|
Rauner stirs the pot
Monday, Jan 4, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller * Regardless of what may happen in the House, as long as Senate President John Cullerton remains firmly opposed, he won’t ever get this bill…
Yeah, that’ll help get a budget, even if he did add that the bill likely wouldn’t apply to Emanuel (which the sponsor disputes, by the way) Whatever the case, the governor has taken the focus off of his “secret” European vacation for now. So he has that going for him. * Meanwhile, the inestimable James Warren takes a look at some recent national media stories about the mayor…
That could also apply to some local coverage.
|
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:24 am:
===… as long as Senate President John Cullerton remains firmly opposed, he won’t ever get this bill…===
Ball Game.
Total deflection to say something to the impossible.
I guess the Rahm part of the Triangulation is “dead”?
How can Rahm be twistin’ arms when he’s twistin’ in the wind, even by Rauner?
Not a “share foxhole” kinda guy, that Governor.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:28 am:
Chicago was not built in a day. These issues of segregation in the city, income inequality, unjustified police shootings and more developed to the point they have over decades.
- Rahm's Parking Meter - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:28 am:
Well, there goes the “Rahm-Rauner alliance” myth.
- LizPhairTax - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:29 am:
Good to see the Chicago media picking up in 2016 right where we left off in 2015.
Ooh, Rauner/Rahm fight!!! Cover issues not personalities please.
Sweater Rahm vs. Carhartt Bruce is lame entertainment.
- Austin Blvd - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:30 am:
Maybe he shoulda just sent him a dead fish filet.
- Boss Tweed - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:34 am:
Am I crazy, or was the plan once to leverage Chicago’s financial problems to get Rahm to help sell the Turnaround Agenda? This…isn’t going to help that.
- @MisterJayEm - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:35 am:
From the New Yorker: “Rahm *** won a second term as the mayor of Chicago in a come-from-behind landslide.”
Emanuel’s victory was neither 1) a come-from-behind win, nor 2) a landslide.
Outta town silly.
– MrJM
- walker - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:38 am:
Boss Tweed said it all.
Another clever political strategy dashed. Reality bites.
- justacitizen - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:43 am:
I never thought recalls were ‘good government’ and elected officials should be recalled in the election process. However, elections don’t seem to be holding officials accountable, so why not have a recall provision?
- Obvs - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:43 am:
People, Rauner does not want a budget. He is governing through attrition and crisis. Do not expect that to change throughout his entire term.
- Anon. - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 10:56 am:
This is going to make for some awkward silences at the next wine tasting.
- Anon - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:07 am:
I was hoping Warren would have commented on the Washington Post piece that also came down hard on Rahm.
- The Historian - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:16 am:
Per Mr. JM, that New Yorker piece also had Rahm going to Congress in 2004 & mentioned “Forest” Claypool. If anyone thought that magazine fact-checked, you now know better.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:22 am:
All politics is local. So the only one who cares about the national press is Rahm himself. They wrote puff pieces on his way up and are knifing him on the way down. Probably a necessary counter to the undue praise before. The only practical impact locally is that Rahm’s national prospects are now dim and maybe he should re-evaluate his governance in light of that. Mayor of Chicago is no longer his stepping stone but likely his ultimate destination. To quote the vile man himself, he needs to get his tampon out and get to work.
- Cheswick - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:46 am:
Yes, but will Rahm come out and say how disappointed he is in Gov. Rauner? I hope so.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:50 am:
–Good to see the Chicago media picking up in 2016 right where we left off in 2015.
Ooh, Rauner/Rahm fight!!! Cover issues not personalities please.
Sweater Rahm vs. Carhartt Bruce is lame entertainment.–
You said it.
With a couple of noteworthy exceptions, virtually all the Chicago media coverage of the McDonald case has been on the order of “what does this mean for Rahm?”
Who. Gives. A. (your favorite ban-worthy word here).
- crazybleedingheart - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:53 am:
==There’s also a collective blame to be shared in Chicago ==
Yes, and while calling for Emanuel’s resignation is a clarifying rallying point, there are a lot of very hot seats to be had right now. Few sitting in them seem to be grasping how precarious their position is.
People should expect broader accountability and plan accordingly. Specifically including GA members in Springfield.
Not just, say, those certain Chicago reps whose family incomes are inextricably tied to the mayor’s office or the CPD (though they certainly have their work cut out for them in 2016).
But also reps in and out of Chicago who play waterboy for the CCSAO or otherwise endorse the general LEO agenda.
Madigan would be wise to start strategizing how he is going to turn the page on 3.5 (actually, 48 years since ‘68 and who can even estimate how far back, before that) very “successful” years of his caucus aligning with the boys in blue.
When told of the major shift and changing winds on criminal justice, GA members have so far performed like the ostriches emailing each other in Rahm’s office: How can we quell. Who can we get to support and legitimize our tiny, fake reforms.
The era of riding the gravy train on the backs of black citizens may not actually end, but the ability to do so in a consequence-free environment, is.
Springfield should listen carefully to the future.
- crazybleedingheart - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:54 am:
meant to say Madigan would be wise to start strategizing how he is going to turn the page on 3.5 decades, not years
- crazybleedingheart - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:56 am:
If Gov. Rauner does not want to find himself in Rahm’s position, he should be careful that his own criminal justice “reforms” are not mere reroutes to privatized services.
May 2016 be a bad year to be in the business of buying and selling the futures of IL’s citizens.
- crazybleedingheart - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 11:59 am:
==To quote the vile man himself, he needs to get his tampon out and get to work.==
This kind of thing isn’t any less hateful just because it’s a quote.
- RNUG - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 12:16 pm:
Legally, the bill will most likely not apply to Rahm in his CURRENT term. It would apply if he were re-elected to another term.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 12:33 pm:
To make it absolutely clear, I found his tampon comment deeply offensive and showing a complete unfitness for office. It’s another example of how the media glossed over Rahm’s failings and recharacterized deep misogyny and machismo blustering as “toughness.”
- VanillaMan - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 1:14 pm:
Short term political gain, long term governing strife. Bruce Rauner isn’t governing. He sure likes his chaos. It must be nice to be so filthy rich you don’t have to clean up your own messes.
- Will Caskey - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 1:15 pm:
Is the last dig at the local press what Natasha Korecki is whining about on Twitter right now?
- Blue dog dem - Monday, Jan 4, 16 @ 3:07 pm:
Confession to be made..old blue dog is a conspiracy theorist. The Booze Brothers have this thing planned out. The RAUN Man gains national GOP fame by letting the windy City go bye-bye. The RAHN Man gets off the hook because he can blame the evil rich .0001%er and at the same time change headlines.