to are grateful the issue has been decided.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:05 am:
A guy, tell it to Rauner, he made that comment the very day marriage equality passed.
Why don’t you let those who worked for equality worry about strategy, they seem to be doing just fine, and they never needed your advice before.
- siriusly - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:16 am:
A guy - it’s not driving a wedge. He said it pandering for primary votes. If he really meant to say that he would sign it if it passed - then he should have said it. But he said he would veto it.
How can anyone know what he really means because he never says. This is the rare example where he actually took a position and now all his people are backtracking. He’s more Blago than Blago !!
- walker - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:20 am:
This has nothing to do with a push by Quinnsters.
I have been hearing this complaint about Rauner for weeks, directly from members/supporters of these communities, regardless of their party affiliations.
- Wensicia - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:31 am:
==I’ve come to respect your opinion, but don’t rub my face in it and gloat. Or you lose me.==
I see, gays finally got equal treatment on the most important personal social issue, so you want them to retreat back into their closets and be silent? Lose you? I can’t even find you beneath the distaste.
- Aldyth - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:34 am:
A guy: “He also said on a big social change like this he’d like to see a referendum that took into account the highest number of opinions”.
Do you really believe that human rights ought to be issued based on majority rule? If put up to popular vote in 1920, would women have been given the right to vote? Do you think interracial marriage would have had majority support? Human rights are rights because you are a human being, not because the majority says you can have that right.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:37 am:
=This issue has been decided. Even the mob knows you only need to kill a guy once.=
A Guy-
So Rauner won’t be talking about anything that Quinn has done that’s already been “decided”? Ok.
- Just Me - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:43 am:
The Pride Parade is inherently a political event.
Speaking of Sidetrack (no “s”): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=F4JxM3RFW_s
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:43 am:
===siriusly - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:16 am:
A guy - it’s not driving a wedge. ====
I’m speaking for myself here.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:50 am:
=== Aldyth - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:34 am:====
Aldyth, we disagree on a premise here, so our debate would be fruitless. I don’t want to start a tangent, but Gay persons did have a Civil Right with civil unions in place. I don’t now, nor have I ever believed Gay Marriage was a Civil Rights movement. I believe intellectual history would support my position. That being said, I’ve been describing me mostly. I know and love many gay people, members of my own family, many friends and business associates. Not even all of them were of a consensus on gay marriage. I accept it as the law. It’s not harming me or anyone I know of. We’re adjusting. That’s all.
- Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 10:58 am:
a guy, you might want to stop now.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 11:12 am:
- A Guy… -
===Gay persons===
Yikes…
===I know and love many gay people, …===
All these “people”, family included, want to be called “Gay persons”?
You might want to listen to - AA -, and sit out a few plays here.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 11:19 am:
OW, don’t think I’d take any advice from you or AA. What in the heck is wrong with the terms “gay persons” or “gay people”? Your tendency to “parse” is a stupid solution looking for an invisible problem.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 11:27 am:
Last year’s parade drew over ONE MILLION people? Where did they all stand? Park? Go to the bathroom? If you stood folks side by side shoulder to shoulder would over ONE MILLION people line the parade site and festival area?
Really? These past, present and future estimates of attendees at rallies, parades, outdoor concerts, protests always are hugely overestimated.
I have no issue calling it one of the largest attended parades, because it IS in the Chicago Metropolitan Area. But over ONE MILLION?
Give. Me. A. Break!
- Bourbonrich - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 11:36 am:
-A guy - Your asking the question is evidence that you do not have a clue on the issue of how to address your fellow human beings.
- Black Ivy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 12:00 pm:
Of course, the LGBT community will be as obnoxiously anti-Rauner as possible during the Chicago Gay Pride Parade. Legalizing gay marraige is Governor Quinn’s allegedly pinnacle achievement. Single-issue voters might be swayed by this nonsense, but not me. I, like Rauner, appreciate diversity of opinion amongst Illinois citizens on the issue of gay marriage. Beleive it or not, many folks still adhere to the notion that marriage is between a man and woman…
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 12:03 pm:
=== Bourbonrich - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 11:36 am:
-A guy - Your asking the question is evidence that you do not have a clue on the issue of how to address your fellow human beings.====
Thanks for the enlightened enlightenment. I’ve been doing just fine with the gay people in my life without your able assistance. But your judgement, is acknowledged.
- Timmeh - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 12:22 pm:
==Rauner is not hostile to gays, gay marriage is here to stay, and you know it. Get off it.==
It doesn’t matter that gay marriage has passed. There’s still the need for more cultural acceptance. Is it the law of the land in all 50 states? No? Then there’s still more work to be done. Part of that work is holding politicians accountable for what they say. But more of that is sending the message to the Republican base that they’re part of the problem with their party if they’re so adamantly against gay marriage.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 12:34 pm:
===are hugely overestimated===
I don’t disagree Louis, and the worst of the bunch is the air and water show. 2 million? If they count everyone who lives within 5 miles of the lakefront, maybe.
The Pride Parade gets a huge crowd, but one million is most probably an exaggeration. 300-400,000 is probably the maximum. It’s in a residential area, so if you count everyone who lives there as a parade attendee, you probably start with 100,000.
Hugely over-estimated crowd estimates really began in 1979 when the Pope said mass in Grant Park. I was there, and it felt like a million people, but I think the Chicago media just liked the big number and the Chicago Police were happy to give it to them.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 12:42 pm:
~tolerant head of the Illinois GOP~
I’d like to see one of those. Rauner has flat out said he would have vetoed the bill. That’s hardly tolerant.
- kjackson921 - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:03 pm:
As a gay, black man who lives in Chicago and will be attending the parade on Sunday, right now my vote is Rauner’s to lose…at least until he actually starts announcing his positions on social issues. I don’t pretend to represent a quiet minority of a disenchanted dem base but I am completely at a loss as to what will make me vote for Quinn, or any of the democrats after the continual mess (fiscal and otherwise) they keep us in.
Yes, I know our fiscal mess is generated from many previous years of pushing the can down the road. But they were also part of the problem, not the solution.
Yes, dems championed marriage equality. But guess what? It was going to happen with them or without him. Case in point: Utah!
I don’t think Quinn is corrupt like past governors but he seems to be ineffective and/or inept. Madigan needs to go, and should have retired so Lisa could have at least been an alternative to Quinn.
As socially liberal as I am, I am willing to vote for the republicans if only to shake things up for the next 4 years and hopefully drive some new blood into the system. If not me, who? If not now, when?
- Anonymous - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:17 pm:
This is so awesome.
Banners should be created like that with various damaging quotes from him, placed all around the state (each suited to each area).
Like it has been said above, this crowd is already for Quinn - but it helps with publicity and can help with his fundraising for sure.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:18 pm:
===…at least until he actually starts announcing his positions on social issues. ===
Bruce Rauner said he would veto SSM.
Voting against your better self is what Rauner is counting on, and you are falling for it.
If you are going to vote to cut your nose in spite of your face, it’s your vote.
BTW, if it wasn’t for Quinn signing what Cullerton and Madigan shepherded, SSM would still be a discussion and not a law.
The parade and that forum of the parade and SSM and this Post by Rich, showing the banners, Rauner is quite clear, he would have vetoed. Reminding those at the parade is more than fair.
- anon - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:21 pm:
to kjackson921–Rauner worked to pull votes off the state, city and county pension reform bills..he worked to pull votes off extending current tax rates..the two most important tasks necessary to bring Illiois back from financial meltdown…in other states where GOP profiles like his have been elected things have gotten worse, not better–see Chris Christy and his disaster in New Jersey. Don’t buy the Koch brothers right wing rhetoric..and enjoy the parade.
- allknowingmasterofracoondom - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:23 pm:
Rauner said he would veto SSM because it was not brought to a referendum. Even if you don’t agree with that idea, or think he was a weasel about taking a stance, at least quote him properly.
OW - His base looks like me:
Educated, upper-middle class, suburban, sick of the status quo.
You just don’t see us in big groups because we are busy working for a living.
And I am glad Rauner is not invited to the parade. Last thing I want is to see my candidate in a picture being photobombed by someone dressed up as a dildo.
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:44 pm:
==As a gay, black man who lives in Chicago and will be attending the parade on Sunday, right now my vote is Rauner’s to lose==
Would you have voted for George Wallace in 1964 and 1968 and 1972? Why would you vote for someone who has utter contempt for your existence and your human rights? That is a vote for Bruce Rauner. You don’t have the vote for Quinn. There will be other candidates, like the Green Party and others. There will be write-ins.
==- Black Ivy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 12:00 pm:==
Tradition is not a logical form of argument.
== nor have I ever believed Gay Marriage was a Civil Rights movement. I believe intellectual history would support my position.==
If you believe that you don’t what a civil right is nor do you know what courts have said throughout our nation’s history.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/civil_rights
http://www.afer.org/blog/14-supreme-court-cases-marriage-is-a-fundamental-right/
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:48 pm:
===Educated, upper-middle class, suburban, sick of the status quo.===
“Educated”, like Clouting a Daughter for her education?
“Upper middle class”, so middle class aren’t a base constituency? You have to be “Upper”…hmmm.
“Suburban”, so urban areas wouldn’t look to Bruce as their base?
“Sick of the status quo.” - well you are a Rauner lemming, because Bruce Rauner is the status quo, lol
No ground game is going to build off that, because your narrow/wide base has nothing rallying it besides the hypocrisy of both Rauners and might be enough, but as the Primary showed, no ground game leaves Bruce weak
As for…
===And I am glad Rauner is not invited to the parade. Last thing I want is to see my candidate in a picture being photobombed by someone dressed up as a …===
Yep, you want to be seen as the face of a Raunerite, great imagery.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:54 pm:
- Soccermom -,
Bruce Rauner was registered in Chicago during those years, and it was reported, a supporter of Forrest Claypool.
- MrJM (@MisterJayEm) - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:57 pm:
“As Hillary said, what difference does it make. Those voters were never going Rauner, or any republicans way in November to start with.”
The question is whether or not they bother to will go to the booth and vote against Rauner. This campaign makes that more likely.
– MrJM
- liandro - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 1:58 pm:
Oh, brother…Rauner 2014 equals George Wallace 1964? Rauner is trying his best to get away from social issues. Wallace, on the other hand, was “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”. You may dislike Rauner, but please stop slaughtering historical context.
- allknowingmasterofracoondom - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:01 pm:
OW - I could almost type your response word for word before you posted it. Predictable. You ask a question, I answer, then you attack the answer.
You asked what the “base” looks like, I just told you. We don’t do parades, but we will be parading to the polls in November.
But you don’t address the misquote. I thought there was no sock puppetry allowed here.
Rich? Buehler, Buehler, anyone?
And I am fine with the Raunerite image if it means I don’t have to pose with someone dressed up as a dildo.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:03 pm:
Precinct Captain: you’re wrong. If the US Supreme Court ruled Gay Marriage as a Civil Right, I missed it. I doubt the gentleman you’re questioning would have voted for George Wallace. You’re question is insulting. It’s not even close to the same. Your quote:
“If you believe that you don’t what a civil right is nor do you know what courts have said throughout our nation’s history.”
In fact I do. You’re wrong.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:14 pm:
You explained the base, I sorted it out, what you meant, and that building a GOTV on the simplicity of the answer failed in the Primary.
What is it with you and that “D” word? The symbolism of the sledgehammer and your use if that word, are you secure in yourselves, it will those symbols bad statements continue through November? lol
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:26 pm:
Willie, I’m not sure if you’ve been to the parade. Shocker for you: I actually have on at least 3 occasions. There has been more raunch in the past couple of years there than even the organizers are comfortable with. I didn’t like reading the “D” word and wouldn’t use it, but the image being suggested is possible there. A lot of people bring their kids to this parade without knowing what to expect. There are definitely some uncomfortable moments for them.
- allknowingmasterofracoondom - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:29 pm:
OW - I use the D word (din’t think it was profanity, but I will refrain from spelling it out) because I have a photo from a parade years ago with that exact scene - and that imagery never left me. I support SSM, I just don’t get dressing up as a “D” and parading down the street. Go ahead and judge me for that one.
But you sorted it out incorrectly.
Suburban means out of Chicago - where the base lives.
Upper Middle Class means just a tiny bit above middle class struggling to get to the next level. You know, the base that believes personal responsibility is the key to personal success.
Educated means - we don’t take pictures with people dressed up as “D”’s in a parade to try and win an election. Or for any reason come to think of it.
Status quo - So you think Rauner is status quo? I just am not smart enough to answer that one.
- Anon - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:40 pm:
This is awesome, particularly the image of Rauner and the damning words he himself spoke. To add insult to injury, he told the Tribune on June 2 he’d consider a repeal. I have consistently voted Republican in the last ten years and what irritates me more than Rauner’s stated position, is that he only made it to appease the Tea Party audience he was addressing when he said it. WORDS MATTER, and anyone that in this day and age, thinks they can tailor their message to an audience and get away with it, should follow this carefully. As far as the Pride audience? It’s a whole lot more than gays…and as more and more people come out, the intolerance of the anti-gay message is a loser. Think Brady losing by 31,000 votes while Kirk won in the same election. Could it be the social issues? I’m guessing so, and while its likely to be a squeaker, Rauner’s gutless actions on gay marriage and other social issues will definitely bite him come November.
- midway gardens - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:40 pm:
A guy - “I accept it as the law. It’s not harming me or anyone I know of. We’re adjusting. That’s all.” How very tolerant of you. Adjusting to something that you can’t identify having impact on you.
kjackson921 - Counting on BR to ‘Shake things up’ but doesn’t it become depressingly clear that he has no answers to our State’s problems other than a ’shake up’ slogan?
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:42 pm:
I have been many places….
The argument is the topic, and the credibility to it.
The reality of wanting pictures with nicely held sledgehammers, or chocking chickens, and the use of that word; yikes to all the Rauner imagery.
Rauner’s base is like his words, all over the place, disorganized and much smaller than what is spells out.
Those banners help in the education of Rauner, and his misleading “Say whatever to whomever” hollowness.
- kjackson921 - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:42 pm:
George Wallace? Seriously? I’m old, but not old enough to have voted for him. And speaking as someone who grew up in the south, I certainly see a difference in what George Wallace espoused and Bruce Rauner saying put marriage equality to a vote. I’m willing to ignore (for now) the ridiculousness of putting anyone’s equality to a vote. I guess his response doesn’t really bother me because it was already decided and won’t be reversed.
I may not have been very artful in making my point, but no one has addressed it: for me it’s less about Rauner and more about being completely and utterly dissatisfied with existing democratic leadership (including Rahm, and he’s not even up for election this year). You can only imagine how frustrated I am as a gay, black, liberal willing to toss vote to anyone other than the democrats because at some point enough is enough. (A Donna Summer reference. Gay enough for you?) And while my vote may not go to Rauner, it will NOT go to Quinn.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:52 pm:
=== midway gardens - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:40 pm:
A guy - “I accept it as the law. It’s not harming me or anyone I know of. We’re adjusting. That’s all.” How very tolerant of you. Adjusting to something that you can’t identify having impact on you.====
Hey Brainiac, I didn’t say it had no impact on me. I said it didn’t harm me. It doesn’t. I was never intolerant. Take your cheap analysis and smoke it. I’ve never used any incendiary language with Gays or any particular minority group. In my life, it would hit way too close to home. Either read better or reason better. Ugh.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:58 pm:
===I’ve never used any incendiary language with Gays or any particular minority group.===
===I don’t want to start a tangent, but Gay persons did …===
Good word choices there.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:15 pm:
Whatever.
- anon - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:17 pm:
Now that gay marriage is legal, why doesn’t the City move the parade to Grant Park? Doesn’t seem to be any reason to ghettoize it any more. It’s gotten too big for the neighborhood and the resulting crowd control problems are getting out of hand. BTW my friends tell their young children that it is the “Rainbow Parade” and the kids seem to take it all, even the raunch, in stride.
- AlabamaShake - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:21 pm:
**Educated, upper-middle class, suburban, sick of the status quo.**
I meet all of those criteria, and am most definitely not a Rauner supporter.
- Wally - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:35 pm:
If Rauner is elected, he will not waste time on a little girl baking cupcakes in the metro East area, he will get to work on the economy. BR may lose some votes and may propel some to the polls because of his veto talk on SSM, but he will also drive others to the polls because of his position. There are a lot of religious middle age to older people in IL who are against SSM and will go vote for Bruce.
But, the economy is the the major item.
- allknowingmasterofracoondom - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:37 pm:
A guy - lacking a real answer or argument, they will always resolve to parsing and attacking. Note they don’t offer a replacement for “gay persons”. Seriously, give me a replacement term that won’t offend. Gay people? Homosexual people? I am fine just calling them people, but they have this big parade and all….
This is what I am intolerant of.
The gay issue hits close to home for me as well, and it is no problem, never has been.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:42 pm:
=== I am fine just calling them people, but they have this big parade and all===
I wonder if you say the same thing around the time of the big St. Pat’s Day parades, or the Columbus Day parades, or…
You’re looking for an excuse to be a victim. Stop it.
- allknowingmasterofracoondom - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 3:50 pm:
Rich, no I am not! I was sticking up for A Guy, because I didn’t see what he said was so bad. Yes, during the Irish Parade I call them Irish people, during Columbus Day parade I call them Italian people. That’s my point, A Guy was just identifying the group. Victim…no way. If I thought I was a victim I would hold a “Educated, suburban, upper middle class, sick of the status quo” parade.
- Jorge - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 4:09 pm:
“Can’t we all just get along?” Guy, choose your words a little more carefully and that could happen.
- A guy... - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 5:00 pm:
Jorge, read more carefully and let’s you and me give it a shot at being pals, Okey dokey? If “gay persons” is a slur in that context or any other really, civilization has no chance. I have to talk to Willie when I come here. He parses like no one else in the universe. I already choose my words very carefully. And yes, I want to get along with you buddy.
- Lincoln (b)LOGger - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 5:39 pm:
I wonder how the black ministers feel about the Dems pushing the LGBT matter over and over. Any thoughts? Does shoring up one, push away another? No opinion, just asking.
- Imjustabill - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 6:10 pm:
George Ryan’s campaign did the same thing to Poshard and the negative publicity and intolerance buzz trailed Poshard for months after the parade.
- Jorge - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 6:26 pm:
That’s so nice of you guy. Let’s hug it out. I will give you props for not bringing up “dildo.”
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 6:52 pm:
Before you mail all of your apology cards, this is not the only civil rights issue that Rauner is pandering on.
He also wants to bring back the death penalty.
- Arizona Bob - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:19 am:
My personal view is that sexual practices between two consenting adults is none of my or the governments business, but it becomes my business when you expect me to subsidize the relationships through taxpayer funded benefits and force our schools, churches and businesses to promote that behavior.
I’ve tried to come up with a “fairness” argument against gay marriage, but its tough to do when we extend benefits to so many “significant others” in our systems.
That being said, I don’t think what may be transient sexual preferences should be empowered to force others to accept or promote those preferences. I believe it’s one of those “your right to smoke only extends to the end of my nose” situations. People should be free to do what they like, or refuse to do so.
Politically, I believe that having militant gays attacking Rauner will only energize his base and perhaps make them forget his stance on abortion and other social issues on which conservatives and Rauner do not agree.
I don’t see this making much of an impact on independents. Most I’ve spoken to seem to think the gay privilege issues are resolved, and the LGBT activists risk some backlash at the polls if they appear to continue their bullying.
It seems this is all about “sound and fury…signifying nothing” when all is said and done.
- Precinct Captain - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:03 am:
==- A guy… - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:03 pm:==
SCOTUS literally called marriage “one of the basic civil rights of man” in 1942.
==- kjackson921 - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:42 pm:==
There is no difference between Wallace and Rauner and referendums on human rights. In states where Wallace ran for president in 1972 he supported anti-desegregation referendums and one even got on the ballot in Florida.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 8:22 am:
===…to seem to think the gay privilege issues…===
Yikes.
- A guy... - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 9:22 am:
=== Precinct Captain - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:03 am:
==- A guy… - Thursday, Jun 26, 14 @ 2:03 pm:==
SCOTUS literally called marriage “one of the basic civil rights of man” in 1942.====
Context please smarty pants. I’m not at liberty to look it up this instance, but memory is suggesting to me this issue was around integrated marriage between a man and a woman, not gay marriage. We will see a ruling on it in the future from the Supremes beyond DOMA and Don’t ask don’t tell (which isn’t addressing marriage). We can agree on this being a “rights” issue, just not a civil rights issue.
- wordslinger - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:10 pm:
My personal view is that sexual practices between two consenting adults is none of my or the governments business, but it becomes my business when you expect me to subsidize the relationships through taxpayer funded benefits and force our schools, churches and businesses to promote that behavior.–
You are so full of stuff Bob.
Nobody’s asking you to do anything but mind your own business and apply the law equally.
- anon - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:30 pm:
@ Arizona Bob. as a single person. I am wondering why I am expected to subsidize your marriage relationship through taxpayer funded benefits. Your argument begs the question of why our society so heavily subsidizes heterosexual marriage.
- Precinct Captain - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:06 pm:
==memory is suggesting to me this issue was around integrated marriage==
Wrong again.