Bruce Rauner Delivers a Rousing, Stirring Inaugural Address

Oath of office


Bruce Rauner kicked off his debut as Illinois governor with a honey of a speech.  He had this dyed-in-the-wool Liberal rooting for  every liberal promise he made.

He started in a tentative way.  Then turned on the juice.  Before I knew I was hooked by his sincerity and surprising eloquence.

His words seemed to come from his heart.  He loves Illinois and wants it to be great again.  He calls for sacrifice.  And says we must take the moral high ground.

“I’m nobody that nobody sent,”  he proclaimed.  And in the moment I believed him.

It’s time to end the cronyism, the influence of special interests.. Who can dispute that?

It’s time to make government work again.  For the common good.

He will immediately freeze non-essential spending in the Executive office.  State agencies will be asked to tighten their belts.

And he pledges to reach across the aisle to make Illinois a leader again in jobs, education, and responsible government.

As I said I’m a Liberal, a Progressive..

And the funny thing is when Rauner called on God for  the usual blessings, I was willing to give him my blessing too.

And the benefit of the doubt.

Good luck, Mr. Governor.  God bless.

Filed under: politics


Leave a comment
  • That seems a change for you.

    Rauner has been consistent in his message that we can't help the poor if the state is broke. On the other hand, I didn't buy Bush 43rd's "compassionate conservatism."

    Considering how the state has left such messes as DCFS, and bipartisan political cronyism as reflected in this article on the RTA (reflecting that everyone, except those milking the system, recognizes that the system doesn't work), I wish him luck in trying to fix it. On the other hand, I don't know if he has figured out how big of a fiscal mess there is.

    At least this time, the legislature didn't engage in the type of lame duck mischief (like the tax increase) they did 4 years ago. I don't have any objection to the special election, and the voter bills obviate the objection that same day registration was a one time political stunt (although it didn't seem to work smoothly).

  • Thank you for a delightful, analytical review. He doesn't need the benefit of the doubt from me, but I join you in wishing the governor the best.

  • Here is the real speech Rauner could not give, found crumpled up in his old pickmeup truck or whatever his is supposed to drive like "folks":

    "Thank you, everybody. I don't know a Mike Madigan workaround, so, while I blather on about things I hope sound good to evil conservatives and loveable liberals, it's all just words.

    "I would have the Attorney General, Lisa Madigan, look under the layers of corruption for something on Mr. Mike, but, well, I know she won't find anything. Just won't...

    "So, ladies and gentlemen and those in-between, I --like Harry Truman-- have a sign on my desk that says,'The Bucks Start and End with Mike.'."

    "Now, may the Devil continue to bless this unholy union of thieving Democrats and Republicans and be so busy with Blago that he can't lead me into temptation."

  • In reply to Richard Davis:

    Apparently Mike and Cullerton don't want to stick it to Rauner just yet.

    It should be apparent that Lisa has a conflict of interest, but she led the ballot with 2.3 million votes, so apparently the statewide voters don't care. Quinn lost numberwise, because he had about 600,000 fewer votes than stepdaughter.

    Maybe more in your wheelhouse and less in AW's, Zorn* was on the radio and said that every governor's inauguration speech is about the same things, except Rauner had more sacrifice. He assumed that Blago was out and out lying, but otherwise those governors were not able to make good.
    *Lisa's biggest defender, and another Tribune columnist whom I challenged on his blog and now for whom I have no use.

  • In reply to Richard Davis:

    I wouldn't worry about Rauner. He doesn't go into great detail about his plans. And that's where the Devil is.

  • If he is void of corruption and sends a message of state responsibility along with personal responsibility then we'll have evolved considerably. The instinct to conform is much stronger than people like to admit.

    It's exciting to imagine Illinois's collective will pointed in the right direction. If it turns out to be business as usual then send him to the guillotine.

  • In reply to 4zen:

    I see you have France on your mind.

  • In reply to Aquinas wired:

    Ha! I think you're right. I just read a piece about about Rep. Lou Lang's disappointment in Quinn, apparently Quinn didn't sign off on Illinois's medical cannabis dispensary's after taking in $5 million in application fees. Maybe a parting shot at Rauner? Forcing him into a historically unpopular Republican issue?

  • In reply to 4zen:

    I'm not sure that is taking a parting shot at Rauner. However, it was reported that Quinn did take other parting shots at Rauner, such as making executive orders, which I am sure are subject to immediate rescission, and appointments, which Rauner reportedly is now trying to rescind. Sort of sounds like a Marbury v. Madison situation (John Adams made all sorts of appointments while leaving), but if they require legislative confirmation, I'm pretty sure that they can be withdrawn.

    What is the real problem facing Rauner, which Richard might have approached, is that the argument made by the Atty. Gen.'s staff in support of the pension reform bill has a 99.44% chance of not flying. I could have thought of some arguments that might have, but since I am not a government employee, not one that the Constitution is subject to implied exceptions. I don't think that has been tried since Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus.

  • In reply to jack:

    BTW, Marbury got his appointment.

  • In reply to Aquinas wired:

    Not via the Supreme Court. Although there was considerable exposition on why he was entitled to his commission, the Supreme Court ruled that the statute purporting to give it original mandamus jurisdiction (as opposed to jurisdiction to issue mandamus in aid of its jurisdiction) was unconstitutional, giving rise to the doctrine of judicial review (a href="">opinion).

  • In reply to Aquinas wired:

    Sorry for the tagging goof, above.

    Also, according to, Marbury never got his commission.

  • Thanks, Jack, for the clarification. So Marshall wearing one hat was unable to force the execution of what Marshall wearing another hat failed to do.

    Yet despite his setback, Marbury lives on in the annals of American history.

Leave a comment