Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Translation: When heck freezes over
Next Post: Interesting bills
Posted in:
* “This is the reason I am running,” Bruce Rauner told a Springfield business crowd last year…
“The government union bosses, they take our tax dollars, they go to the politicians and say, ‘Mr. Governor or Mr. Speaker, give me a big pension for my workers and I’ll give you ten million dollars for your reelection. Give me more pay for my workers, I’ll give you $20 million for your reelection. Give me free healthcare for my workers off the backs of the taxpayers, I’ll give you another $10 million for your reelection, I’ll give you free campaign workers for your reelection.’ […]
“You won’t hear the politicians talk about this. You won’t. The Democrats don’t talk about it because that’s where Madigan gets all his money or his power. He’ll never talk about it. And you’ll never hear the Republicans talk about it either because a lot of them get that money, too.”
* Madigan gets “all his money” from government union bosses? Let’s take a quick look…
* The last time Madigan’s Democratic Party of Illinois committee received AFSCME money was October of 2011, and that was only $5,000.
* And the last time Friends of Michael J Madigan received any AFSCME money was December of 2009 - more than four years ago.
Madigan has received a grand total of $821,200 from AFSCME, but that was since August of 1994, which works out to about $42K a year. Madigan raised more than that this month, including $21,100 from Stand for Children Illinois, which is not exactly a favorite of the teachers unions.
* And the Republicans? As I’ve said here many times before, Republican legislators who vote with AFSCME and the teachers don’t do that because they’ve sold their souls. They vote their districts, or their ideology. Rauner has a different ideology, which includes assuming the worst of anyone who disagrees with him.
He’s gonna be a dangerous governor, that one.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:17 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Translation: When heck freezes over
Next Post: Interesting bills
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Thanks for the drinkin’ fuel, Rich.
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:21 am
Hit that nail right on the head.
Comment by Liberty First Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:22 am
““The government union bosses, they take our tax dollars, they go to the politicians and say, ‘Mr. Governor or Mr. Speaker, give me a big pension for my workers and I’ll give you ten million dollars for your reelection. Give me more pay for my workers, I’ll give you $20 million for your reelection. Give me free healthcare for my workers off the backs of the taxpayers, I’ll give you another $10 million for your reelection, I’ll give you free campaign workers for your reelection.’ […]”
Cousin Brucey:
Since you have previously stated you read this blog, I ask you now, please post documentation proving yoiu allegations that the unions are giving millions of dollars to candidates in exchange for votes. From the statement I quoted above, you are alleging that unions have given at least $40 million dollars in exchange for votes. Please prove this statement.
Comment by AFSCME Steward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:23 am
Gee, what an ax to grind this man has.
Comment by YO Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:24 am
I’ve said it many times to my friends when discussing this race. Rauner is the “roll the dice candidate”, as in, you are taking a chance that he can actually fix some things. The other chance you take though is that he crashes and burns in a spectacular fireball previously unknown to mankind, taking us all with him.
Meanwhile, you know what you’ve got with Quinn, Rutherford is done, Dillard will kick the can down the road, and Brady won’t win the general…
Comment by BDuty6 Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:26 am
He will win the primary. I guess it is going to be the first time in my life that I can’t vote for either candidate. Where’s a Ross Perot when you need one.
Comment by Nieva Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:26 am
Rauner may live in fantasy land, but he’s not stupid. Nor are the people around him.
One assumes this language must be polling or testing well.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:27 am
With Rauner governor, and no allies in the Senate or House. Springfield will be more dysfunctional than Washington DC.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:27 am
Dangerous, or ineffective?
Comment by Whatever Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:28 am
The dice are loaded and keep coming up “snake eyes” or “craps.”
Comment by Upon Further Review Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:29 am
Rauner actually brought Stand for Children to Illinois and helped set that PAC up.
Comment by dunno Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:31 am
This from the guy who’s dropped millions on politicians in both parties while trolling for government pension business.
I’m sure a Springfield crowd was surprised to learn that unions are running the show in the capital and had $20 million to contribute to the governor and speaker.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:31 am
Attention legislators and staff: I am looking for a sponsor for a new bill to solve the state’s budget problems. It provides for a modest tax levied on Bruce Rauner every time he lies.
Comment by Reality Check Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:31 am
He is Blago with the unlimited money stream and the unlimited and unvetted rhetoric.
Dangerous.
Very. Dangerous.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:33 am
Just example of how Mitt Rauner shows every day that he knows absolutely nothing about anything he talks about…..he does not let any fact get in the way. pity the poor whack jobs who may vote for him
Comment by circularfiringsquad Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:34 am
Billionaire Bruce. Repeat. Billionaire Bruce. Repeat after me. Billionaire Bruce. Billionaire Bruce. Billionaire Bruce.
Don’t be bought, Illinois. Don’t be bought.
Comment by Mc Diesel Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:35 am
If the “government union bosses” have so much power, then how did pension reform get passed?
Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:38 am
According to Rauner, pension reform was a sweetheart deal for the unions, that’s how it got passed.
Comment by SAP Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:42 am
Yep Rich, so dangerous that we might end up 50th out of all the states in job creation and fiscal debt.
…Oh wait….
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:42 am
I’d like to think there is absolutely no chance this guy could get elected governor, but you can never underestimate the ability of the Illinois voters to pick the worst candidate.
Comment by Pelon Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:42 am
He is dangerous?
Rauner is going to hit the cold hard reality of Illinois government like an ice cube falling from the top of Willis Tower to the pavement.
He can play Rod Blagojevich and every other nutbag we’ve elected over the past twenty years, all rolled into one, and that Illinois cold hard political truth is going to neuter him.
He might find some political traction with this stuff, but if he’s elected promising it - he’s going to go down like every other public office holder facing our problems.
I don’t have a problem hearing candidates say stupid stuff - I’ve gotten used to it. And I certainly don’t expect any candidate to be rock-hard in support of what they said a year before the general.
Look. After Ryan, Blagojevich and Quinn, I think we’ve proven that the Office of the Governor here in Illinois can be effectively neutralized when a felon or an idiot sits in it’s seat. Anyone thinking they can just get elected and rule like a dictator from Chicago or Springfield has lost touch with how a state government works.
Rauner can’t screw things up any worse than the malicious incompetence we’ve witnessed and jailed since 2000.
Brucie - if you still want to back up nonsense like that if you end up as governor, I’m certain someone in your staff will take the big stick of reality and beat you with it long enough for you to change your mind.
I think it will be a shillelagh with the initials “MJM” carved into it.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:43 am
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it…
it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”.-Joseph Goebbels
Comment by DuPage Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:45 am
==He’s gonna be a dangerous governor, that one.==
Nope. He’s gonna be a dangerous Republican nominee for Governor. He may win the primary but won’t win the general election.
Four more years of PQ…ugh.
Comment by Jake From Elwood Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:46 am
He is the quintessential pay to player…he and his $$$ are part of the systemic corruption we have in this state!
Comment by Priceless... Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:46 am
If we can survive Blagojevich, we can survive anything.
Comment by Just Me Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:46 am
This election may be a test of McLuhan’s idea of the “medium is the message.” If Rauner spends lavishly and smartly, he may succeed in trumping truth and accuracy with dazzle, splash and volume. Money is the mother’s milk of politics. No one said it had to be good milk.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:47 am
Raunerbots are back on the job, I see.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:47 am
I like dangerous. I do not like career politicians.
Comment by Westward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:49 am
I’m already on record predicting that, if elected, Rauner will cost the State more in lawsuits than Blago and Quinn combined. Rauner will crash and burn this state just like the companies he’s bled and abandoned …
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:50 am
==Raunerbots are back on the job, I see.==
Probably the only jobs Bruce Rauner has and will ever create.
Comment by Served Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:50 am
Oswego Willy, once again you miss the point entirely. Blago became a felon for personal financial gain. He was looking for sweet board jobs for he and his wife, and at one point I understand that he was even considering walking away from the governorship for a better paying job. He had little interest in doing good for the state or sacrificing for policies that served the greater good.
Rauner is just the opposite. He could make a LOT more money outside the Guvs mansion than in it, and it’s unlikely he’d have his hand out to sell influence like Blago did. He’s doing this because he wants the power to repair some of this mess, he doesn’t need the money from graft or campaign contributors to do it.
Ineffective? Rauner has figured out how this political game in Illinois is played. He knows the decision makers and what motivates them, which is a heck of a lot more than Quinn can say. He understands what makes Madigan and Rahm tick, and he can deal with them. All he has to do is throw a patronage bone to Radogno and whoever will eventually be the minority leader in the House and he’ll get his agenda through.
Money is what got our felonious Guvs in trouble, and he has no problem there.
Willy, you should know this. You’re plugged in to politics. Stop shilling for his the clowns he’s fighting when you know better. Don’t be a dope!
Comment by Arizona Bob Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:51 am
Every single statement by Rauner in the paragraph quoted above, is demonstrably false. Every single statement can be shown false by hard evidence.
The reason “the Democrats don’t talk about it” is simple: it doesn’t happen that way.
Madigan’s support doesn’t come much from government unions, and he deliberately turned his back on them big time, over the last four years. They are supported more by the Republicans, than the Democrats, right now.
Of course, Bruce might be a game changer, losing the support Republicans do have from many union members, since he has declared outright war on them, to gain even more campaign funds.
Comment by Walker Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:53 am
Rauner did Dems a huge favor by taking out Rutherford while at the same time making it only and entirely about him and Dan. Dillard hasn’t raised the money and Brady’s already a loser, so a Rauner (Billionaire Bruce) candidacy allows Pat Quinn to run his populist campaign. Romner (Romney/Rauner, see how I did that?) will try to tag Pat with Madigan but Pat gets to say hey, Madigan sued me because I docked his pay until he made a pension deal happen. History shows that when folks underestimate Pat Quinn, that’s when he’s at his most effective. He may be a goof but he’s our goof and we know who he is. We have no way to know who Romner is and he has no track record to suggest that we should trust him with our vote.
Comment by ericthered Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:53 am
OW is 100% correct.
Comment by DeKalb Guy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:54 am
Rich, this brings up that “sidekick” post from teh other day. Evelyn Sanguinetti can fill in for Hervé Villechaize.
Comment by PoolGuy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:55 am
Rich, why did you limit your search only to AFCSME? What about the IEA, IFT, CTU and SEIU contributions, either through direct contributions or PACs? It doesn’t seem Rauner’s comments were limited to the AFCSME.
Comment by Arizona Bob Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:55 am
“Rauner has a different ideology, which includes assuming the worst of anyone who disagrees with him.”
Rauner seems to be the kind of person who will get everything he can from you and when you’re no longer useful to him, or when it’s opportune for him, he’ll spit you out like an olive pit.
Again, ad nauseum, how much did he hate union leaders when his firm got the TRS pension fund? How much did he hate union leaders when he was in the public pension business in general for so many years?
For Rauner supporters, try to put yourselves in a public worker’s shoes. Imagine someone who made 779 times more money than you, in large part because of your pension or the pension of another public worker, and then using that money to attack you at the head, by going after your leaders.
I’m glad Rauner’s comments are published. The unions need to feel the fire under their fannies and get out and organize against this dude.
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:55 am
A noun a verb and “damn union bosses” is like the second thing generic Republican candidates say if notthe first.
It certainly indicates he hasnt thought too carefully on what he wants to do as governor and doesn’t have a very good understanding of IL’s geographic/partisan history.
But I’m not sure this indicates anything about how Rauner would actually govern.
Comment by Will Caskey Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:56 am
Rich, this good for you. BR elected, you will never have a dry day for writing.
Comment by Westward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:57 am
–Of course, Bruce might be a game changer, losing the support Republicans do have from many union members, since he has declared outright war on them, to gain even more campaign funds.–
I think that’s right. I believe the anti-union rhetoric is the driving force behind Rauner’s juggernaut fundraising network.
Big money from all over the country is coming in, daily, in support of it.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:58 am
If Bruce were to win, what could he do? Madigan and Cullerton will pass the bills they back, regardless of Rauner. He’ll veto, and they’ll override. Anything I’m missing here?
Comment by PublicServant Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:59 am
===Rich, why did you limit your search only to AFCSME?===
Because I have a work life outside of this blog.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:59 am
Another trait I suspect Rauner has in common with Blago is that his ultimate ambition is probably national, with “taking on the government union bosses and overpaid public employees” as his signature issue (just as “healthcare for all” was supposed to be Blago’s signature issue). Bottom line is that he really wants to be the next Chris Christie or Scott Walker, i.e. “GOP governor who turned around a ‘blue’ state”.
Comment by Secret Square Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:59 am
==you can never underestimate the ability of the Illinois voters to pick the worst candidate. ==
Overestimate is what was meant, and that seems to be right. But I didn’t know Oberweis was even running this time….
Comment by Excessively Rabid Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 10:59 am
Sorry Rich, do you only want comments that agree with your position?
Initially, I was a “Rutherfordbot”. Dodged a bullet on that one though.
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:00 am
- wordslinger -
Dead on. Certain groups want to finish the union busting they started in other states.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:00 am
The term bot is applied to folks who reflexively offer up defenses of their candidate without actually addressing the issues in the post.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:01 am
When you control the money and politics of your party’s primary, I guess you feel you can say whatever you want, true or not.
I don’t think Rauner even cares when he’s caught in a lie; he’s effectively handcuffed and silenced his opponents.
Comment by Wensicia Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:02 am
It’s time somebody wrote more about what kind of businessman Rauner was - not in terms of how his companies performed, but whether he was this same kind of authoritarian , my way or the highway within GTCR, whether he ever compromised in meaningful fashion (or had to- maybe it was a clubby environment where everyone generally agreed, and he thinks that will carry over to Springfield, once he’s inside the room). Since there’s an abundant chance this man will be governor in 2015, we need to know more about his management style. This would include whether there’s good evidence he was such a champion BSer in his public business statements (I’d actually feel a touch better about Rauner currently, if he views lying as just part of the price of doing business, and anything he says today can be easily retracted or ignored nine months from now).
I think it’s pretty clear that people’s approach to governing is going to be heavily affected by their point of reference and past experience. For better or for probably worse, Rauner’s private sector management style at GTCR is going to be one of his models he takes to the governor’s office, at least initially. So we need to know more about what that style was. Unfortunately I fear most of those who are in the know about it, are unlikely to be forthcoming and / or honest…
Comment by ZC Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:03 am
A dangerous liar soon becomes irrelevant.
Comment by Obama's Puppy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:03 am
Not a bot, Rich.
Billionaire-Bruce. Those two words cannot ever not appear after one another.
From now on. First Name: Billionaire, Middle Name: Bruce, Last name: Rauner.
Comment by Mc Diesel Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:05 am
Arizona Bob
“Rauner is just the opposite. He could make a LOT more money outside the Guvs mansion than in it, and it’s unlikely he’d have his hand out to sell influence like Blago did. He’s doing this because he wants the power to repair some of this mess, he doesn’t need the money from graft or campaign contributors to do it.”
Rauner is a power hungry meglomaniac period. He will find a way to benefit himself if he is elected Governor. His track record already proves this to be true.
Since you state he just wants to clean up some of the mess, please tell us exactly how he is going to do this. Maybe its by shaking up Springfield. Or maybe its saying no to union bosses. Perhaps its term limits, 8 years and you’re out. Maybe it “run Illinois like a business”. He has not taken a stand on any issue of importance. He has not produced a single solution for any problem, other than to destroy pensionhs for workers, which are constitutionally protected, and were earned by the workers. All we have seen from Rauner are slick commercials with focus group tested buzz words. No substance. No plans. Just rhetoric.
Comment by AFSCME Steward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:05 am
Rich is right, Raunerbots in full throat! lol
- Arizona Bob - is vying with - A Guy… - for top.
===He had little interest in doing good for the state or sacrificing for policies that served the greater good.===
Rauner has said nothing about serving the good. Rauner wants career politicians and union bosses out. Nothing good is being driven as a narrative.
===Rauner is just the opposite. He could make a LOT more money outside the Guvs mansion than in it,..,===
Except when making tens of millions off of public pensions. Do you read what you type?
===…and it’s unlikely he’d have his hand out to sell influence like Blago did. He’s doing this because he wants the power to repair some of this mess, he doesn’t need the money from graft or campaign contributors to do it.===
Stu. Levine. Anything else on that, or go you want the lesson of pay to play… again?
===Ineffective? Rauner has figured out how this political game in Illinois is played.===
Please, stop. My side hurts! Rauner is an insider, of course he knows. Dopiest argument yet that I am wrong!
===He knows the decision makers and what motivates them, which is a heck of a lot more than Quinn can say. He understands what makes Madigan and Rahm tick, ..,===
When you vacation with Rahm, and the families vacation together at your house, sorry, ranch, you get to know tons.
MJM doesn’t need a “buddy”, MJM needs a Co-Equal partner, and not a CEO working against the Illinois Constitution.
===…and he can deal with them. ===
“How much will it cost?” asks the insider Rauner.
===All he has to do is throw a patronage bone to Radogno and whoever will eventually be the minority leader in the House and he’ll get his agenda through.===
Pay to play? Don’t we ding Quinn for the Careen Gordon fiasco and that “give and take”? Can’t be a breath of fresh air and do the same thing.
Man, being a Raunerbot means having no ethics, morals, a hypocrite while dinging others who “do” what you want to do, and lack knowledge of Illinois Government.
I need Cannoli…
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:06 am
Rauner is like all flannel mouthed politicians, they blab just to blab.
Actually most of us on this blog do that.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:08 am
I addressed your premise that he was going to be a “dangerous” governor.
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:09 am
Speaking of Stand for Children, who was responsible for recruiting the organization to get involved in Illinois? Oh yeah, Bruce Rauner!
Comment by Raymond Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:10 am
The Baron is just asking for AFSCME to float a libel claim.
Good luck proving actual damage, but a little push back wouldn’t hurt.
Comment by Dee Lay Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:10 am
When is someone going to ask Rauner what he’s gotten in exchange for his big contributions?
If he thinks everyone else is getting favorable action for their campaign contributions, why shouldn’t we assume Rauner got sweetheart deals for his contributions?
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:13 am
Jeez, Arizona Bob, does Rauner pay you by the post? Do you really think that the Baron is going to muscle Madigan?
Comment by tominchicago Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:13 am
Who is investigating Quinn? Who did he take on his trips abroad? His broad (lol) and the tax payers paid for a little snuggle time. Has the Governor bought anything out of state on the internet and not paid Illinois sales tax or declared on his taxes? How is Quinn’s mom being taken care of in a nursing home in Chicago? Preferential treatment because her boy is the Gov??? Ummm. And there is the brother out east. How many contracts has his company received? Priceless.
Comment by S. Barnett Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:15 am
Arizona Bob,
You are kind of on the mark and kind of off the mark. Yeah Blago was driven by a financial desire, but in many ways the bigger problem with Rod was his lack of desire to actually govern.
He loved the big events and the big events but had no interest in the day to day of being governor. That was what made him a terrible, there have been lots of folks in this state who have done a fine job in office who were also looking at the angles for themselves to profit as well.
The Rauner risk that isn’t really going to want or have an interest in governing. It’s one thing to identify a goblin, it’s another when you have to deal with it everyday.
Comment by OneMan Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:15 am
Attacking Speaker Madigan worked well for Rod Blagojevich, right?
And “Billionaire Bruce” vs. “Mitt Rauner”: Now there’s a good QOTD!
Comment by Northsider Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:16 am
==If we can survive Blagojevich, we can survive anything.==Just Me @ 10:46 am
This is dangerous thinking.
I was in Cambodia in 1993 during the UN peacekeeping mission. I had visited dozens of countries in Europe, Asia, Middle East and the Americas at that point.
Seeing a country where people did not trust other people they interacted with showed me how bad things could get.
People in power undermine trust to gain some small pecuniary advantage. And it works. And it keeps working until it doesn’t.
Then things get worse and out-of-control quickly. See Yugoslavia or Ukraine.
You can’t keeping treating people disrespectfully and dishonestly and expect things to come out in the wash.
And it’s dangerous to assume that just because the past problems, like Blagojevich, worked themselves out that all problems will work themselves out w/o any major consequences.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:20 am
I think my handle sums it all up . . .
Comment by Billionaire Bruce Rahmner Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:24 am
Pat Quinn must be praying Rauner gets the nomination. He’s the only one who can scare the six figure voting block of public employees and their families into voting for Quinn again. Plus, running against a billionaire is the only way Quinn’s populist shtick is still halfway believable.
Democratic public employees will vote for Dillard if he’s the nominee to punish Quinn for pension theft. That’s the only way Republicans win this race.
Comment by W Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:27 am
Dear Raunerbots,
Soccerchild is having some financial setbacks, so I was wondering — how much is Bruce paying per post? I’d be willing to consider a business arrangement. I don’t think Bruce can beat PQ in the general, so no harm would be done, and it would achieve a little income redistribution. Let me know how this works, and maybe we can figure something out.
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:29 am
Dear Soccermom, the pay is the same as your candidate proffers.
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:40 am
Why on earth voters would consider anyone with ZERO experience in state government for the top job in state government regardless (or because of) of the candidates rhetoric is asking for trouble. This a is a job interview. Think about who you would hire for important things in your life (tax preparation, gall bladder removal, barber). Would you hire someone for any of those jobs just because of how they talked about it, or would you rather your barber had a bit of experience before het got out the clippers?
Comment by Sangamo Sam Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:41 am
Never mind: the sentence structure is weird. They want the Better IL proposal taken off the table.
Comment by whetstone Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:42 am
Sangamo… You answered your own question. People want someone who does not have the experience that created our mess…. Note the primary poll numbers…
Comment by Walter Mitty Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:44 am
“Dangerous?!” How dangerous can he be? If he really does something “dangerous”, the House votes to impeach and the Senate impeaches (with only Democrats since they have 40), and he’s gone. So dangerous may not be the right word. Then we get the Lt. Gov and if she is “dangerous” she gets impeached and now we have Lisa Madigan.
So, I am not really worried about him being “dangerous.” The only thing that really worries me if Rauner wins the primary is that he might not beat Pat Quinn. Four more year of PQ really keeps me up at night. But my first choice, is on a death spiral, my second choice never really got off the ground, and my third choice is already 0 for 1 against PQ, so Rauner could be all I got. Kinda sad, but reality none the less.
Comment by Jaded Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:46 am
SangamoSam - to fix a fiscal disaster, I want someone with the business know-how to do so. The people in government in Illinois with state government “experience” , have created a disaster. Time to vote them out.
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:46 am
“Rauner is just the opposite. He could make a LOT more money outside the Guvs mansion than in it, and it’s unlikely he’d have his hand out to sell influence like Blago did. He’s doing this because he wants the power to repair some of this mess, he doesn’t need the money from graft or campaign contributors to do it.”
What Rauner wants is what Walker wanted and wants. The power to make changes that will benefit his multimillionaire buddies and will create more opportunities for him to make even more money when he leaves office. Of course he wants term limits. He just wants to be in there long enough to do what he can to allow the 1% to make more money and the middle class to make less.
Busting unions is a step in the plan.
Comment by Irish Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:46 am
===“Dangerous?!” ===
When you naturally assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a criminal, that’s dangerous. Period.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:49 am
- Irish -,
Well said. I tell people “Bruce Rauner” is running so Bruce Rauner can cut out the middlemen politicians.
You are “on it”…
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:50 am
His logic is classic Psych 101, “Finding ones faults in the actions of others”. He has a record of expecting a return on his own political contributions. He obviously believes every politician is motivated by money rather than ideology.
Comment by Endangered Moderate Species Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:50 am
===classic Psych 101===
Psych 101, like Econ 101, has damaged a lot of people, making them think they’re experts on a topic that they really don’t know much about.
Try to leave 101 classes out of the comments, please. Thanks.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:53 am
==I want someone with the business know-how to do so==
Government doesn’t operate like a business. You have to work within the laws and rules governing the state. Rauner and some of you in the public don’t understand that.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:59 am
“He’s gonna be a dangerous governor, that one.”
Careful Rich, you’ll wind up in a Rauner nursing home. LOL!
Comment by too obvious Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:00 pm
Just how many 6 figure public employees are there ? Enough to change the course of a statewide election ? I don’t think so. I know you hate public employees. But at least hate us for a valid reason. Just for the record for the rest of the Raunerbots, a vast majority of public employees do not earn 6 figure salaries.
“He’s the only one who can scare the six figure voting block of public employees and their families into voting for Quinn again”
Comment by AFSCME Steward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:06 pm
You guys keep missing the big picture. Raunner is trying to run as an anti-union proxy. Voters aren’t tuned-in to their state rep/senator and the excrutiating minutia of these bills. They don’t care if unions are directly contributing to Madigan, directing member contributions, or just acting as foot-soldiers on the ground/funding commercials/etc. to get candidates to win.
As for “dangerous” - Rich, IIRC you wrote a Sun-Times column about a year ago about how you were all but ready to leave the state because of how messed up it was. It’s hard to envision radical change coming to Illinois without a radical - not to dictate his agenda but to draw such a stark line in the sand that it forces all parties to cooperate. Maybe that’s dangerous, maybe it’s what the state needs. In any event, at least it’s a choice - an IEA-supported Dillard vs. Quinn is not.
Also consider this: Peter Fitzgerald never gave clues that he was a clean government type. He adopted that stance for political reasons and then stuck to it. Pat Quinn DID paint himself as a clean government type - how did that work out? (Answer: Reform Commission backstab, UNO, DCFS, etc. etc.) The past isn’t a great crystal ball.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:06 pm
===Government doesn’t operate like a business.===
Totally understand and that’s exactly what needs to be changed. Government can’t keep spending money it doesn’t have. Learn *that*, run it like a business, as Walker has in Wisconsin and you end up with a surplus - sending money back to the voters…again like Walker.
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:07 pm
AFSCME steward — I think the “six figure voting bloc” refers to the hundreds of thousands of union members who vote, not their pay rates.
And Victor — here’s my take on “running the state like a business”:
Bruce Rauner wants to run the state of Illinois like a business. His business.
And that means valuing profits over people’s lives, and converting other people’s money into his own.
Bruce Rauner. We’ve seen what he did to vulnerable seniors in his nursing homes. Don’t let him get his hands on Illinois.
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:14 pm
“Peter Fitzgerald never gave clues that he was a clean government type. He adopted that stance for political reasons and then stuck to it.”
If he did it for political reasons he’d still be Senator. He was an honest Senator because he was an honest person. Fitzgerald was who Rauner is trying to fool us into thinking he is.
Comment by AFSCME Steward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:15 pm
Illinois is not Wisconsin.
Walker doesn’t have the Illinois GA or the Illinois Constitution.
- VictorNorth -, you are ignorant (see dictionary) of the role of government and how a business works.
States don’t “make anything”, gave no “profit margins”. States run programs that are services that will never recoup the money spent to run them. Ever. Not by bad management, but by the nature of the government’s role in society, and within the laws governing, and the Constitution overseeing the functions of Co-Equal branches.
Rauner would be Executive, equal to Legislative and Judicial, and not CEO ruling over Legislative, Judicial, and no Constitution to worry about.
Walker can’t run Illinois like Wisconsin, like Rauner will not be able to run Illinois like a business or Wisconsin.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:15 pm
– Learn *that*, run it like a business, as Walker has in Wisconsin and you end up with a surplus - sending money back to the voters…again like Walker.–
So the business model should include a graduated personal income tax in which most earners pay 6.27% and top earners pay 7.65%? A state property tax, to boot?
Wisconsin has the highest state and local tax burden in the Midwest.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:18 pm
=He’s gonna be a dangerous governor, that one.=
Confirmation from Rich, Rauner will be the next Governor.
Comment by Downstater Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:18 pm
And in my Public Budgeting 101 class last night, we talked about the Medicaid program.
So here’s the question: What will Bruce Rauner do in his first year as governor (god forbid) if Medicaid claims come in substantially above estimates? Refuse to pay the bills? Shut down public schools in March to save money and then move those dollars over to HFS? Death panels?
Where are the lessons from “business” that are applicable to this one? And keep in mind that anything he wants to do to save money in future years will require legislative change and a waiver from the Feds– just like in a business, right?
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:20 pm
Word nails it with a perfect retort!
Comment by PublicServant Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:22 pm
Soccermon
“So here’s the question: What will Bruce Rauner do in his first year as governor (god forbid) if Medicaid claims come in substantially above estimates? Refuse to pay the bills? Shut down public schools in March to save money and then move those dollars over to HFS? Death panels?
Where are the lessons from “business” that are applicable to this one? And keep in mind that anything he wants to do to save money in future years will require legislative change and a waiver from the Feds– just like in a business, right?”
Simple, he’ll spin of a shadow company, dump all of the liabilities on that company & then declare bankrupcy, just like he does in his normal business operations.
Comment by AFSCME Steward Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:23 pm
AFSCME — Let’s call that shadow company “Indiana”….
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:24 pm
*Oswego Willy*
I’m a guest here, so I won’t reply in kind to your insults.
Enjoy your echo chamber.
Comment by VictorNorth Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:27 pm
If elected, he’ll either find a way to work with the GA leadership (where the other party has a respectable chance of being in a position to override vetos on a party line vote basis), or might be left in the position of having a bully pulpit to talk from, but little practical power to do much of anything else.
Comment by titan Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:27 pm
It’s one thing to say that government can LEARN some things from the business world, such as how to live within a budget. It’s another thing entirely to say that government should be “run like a business”, which is not possible because private businesses are not constitutional representative democracies — they are (hopefully benevolent) dictatorships or in some cases, hereditary monarchies. Saying that government should be run like a business is like saying your spouse should be treated the same as your children — the relationships are fundamentally different.
Comment by Secret Square Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:30 pm
===Rauner is just the opposite. He could make a LOT more money outside the Guvs mansion than in it, and it’s unlikely he’d have his hand out to sell influence like Blago did. He’s doing this because he wants the power to repair some of this mess, he doesn’t need the money from graft or campaign contributors to do it.===
I wouldn’t be too sure. He can push for legislation that would benefit his business empire (even if it’s held in trust while he’s governor.) He can attempt to steer contracts to his businesses or allies. Sure he’ll take a temporary pay cut, but he can definitely make a lot of money out of being governor in the long run.
Regarding dangerous-if Rauner does buy himself the governor’s mansion, his money can buy one heck of a bully pulpit. Yes, I know the map is going to put a ceiling on how many seats he could flip, but he can certainly get to work on getting legislative allies for 2016.
Comment by CollegeStudent Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:31 pm
ig·no·rant
1 lacking knowledge or of the thing specified
.
That is why I asked you to go to a dictionary.
I didn’t insult you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:31 pm
I don’t understand how anyone can credibly say they intend to “Run Illinois like a business” and also say they will let the income tax raise expire. In what business does it make sense to slash your main revenue source?
Comment by bottom rung. Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:35 pm
===. In what business does it make sense to slash your main revenue source? ===
When you’ve priced yourself, or are close to pricing yourself out of competition.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:39 pm
The Free Market corrects pricing by running companies out if business due to pricing, costs, or both.
Illinois is not a Free Market player with competition and in the same breath, Illinois is required to provide unlike businesses which can decide what to provide and what not to provide.
Revenue, cost, profit margin are mitigating factors for states.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:44 pm
======Government doesn’t operate like a business.===
Totally understand and that’s exactly what needs to be changed. Government can’t keep spending money it doesn’t have. Learn *that*, run it like a business, as Walker has in Wisconsin and you end up with a surplus - sending money back to the voters…again like Walker. ===
The irony is that government truly run like a business would be the most business hostile government this country could ask for short of a totalitarian command economy.
Because if government was actually run like a business, taxes would go up to almost the point where you get an armed revolt while bare bonesing services. Which of course would lead to a mass business exodus.
The job of businesses is to make money. Not sell things or provide services. Government has the reverse priority, which is why running government like a business is a stupid soundbite.
——————————
BTW while Walker is working on getting tax cuts passed in Wisconsin, evidently he’s having trouble getting his own party’s legislators to buy in because the cuts project to create another budget deficit in a few years.
Comment by CollegeStudent Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:44 pm
• Government should be run like a business.
• Vegetables should be tasty like chocolate.
• Movies should be free like television.
• Smoking should be exercise like jogging.
• Birthdays should be weekly like Tuesdays.
I know it sounds like the juvenile babble of a child, but that’s how they do it in Wisconsin!
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:52 pm
VictorNorth@ 11:46 am:
“[T]o fix a fiscal disaster, I want someone with the business know-how to do so.”
As has been discussed here before, business know-how has no relationship to running government.
Comment by Sangamo Sam Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 12:54 pm
==run it like a business==
It’s a nice theory but you cannot do that. In a business the CEO can issue a decree and it gets done. Doesn’t work that way in government. If you want government to run like a business you are going to have to change the Constitution to get rid of that little thing called the legislature.
==as Walker has in Wisconsin ==
Wisconsin is not run like a business. I don’t know where you would even get such an idea. The fact is that governments cannot operate like a business. Period. They can use best business practices but the link ends there.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:07 pm
S.Barnett@11:15am=Who is investigating Quinn=
More details? We would all like to hear about it.
Pat Squeezy Quinn has a lot of differences of opinion with a lot of people, but even his critics don’t think he is a crook.
I picture Quinn in a meeting with a Billionaire. “I wish you would reconsider your views on these items we discussed, governor. Let me know if you change your mind”. A minute after Billionaire leaves, Quinn notices a brown bag was left on his desk. Quinn leaps up grabs the bag and goes running after the Billionaire, wait! you forgot something, (hands bag to Billionaire).
But governor, I left that you.
Thanks anyway, but I already ate lunch.(Quinn thinking the bag contains a ham sandwich and apple).
Inept, and ineffective, yes, crooked, I don’t think so.
Comment by DuPage Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:13 pm
AFSCME Steward
If you go here…
http://databases.sj-r.com/salaries/state-of-il/100k-club/
There are 6,215 or about 8% of the workforce of state government.
It does not appear to include the state universities.
Comment by OneMan Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:18 pm
“maybe it’s what the state needs”
Really, the state needs a leader who profited immensely from the very system he says now must be radically changed?
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:22 pm
What’s most dangerous about Rauner, IMHO, isn’t the run-government-like-a-business shtick — we’ve heard it before — but the ugly, divisive, nasty, extremist rhetoric he’s injecting into the governor’s race. Guys like that can do serious damage if they aren’t repudiated at the polls, and they don’t need legislative majorities to do it. All it takes to poison the well is a public official with enough money to fund a private foundation …
http://www.ncpolicywatch.com/2013/12/18/the-politics-of-intimidation/
Comment by olddog Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:23 pm
AFSCME Steward -
====Rauner is a power hungry meglomaniac period. He will find a way to benefit himself if he is elected Governor. His track record already proves this to be true.===
So true, he is talking about parking cars, flipping burgers, dressing like a common person from downstate, note the barn coat and flannel shirt.
Lot of disguise, but most people don’t become as rich as he is by taking care of anyone but themselves, and their own interests.
Comment by 3rd Generation Chicago Native Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:23 pm
Little Jack Rauner
Little Jack Rauner sat in his penthouse
Watching his minions go by
He put on his Carhartt and lent himself millions
And said “What an average guy am I!”
Comment by Tommydanger Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:24 pm
yes I know its Bruce
Comment by Tommydanger Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:24 pm
=Jeez, Arizona Bob, does Rauner pay you by the post? Do you really think that the Baron is going to muscle Madigan?=
NO ONE muscles Madigan, except maybe for MRS Madigan. Rauner knows how to deal with him to get things done. You find commmon ground, and move forward with a compromise.
Obama completely lacks these skills, that’s why he’s been such a failure legislatively. Thompson had these skills, as well as Edgar. It’s a necessary talent to being an effective politician. Quinn and Blago both stunk at it. Ryan handed out pork like candy (remember Illinois First?)to get his way. Rauner’s a deal maker. I may not like what he’s willing to give away,but at least I believe the deals he make will work out best for economic growth and governmental fiscal responsiblity in the big picture.
Comment by Arizona Bob Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:25 pm
===He’s gonna be a dangerous governor, that one. ===
No he’s not, because he’s not going to get elected.
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:27 pm
===Rauner knows how to deal with him to get things done. You find commmon ground, and move forward with a compromise.===
You read the quotes, the Post, listen to Rauner and see the Ads. It’s not compromise, it’s taking no prisoners, and MJM sees, I feel, that Rauner is more Blago than Thompson.
===Rauner’s a deal maker. I may not like what he’s willing to give away,but at least I believe the deals he make will work out best for economic growth and governmental fiscal responsiblity in the big picture.===
Deals for his own wealth, off unions.
BTW, what deals, “Bruce Rauner” has not given a compromise for MJM, or the electorate to see this “Dealmaker” on the Trail.
“Take on Career Politicians, Union Bosses, and they are right I will do what I say. Exactly right.”
Dealmaker?
Not even close in presentation, so if you have specifics to refute even the Ad line to discredit the Globe cartoon, you have nothing to stand on to back your arguement.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:43 pm
Nieva, I felt the same way until I came to the realization, that I don’t have to accept mediocrity - actually less than mediocrity. I’ve come to support the stealth Oswego Willy for Governor campaign.
To the post:
I’m another who sees a similarity between the Count and Blago. Not that the Count is going to be shaking folks down for money - he’s already got plenty. The similarity goes to the elaborate promises of ending corruption and bringing prosperity to Illinois. Blago’s narcissistic behavior plunged the state into deeper fiscal problems, years of acrimonious fighting with and among the membership of the General Assembly, and severely damaged the quality of state government.
This is the future I see with the rhetoric discussed in this post. I wasn’t fooled by Blago, and I’m not going to be fooled by the Count.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:45 pm
As has so effectively been pointed out in this post, government can’t be run like a business. However, I’ve seen numerous attempts to apply business practices to government. For the most part the results were extra work for employees and results that were ignored or only minimally applied because of fiscal realities or political pressure.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:53 pm
Having run businesses, and been involved in government service, I have found that very few of the best approaches leading to success in business actually lead to success in government.
The reasons are many, complex, and too much for short commentary on a blog. Some of the financial acumen and people skills can certainly be applied — and Rauner might have these — but it is not an easy transition.
Do we have to learn the same sorry lessons over and over again?
Applying business practices to government leads to failure more often than success.
Comment by Walker Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:55 pm
===He’s gonna be a dangerous governor, that one.===
And that’s different than the last 3 in what way?
Comment by Anon Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 1:57 pm
Hey, who’s got the Reform and Renewal banner? Maybe we could sell it to Bruce?
Comment by Soccermom Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 2:00 pm
Businesses can sell off or close down unprofitable lines. Let’s see . . .Public Aid? No profit there. Gone. Police? Prisons? Who’s going to pay for them? Gone. Consumer protection? No need, the market place will take care of that. Roads? No profit there either. Gone. Environmental regulations? The market place will take care of that too. See how much money we’ve saved? Yup…exactly like a business. (end snark)
Comment by Skeptic Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 2:02 pm
S. Barnett wrote: ===Who is investigating Quinn? … And there is the brother out east. How many contracts has his company received? Priceless. ===
Pat Quinn doesn’t have any brothers east of the Thompson Center. That’s in Chicago, so where are you talking about? Do you just make stuff up, or what?
Comment by Mighty M. Mouse Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 2:09 pm
Regarding ZC’s suggestion: I don’t understand why “management style” is an issue during an election. It’d be nice to just get the candidates’ overall objectives and the general feasibility of same nailed down.
On the other hand, “style” may become a factor for someone who’s already in office though that seems to seldom happen for mass media distribution unless something goes horribly wrong.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 2:46 pm
=For better or for probably worse, Rauner’s private sector management style at GTCR is going to be one of his models he takes to the governor’s office…”
And I believe I understood the post correctly, but apologize if I didn’t as it seems that some of the terms have non-standard meanings (e.g., a style is not a model).
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 2:53 pm
=Actually most of us on this blog do that. =
lol Anonymous 11:08.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 2:57 pm
demoralized, when I think of the term “running government more like a business,” it’s not at a level as high as the one you referenced in your post. It’s in the analyses and solutions that I believe you had once stated also apply to government.
And Skeptic, I’m going to guess that most know that government is not a for-profit so the obsolescence and redundancies would not be analyzed, viewed, or resolved in that manner because the objectives would be entirely different from those that you’d referenced.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 3:15 pm
@ Anonymous — 3:15, 2:57, 2:53 etc.
Are you all the same guy?
Or did you just get the same set of talking points when you reported to work today?
Comment by olddog Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 3:39 pm
“that’s where Madigan gets all his money or his power”
I’d like to see Madigan give a speech at the union hall instead of the Union Club, once in a while. Madigan seems to be almost as removed from any populist pro-labor sentiment or movement as Rauner is.
Comment by Grandson of Man Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 4:07 pm
=Illinois is not Wisconsin.==
Well I’m glad someone here acknowledges that states are different from one another. If only the one size fits all federal bureaucrats in Washington could understand this when it comes to education policies, drug laws, SSM, abortion, minimum wage, etc.
Comment by CommoNooB Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 6:25 pm
Long Carol Marin piece on Channel 5 on THI/GTCR and the nursing home lawsuits.
– Photos and details of the deaths of the seniors in question. Details on court judgements and bankruptcy. Interview with plaintiff lawyer.
– Stock footage of denial from Rauner and campaign statement.
– Union anti-Rauner spot.
– New Rauner response spot.
– Closer of Rauner saying he wants to run Illinois like his businesses.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 6:37 pm
Can we make a list of the past “businessmen” who were brought in to run State agencies “like a business” and failed massively vs. those that succeeded?
I’m trying hard but can’t think of a success-maybe under Thompson.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 7:20 pm
His message is resonating with folks not involved in unions ( most of the state population) they don’t have the big pay checks with benefits… And they have no problem voting him in. Gov. Rauner has a ring to it.
Comment by Sweet Dreams Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 7:39 pm
- Sweet Dreams -,
How about “gridlock”, “shutdown “, “litigation”, “unconstitutional”, “separation of powers”, “overreaching Executive powers”…”Blago-Like leadership”.
Yep. Nice ring to all those.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 7:55 pm
@ Sweet Dreams –
If you’re not careful, you’re going to wake up and find that ring in your nose.
Comment by olddog Thursday, Feb 20, 14 @ 11:20 pm
I’m not a Raunerbot, but I think the criticism here is a little over the top. AFSCME has made more than $17.5 million in political contributions, according to the state board of elections. That money went somewhere. You don’t spend that kind of money without expecting something in return, and you don’t keep spending that kind of money unless you have gotten something in return. While Rauner’s rhetoric may be an oversimplification, that’s what politicians–all politicians–do, and his core point is a valid one: Unions in Illinois give an awful lot of money to politicians who have done an awful lot of things that benefit unions. Who can argue with that?
Comment by just pandering Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 8:35 am
- just pandering -,
How much in the millions has “Bruce Rauner” spent to try to hide the millions and millions made with insider deals by Bruce Rauner, and off the Constitutionally guaranteed pension work monies, “Bruce Rauner” is in fact bashing Bruce Rauner, the insider, working closely with career politicians, vacationing with them in fact.
You can’t purchase integrity or ethics, because the cost of it is always elusive, and if you want to ignore the hypocrisy, or explain away blatant character issues, then when you bring up the “good” and just ignore the real, you may hear Raunerbot…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 8:42 am
===AFSCME has made more than $17.5 million in political contributions, according to the state board of elections===
Take a look at that list you generated. Much of it is double-counted. For example, AFSCME contributed $800,000 to its own PAC last month and it’s counted in your $17 million number.
Very misleading, to say the least.
Click here to see for yourself.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 8:57 am
Over $7.8 million is listed on an AFSCME to AFSCME contribution search going back twenty years.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 8:59 am
OW,
Your points may, in fact, be true. It would not be the first time that a politician said something hypocritical–even Lincoln, I suspect, spoke out of both sides on occasion when the situation demanded. Of course Rauner has character issues–most importantly, at least for me, is that he can’t seem to keep his stories straight when it comes to such things as clouting his kid into school and whether the minimum wage should be raised. The Levine stuff is also troubling, no matter what the Tribune says. All that is beside the point in this particular debate, and I find it difficult to refute Rauner’s contention that unions have given a lot of money to politicians who have delivered things that benefit unions to the detriment of the state as a whole. On that issue alone, Rauner has a point, I think, and to label such as evidence of living in a fantasy world is a bit much. To reflexively bash Rauner (and make no mistake, there is lot there to bash) no matter what he says says as much about the critic as it does the target.
Comment by just pandering Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 9:00 am
OK, then, let’s say it’s only half of $17.5 million, or only a third of $17.5 million. It’s still a heckuva a lot of money, and I would say that an average of $42,000 a year to one politician alone, Madigan, for the past two decades is significant. Is anyone seriously suggesting that unions are not heavyweights when it comes to funding political campaigns in Illinois?
Comment by just pandering Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 9:05 am
Dude, look at Rauner’s quotes. He’s claiming MJM gets most of his money this way. So, yeah, you make some reasonable points, but Rauner did not, which is what this post is all about.
Sheesh, man.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Feb 21, 14 @ 9:38 am