When is an apology worth squat?

I always thought the only “apology” worth anything was the one comedian Steve Martin gave all those decades ago.

MARTIN: From the past

Remember back in the days of the arrow through the head and the banjo riffs when he’d build himself up into a frenzy of alleged gaffes, then wind them up with the over-the-top, “Well, Excuuuuuuuuse Meeeeeeeeeeeeeee!”

IT WAS SO insincere. It meant nothing. It was just a formality meant to shut people up, and Martin mocked the very idea that an apology was necessary, or that it meant anything.

Anyway, all this speculation over the sincerity of an apology has popped into my mind on account of the fact that Mayor Rahm Emanuel – in theory – has apologized for the death of Laquan McDonald.

He conceded that since all this mishap has occurred with the police under a superintendent he picked and during his time in office, he has to take the blame.

As Emanuel put it, “If we’re going to fix it, you have to understand it’s my responsibility with you. But if we’re also going to begin the healing process, the first step in that journey is my step, and I’m sorry.”

TO PARROTT MARTIN, “Well Excuuuuuuuuse Meeeeeeeeeeeee!” for thinking that Emanuel is less than sincere, or that there’s anything he could possibly say that would appease anyone who isn’t already looking for any excuse to forgive him.

The reality is that the people who are most concerned about the issue of police misconduct in modern-day Chicago are looking for someone to blame. They are less interested at this point in time in trying to find a solution so much as they want someone’s face to post on the problem.

For many, particularly those who wanted Anybody But Emanuel back in the February and April elections earlier this year, they’re more than willing to put the blame on Rahm.

EMANUEL: Is he about as sincere ...

They want him to go. They’re not interested in him being a part of the solution. If anything, they would have found a problem to blame him for no matter what had happened. The death of McDonald was just a convenient occurrence for them.

MY POINT IS that I don’t think there’s such a thing as an apology in a case like this. We have to acknowledge the cause of a problem then figure out how to fix it.

But the idea that someone’s “I’m sorry” really means anything just doesn’t wash. If anything, it always comes across as sounding like someone means to say “I’m sorry I got caught!”

So if by having Emanuel make his little speech Wednesday morning it means that city officials are willing to work together to try to resolve our societal differences that are truly at the heart of this particular problem, then perhaps it meant something.

... as the Hamburger Dude?

Otherwise, it was wasted words that ought to best be forgotten by Friday – if not sooner!

THE REAL PROBLEM we face here is one that goes back much farther than Emanuel as mayor. Or either Daley. It is something that isn’t even limited to Chicago, no matter how many politically partisan outsiders are now wishing they could say it is.

I’m wondering how long it will be before someone tries to claim that the outrage felt toward police because of the death of McDonald and certain other young black men is nothing but political correctness run amok. I have no doubt that some people really feel those 16 shots fired at Laquan were somehow justified.

So long as we have those attitudes amongst us, we will have this problem – no matter whether or not political partisans are able to concoct a way to pressure Emanuel out of the mayor’s office against his will.

Which makes me think we’ll someday hear something the equivalent of the Hamburger Dude, the character played by Paul Reubens in a Cheech and Chong film when he apologized for trying to steal $5 million – only to screech out “I’m not sorry” when he thought nobody was looking.

  -30-

Budget details, schmetails. Where’s our Christmas lights and lottery prizes?

We’re more than a third of the way through Illinois government’s fiscal year without a balanced budget in place, and our political people are still quibbling over details.

We get to keep holiday 'tree' after all. Image provided by Disarranging Mine

We have Gov. Bruce Rauner making several moves on Monday that he says show a willingness to compromise with Democratic leadership in the General Assembly. As in, now it’s their turn to make some moves toward a budget deal.

NOT THAT I expect many people to be swayed into believing that anything significant has happened in this partisan political spat! Most people probably think the 'big news' from Springfield on Monday was Donald Trump's anti-Starbucks rant!

We’re talking about details that give many people a massive headache. Just like the political hacks of old who devoted their attention to giving out free turkeys at Thanksgiving, rather than providing any real government services. The public saw a free turkey on their dinner plates and were easily appeased.

That may be the real problem we have with this political brawl – the public really doesn’t know what to demand. And for some people, the partisan gestures are what they really want; some are enjoying the political fight all too much.

Way too much attention has been paid to those Illinois lottery game winners whose prizes are delayed because the funds that would have gone to cover the winnings have not yet been authorized.

FORGET THOSE PEOPLE in need of services provided by state programs. It’s the lottery winners who are the “true” victims here.

Who's the real Grinch ...

To add to that, we now have the “Christmas tree lights” issue.

There’s no actual tree – it is a holiday tradition that has been in place for about a half-century in which colored lights are strung from the outside of the Illinois Capitol building.

The end result is a tree-shaped appearance for the Capitol during the month of December. I must confess that back when I lived in Springfield, I thought it was an interesting display.

IF ANYTHING, IT was more intriguing than the giant trees many municipalities feel compelled to erect for the Christmas holiday.

... for this holiday season?

Because of the lack of approval of budget funds, the secretary of state’s office (they’re in charge of maintaining the Capitol building) had said it didn’t have the money to be able to pay to erect the lights this year.

It’s only $7,300, but the idea is that there’s no authorization for any money to be spent – it’s not a matter of how much (or how little) the dollar amount is.

But we learned this week that we’re going to get our blessed tree-like lights on account of three labor union locals – they’re going to kick in the money so that people who have business in Springfield during December will still get their holiday treat.

IT’S BEING PRESENTED as a victory for organized labor over the opposition of Gov. Rauner – who has brought on this budgetary stalemate because of his demand that assorted restrictions on organized labor be a part of the budget negotiations.

I’m not willing to see it as some sort of labor union victory – even though I’ll be the first to admit to siding with the concerns of organized labor during this process.

It seems our holiday lights have become yet another petty issue elevated in significance by people whose eyes glaze over at real financial talk – but to whom the lack of a symbolic Christmas tree this year is something they can get all outraged over.

The sad part is that we’re likely to be well past the Christmas holiday by the time anybody is willing to talk seriously about the budget – and I still wonder if we’re likely to go the entire fiscal year without a spending plan. Would that make Rauner and the Legislature the collective “Grinch” who stole the state’s holiday season this year?

  -30-

Putting pressure on the pols to resolve Illinois state budget (or lack thereof)

Let’s hear it for Cook County Circuit Judge Diane Joan Larsen, who on Tuesday took action that puts pressure on the political people who currently are finding ways to avoid getting serious about putting a budget together for the state’s fiscal year.

Will anything significant happen here Wednesday?

Larsen issued the ruling that is the worst nightmare to Gov. Bruce Rauner – who had hoped he could continue to make the state payroll even though there is no budget in place.

WHICH IS SOMETHING the Illinois Constitution requires before any government expenses can be paid. It is a logical requirement – spending government money without a plan would be irresponsible.

Larsen ruled that the state payroll can’t be made come July 15, or any other time, until the state gets its act together and officials pass a balanced budget.

Since Rauner and the General Assembly’s leadership aren’t in any mood to get serious (they’re more interested in one-upping each other), there won’t be a budget in place by next week.

So state workers are likely to miss a paycheck (or a few if this political fight lingers on).

IT BECOMES LIKELY they’re going to blame the new guy for stirring things up with his desires for anti-labor and other ideological measures. Even though Rauner desperately wants everybody to believe that it’s the fault of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, who has taken on the role of leader of the legislative fight against the governor’s ideological battles.
 

Couldn't we just put gov and speaker ...

It’s just a matter of time before Rauner or his allies start taking pot shots (they may be already) at Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, whose staff argued before Larsen that the state payroll can’t be made.

It will be Illinois Comptroller Leslie Munger who will lead the political rhetoric – although there will be others who will spew claims of “Daddy’s girl” against the attorney general. Her office will file the appeal in court, although the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees has its own legal action planned to try to keep workers getting paid.

The rhetoric is going to get ugly, and I’ll be the first to admit sympathy for those state employees who are showing up for work these days without knowing if they’re going to be paid on time.
 

... in a boxing ring to slug it out?

IF EVERY JOB has a perk to make it worthwhile, there also are drawbacks. And one of those for state workers is that there is always the risk of the payroll getting entangled in partisan politics. It has happened in the past.

What makes this year’s situation seem so pathetic is that it seems that Rauner was too eager to bring it on.

So what happens now?

The Illinois House of Representatives is scheduled to convene on Wednesday, which means the high and mighty speaker of the House will have his opportunity to make a statement of sorts that denounces the governor for not getting serious about putting together a budget that fulfills all of Illinois government’s obligations for the upcoming year.

WHICH MEANS MORE rhetoric with little action. Although even if the Illinois House were to pass something on Wednesday resembling a budget, there’s still the fact that the state Senate won’t convene until next week.
 

MADIGAN: A win for father also benefits state?

Nothing can happen until at least then. Which makes it highly unlikely that anything will happen before the July 15 payday that is the newest “drop dead’ date in this political fight.

Yes, I’m being critical of the governor for prolonging this issue – instead of realizing that his political fight to pass his ideological fantasies is over for this year and that he ought to focus his attention on how to resume the battle come next spring.

If he were serious, he’d realize that is the best tactic to get a political win for the long-term. Instead of threatening the state payroll and angering his employees to the point where they’ll actively work against him to make sure he never achieves his desires.

  -30-

Would Harold still hold a grudge against the Mighty Quinn?

“I would never appoint Pat Quinn to do anything. Pat Quinn is a totally and completely undisciplined individual who thinks this government is nothing but a large easel on which to do his PR work.

 

“He was dismissed; he should’ve been dismissed. My only regret is that we hired him and kept him too long.”

 

  -0-

 

Those were the words of then-Mayor Harold Washington back in 1987 to explain the dismissal of the city’s director of revenue following only an eight-month stint in the job.

 

That director, of course, was Pat Quinn – who by that time had already been involved in the “Cutback Amendment” that reduced the size of the Illinois House of Representatives by one-third. He had yet to be elected to the post of Illinois treasurer, lieutenant governor or governor, nor to run any of the unsuccessful campaigns he tried in the late 1990s for the U.S. Senate or Illinois secretary of state.

 

THOSE WORDS ALSO are being used these days in a campaign ad that uses video of Washington speaking, then tells the voters we should “fire” Pat Quinn come Nov. 4 (a.k.a., Election Day).

 

This particular advertising spot came a couple of days after Republican gubernatorial nominee Bruce Rauner touted his endorsement by a collection of African-American ministers – many of whom had previously offered their support to Rauner individually.

 

It is part of the continuing effort by the Rauner campaign to hurt Quinn’s standing amongst African-American votes (where theoretically he could get up to 90 percent support).

 

Create a sense of apathy amongst black voters, and perhaps Rauner’s coalition of rural residents and business-type executives can be large enough to win the election for Illinois governor.

 

THERE’S JUST ONE problem with this strategy; the tidbit being used this time to motivate this line of thought is so old and unimaginative.

 

For all Rauner’s campaign has done is recycled the theme of one of the campaign ads that Dan Hynes used in his 2010 Democratic primary campaign against Quinn for governor.

 

He also reminded us of what Washington once had to say about Quinn.

 

For that matter, I have heard many political people of both major party persuasions use the fact that “Washington fired Quinn” as one of their talking points about how Quinn is somehow less-than-legitimate.

 

ACTUALLY, IF YOU study what Washington actually said (particularly that line about the “large easel on which to do his PR work”), it is so in line with what so many political people said about Quinn – he puts the “causes” he touts front-and-center, and isn’t afraid to embarrass his alleged colleagues if it helps bolster himself.

 

A “phony reformer,” is a phrase I have heard used to describe Quinn by so many people I can’t even begin to recall them all.

 

This is an old attack. It is why Quinn had little to no trouble swatting it aside when he started to get questioned about it on Wednesday. Heck, Quinn should probably have put a response to this on tape years ago. Then, he could just play that segment in response to the Washington attack whenever anyone tries to resort to using it against him.

 

All of this is to say that my response to learning of the latest Rauner campaign rhetoric was to wonder why his people couldn’t come up with something original. Unless they want to believe that black voters will mindlessly follow their “leader” when they cast ballots on Election Day.

 

SOMEHOW, I JUST don’t see that happening.

 

And as for the debate some are taking now as to whether Washington would have ever forgiven Quinn (the mayor died shortly after this firing occurred), I can’t help but think that Washington would have been like many other people will be come this election cycle.

 

He’d hold his nose and vote for Quinn against the “rich guy” who seems to think all the money he can afford to put into his own campaign gives him a sense of intelligence and know-how.

 

  -30-