46 Comments - Roman - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:24 am: Following the constitution now qualifies as “bold.” That’s how pathetic things have gotten. - Porgy Tirebiter - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:28 am: Resorting to name-calling = you don’t have an argument. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:32 am: Perhaps these sober conservatives like Yaffe and Dey can explain the governing philosophy behind continued support for expenditures without appropriation. And that of Gov. Rauner’s urging of Comptroller Mendoza to continue to cut checks absent an appropriation, court order, or any legal authority whatsoever. It’s certainly not based on the American Constitutional model. Which lawless autocratic model are they following? - facts are stubborn things - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:33 am: The rule of law! A crisis is no time to abandon the law, rather it is a time to embrace and defend the law. I think the ISC mentioned something about this in their decision on pensions. Rauner does not care about state employees, he just hates to loose the leverage to continue to damage this state in order to destroy unions. He is afraid that if the AG wins and state employees are no longer paid he will have to do what MJM has been bagging for — a budget. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:33 am: To the Post, Sen. Durbin - “…And if she tests that, and it comes through, it’s going to force the hand of the governor as to whether or not that the things he’s insisting on are so important that it would create an even worse situation in our state,” This is looking at the actual governing of the state within the constitution requirements and asking the question where the Executive sees the governing and how they (the Executive) will govern if the constitution is called upon. Here is Yaffe being, not a professional operative, but an embarrassing apologist ignoring governing… ===…career politician…Mike Madigan and the money men who fund his machine… failure of Madigan’s decades of rule in Springfield…afraid to stand up to Mike Madigan.=== What can even be considered an insightful political maneuver with these words and phrases wrapping around a double-speak that has no relation to the budget, the challenges of the budget, the issue of following the constitution, or even as simple as calling it a partisan take? Steven Yaffe lacks the actual knowledge to make a counter argument, and worse, puts his name to what he has to know is jibberish spin that someone knows is ridiculous, but requires Yaffe to put his name to it. Wow. - AlfondoGonz - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:41 am: It is telling that of all the criticism leveled at AG Madigan for this motion, none of it alleges it to be unsound legally. She’s the Attorney General; the ranking attorney in the State. Her duty is to uphold the laws of the State. I’m sorry, Republicans, that her adhering to her duty is detrimental to your bankroller. The half-baked criticism of the motion, or, more accurately, the person who filed it, is unbecoming. - Nick Name - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:41 am: Steven Yaffe: It’s no surprise that you are spinning this like the lackey of a career vulture capitalist. - JoanP - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:41 am: “Jim Dey’s take is right out of “Mad Men”… ” Talk about condescending! He practically came right out and patted her on the head and called her “little lady”. Whether one agrees with her or not, for the AG to take a position on the issue is not “inserting herself”. It’s doing her job. Sheesh. - Rabid - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:43 am: Besmirching the Madigan’s stature must mean the treasury is heads and shoulders above the govenor - Norseman - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:44 am: Trump may have an opening. Dey’s infantile style fits perfectly with his administration. I’m going to take this opportunity to admonish AFSCME workers to avoid taking Lisa’s action as an attack on you. This is needed action to get the State running again. While you may have to go through a short period of pain, the long-term effect will be a positive. Many of you voted against Quinn because of his wrong-headed pension effort. How did that work out for you? Don’t make the same mistake twice. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:48 am: A 50-year-old woman is not a little girl. What sexist nonsense. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:49 am: What is Dey’s height? Weight? - MSIX - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:50 am: =Diminutive Daughter= Dey shows his true colors. - A guy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:50 am: It’s silly time, all the way up and down the ladder. - Precinct Captain - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:51 am: Jim Dey is as vomit inducing as John Kass. But to the meat of the post, Bruce Rauner and his allies have spent two years trying to inoculate themselves from the financial, legal, and political consequences of their decisions. Let’s remember, this is a governor who whines constantly about the number of court orders the state is under, yet when the impasse began he tried to support as many as possible in order to avoid the consequences of vetoing the budget. Finally, someone is standing up for Illinois Constitution. If Bruce Rauner wanted to avoid this crisis he has had literally years to get his act together. Instead he fiddled. Thank you Lisa for standing up for the plain English of our constitution. - JS Mill - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:52 am: Wow, Dey is quite partisan. I note his ample use of physical descriptors for the Madigans’, mocking their physical stature. That is typically a sign that you don’t really have much to say. Whelp, more birdcage reading. - Earnest - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:56 am: >Sen. Dick Durbin on Monday called Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s motion to halt state employee pay without a budget Am I being too persnickety if I feel the word “appropriation” is a lot more accurate than “budget”? The distinction makes for a very different frame of the situation. - Illinois O'Malley - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:56 am: #AltFacts: Steven Yaffe presents a balanced budget from Gov Rauner to Mike Madigan. - flea - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:57 am: Insulting, denigrating and resorting to this type of positing about this fine lady and/or her father is absolutely ludicrous. Diminutive minds spouting diminutive thoughts…. - Dan Johnson - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:57 am: The Attorney General has been in office for what: almost 20 years? It is straight-up sexist to continue to refer to her as a mere extension of the Speaker. We can’t tolerate that anymore. You don’t like the Speaker, fine. But she is clearly her own political and governmental force. She has earned that basic respect. /rant over - Biscuit Head - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:57 am: Yaffe and Dey = nothing actually useful to add to the situation. But they do provide some alternative facts and fake news for the uninformed. - Bobby Catalpa - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:01 am: — Which lawless autocratic model are they following? — Come on. It’s the “rich guy, I’m a businessman so I don’t need advice” model. Rauner started it. Trump is perfecting it. Paradoxically, Trump in 10 days is doing a far better (or worse, depending on you look at it) job than Rauner in executing the model. Rauner’s too quiet, too timid. There’s a kind of impotence in Rauner’s maneuvering these days. Maybe because he has no Steve Bannon? Maybe because he cares too much about his political future? Better hop to it, Bruce. Now’s the time to act. Soon folks will tire of the “rich guy model” and move toward the old-fashioned (status quo?) “statesman model.” - AC - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:01 am: I think Jim Dey even managed to top Scott Stantis. Is there an award for producers of sexist caricatures? - Jocko - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:04 am: Does that make Bruce the Dour Demagogue of Delayed Deadlines? - Generation X - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:05 am: Hilarious all this lauding of the AG and her commitment to uphold the Constitution. Yet when Pensions were at issue and the General Assembly passed an equally Unconstitutional Law she defended that. Feels like maybe just maybe politics are at play in decisions of what parts of the Constitution are enforceable - Whatever - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:09 am: ==Following the constitution now qualifies as “bold.” That’s how pathetic things have gotten.== “We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men.” George Orwell - Emily Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:18 am: Little Lisa. Come on. In all seriousness, if anyone is unclear as to why this is sexist, please email me and we’ll set up a time to talk. - Tough Guy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:24 am: Obviously Yaffe has no clue of Durbin and Madigan’s relationship over the years. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:26 am: ===she defended that=== For judicial purposes, laws are initially presumed to be constitutional. - Arock - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:29 am: - Illinois O’Malley - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:56 am: #AltFacts: Steven Yaffe presents a balanced budget from Gov Rauner to Mike Madigan. #AltFacts: House Leader Michael Madigan has passed a Constitutional Budget every year since 2001. Must be fact because AG Madigan has never filed suit to protect the citizens of Illinois from harm from these budgets. - Unsolicited Advice - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:29 am: The news-gazette should be ashamed of itself for publishing such obviously sexist language. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:32 am: –Little Lisa.– Some men are obsessed with size, in all things. All men know the source of the insecurity that drives that obsession in those men. That’s real locker-room talk. - Louis G Atsaves - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:36 am: The anti-GOP spin is pretty breathtaking around here. If it is unconstitutional to continue to pay state workers NOW then why continue the illegal actions until 2/28? If the Illinois Supreme Court last summer decided this issue, then why did the AG wait until (1) after the November election and (2) after the lame duck legislative session. If cutting off or delaying paychecks of legislators didn’t force a budget solution, and starving social providers, universities and others with little or no funding, why feel stopping paychecks for all state employees will pressure a solution? When I checked online, a number of agencies have appropriations for salaries post 12/31. If those intimately knowledgeable about this in government are aware of this unreported fact, then the pressure argument for a budget by 2/28 begins to deflate. This isn’t a heroic move by the AG. She too elected to not follow the law if in fact the law is certain since last summer. Her move was political. The responses by all concerned are political including AFSCME. I pity the judge who decides this. Any order he issues will be appealed and he will be tarred and feathered for his actions. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:50 am: ===The anti-GOP=== Pro-Constitution, I guess anti-Raunerism. So, Counselor, you say, as an officer of the Court, that a constitutional officer should ignore a court order. Wow - Louis G Atsaves - - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:56 am: ===If the Illinois Supreme Court last summer decided this issue, then why did the AG wait until (1) after the November election and (2) after the lame duck legislative session.=== Questioning motive, not legality. Got it. ===If cutting off or delaying paychecks of legislators didn’t force a budget solution, and starving social providers, universities and others with little or no funding, why feel stopping paychecks for all state employees will pressure a solution=== The only one that had a hand in doing all that was a Governor who couldn’t get 60 and 30. So you’re acknowledging the purposeful, hurtful actions of Bruce Rauner. “Thanks!” === She too elected to not follow the law=== So the Governor and Munger were, by saying “too” elected to not follow the law. That’s refreshing to hear from you, Counselor… ===Her move was political. The responses by all concerned are political including AFSCME.=== But… does the move have merrit… Counselor? ===Any order he issues will be appealed and he will be tarred and feathered for his actions.=== Who will tar and feather this judge? Are you giving a “warning” Counselor? lol - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 11:01 am: –The anti-GOP spin is pretty breathtaking around here. – What is “anti-GOP” about asking the courts to rule on the Constitutionality of continued spending without appropriation? What is “pro-GOP” about continuing that practice? Should that continue in future administrations? Again, under what governmental model? Because it’s not the American Constitutional model. It’s fair to knock Madigan for not doing it months ago, not for doing it now. - Mama - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 11:33 am: =- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 9:32 am: “Which lawless autocratic model are they following?”= Wordslinger, I have a feeling they are using Trumps lawless model. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 11:40 am: =Paradoxically, Trump in 10 days is doing a far better (or worse, depending on you look at it) job than Rauner in executing the model.= Trump also has a somewhat timid republican house and senate and that helps. Right now they’re still trying to read the tea leaves on all of this. Rauner never had that luxury and steadfastly has refused to acknowledge it even to this day. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 11:50 am: @Oswego WIlly: ===”But… does the move have merrit… Counselor?”=== It appears to me the move may have merit. It also had that same merit last summer when the Illinois Supreme Court decided the AFSCME contract suit. Where was the AG jumping in last summer? She made a political decision not to do so. Democrats would have been blamed for a government shut down. Some close House and Senate seats may have flipped. Munger may have hung on to continue being Comptroller. It was political, not heroic, when she delayed her action last summer before the November elections, when she delayed her action during the lame duck session, and it remains political, not heroic, when she pounced immediately after the State of the State message. You can nip at my ankles all you want, but those facts will not change. Why now? Because it was politically expedient to suddenly decide to try to reverse a court order. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 12:01 pm: ===You can nip at my ankles all you want, but those facts will not change.=== Nah. I’m knocking down your strawman that you, Counselor, aren’t as concerned that Governor Rauner is willing to break actual court orders, you’re more concerned about the politics. Speaks volumes to how much you care about Bruce Rauner and the little regard you have for the state of Illinois(?) ===It was political, not heroic, when she delayed her action last summer before the November elections, when she delayed her action during the lame duck session, and it remains political, not heroic, when she pounced immediately after the State of the State message.=== But… it still has… merit… right? lol. As an Officer of the Court I guess I’d expect you to be siding with the Attorney General now… LOL Why all this concern about timing? If you are worried about a Governor more than willing to ignore court orders you’d be burning down your own “timing” strawman and cheering the AG and denouncing the Governor. Why aren’t you? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 12:09 pm: Louis, it was March, not last summer. You can’t even get the facts straight, hope you do on your own cases. - Keyser Soze - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 12:19 pm: Dadigan? Credit where due, that’s clever. - RNUG - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 2:10 pm: == If it is unconstitutional to continue to pay state workers NOW then why continue the illegal actions until 2/28? == Delayed implementation of court orders to provide for an orderly transition is not that unusual. Remember things like TRO’s and stays to maintain the status quo until a final decision is rendered? It’s pretty obvious this will be appealed. - Mac - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 4:25 pm: The AG is indeed a small package,but that small package contains a very big person. Don’t always agree with her,but,they are her decisions. - Rabid - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 4:57 pm: Durbin takes a swipe at the govenor, who’s next duckworth,Obama has time on his hands too - jake - Tuesday, Jan 31, 17 @ 10:07 pm: We’re used to Jim Dey here in Champaign-Urbana, so don’t always realize how startling he must be to others. Actually is a nice man in person, but gets pretty bizarre and, in this case, offensive, in print. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.