|
Unclear on the concept
Tuesday, May 7, 2024 - Posted by Rich Miller * Background is here if you need it. Could this be true?…  Of course not. It’s Jeanne Ives, for crying out loud. She’s never been a reliable source of facts. The fact that she served three terms in the Illinois House may lead people to think she can accurately comment on legislative proposals. But notice she doesn’t provide a link to the bill so you can’t just easily click here and look for the repealer language and see for yourself as plain as day that what’s being repealed are the three sections creating non-binding referendums. Ives ought to know this because those three referendums were specifically created to prevent her own statewide referendum from seeing the light of day because Illinois limits the number of statewide questions to three. Maybe I’m wrong, but I refuse to believe Ives is that spectacularly dumb. * And Ives wasn’t alone… 
|
 |
|
|
- Roadrager - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 12:43 pm:
==Maybe I’m wrong, but I refuse to believe Ives is that spectacularly dumb.==
Okay, but we can agree Chris Miller (no relation) probably is, yes?
“protective their members”
- Hank - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 12:44 pm:
Twiddle dumb and twiddle dumber.
- New Day - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 12:48 pm:
Jeanne Ives is lying for political effect?? Say it ain’t so.
- Panther Pride - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 1:02 pm:
Can’t let facts get in the way of a good political narrative.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 1:04 pm:
I think what irritates me the most about this is the number of people who are going to believe what they are saying. What’s that saying? You can’t fix stupid.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 1:28 pm:
Anonymous commenters are always deleted.
- H-W - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 1:29 pm:
Outright deceit ought to be disqualifying. Intending to deceive with demonstrable lies violates the idea of democracy in the first place.
- Leslie K - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 1:36 pm:
I just find myself wondering what Ives’ exceptional engineering-major children (or now engineers, since they presumably graduated with multiple degrees at the top of their class years ago) think of the whole thing. /s
To the Ives question, I’ve never been able to decide if I think she is that dumb or that calculating.
- Retired SURS Employee - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 1:54 pm:
Years ago, when she was in the General Assembly, I had to explain to her a section of the Pension Code that she clearly did not understand.
- Professor Ath - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 2:04 pm:
Meh. Not any worse than Gov. Pritzker calling it an ethics bill.
If the goal was to get the echo chamber to talk about a very bad bill, that part worked.
- Vote Quimby - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 2:04 pm:
“Three percent” of citizens lie for political reasons /s
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 2:30 pm:
“Not any worse than Gov. Pritzker calling it an ethics bill.”
I’d say explicit lies about a bill’s content are considerably worse than a possible mischaracterization — but we all make our own ethical choices, don’t we?
– MrJM
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 3:03 pm:
===Not any worse than Gov. Pritzker calling it an ethics bill===
Meh. The post-primary appointment was one of MJM’s favorite gimmicks. Wouldn’t wanna die on that hill.
Either way, there’s enough to criticize here without having to resort to bumbling or outright lying.
- low level - Tuesday, May 7, 24 @ 8:21 pm:
Years ago we had strong, partisan arguments about legislation but neither side resorted to outright fabrications. This is not the Ronald Reagan, Jim Edgar GOP I grew up with.
- Eire17 - Wednesday, May 8, 24 @ 5:55 am:
Putting Ives and Miller aside it’s a weak move. Just adds fodder for the people who believe elections are rigged. The Dems moved the primary up for Obama back in the day then back to March subsequently. They have a huge super majority and still feel compelled to rush this through. An Ethics bill? He knew what he was saying. Weak.