Wisconsin: What the Fuck?!

Wow, really??? Not that you ever hear about anyone shooting cats...

And cats, by the way, don't just kill birds. My cat seems to take particular pleasure in torturing them first. The cats that would be shot would at least in most cases die a swift and relatively painless death.

Death to the feral cats of Wisconsin!

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_15509218?nclick_check=1

Man believed clowns were attacking home in Roberts, Wis.
Mother's house shot up; Arizona visitor admitted taking hallucinogen
By Andy Rathbun
arath✧✧✧@pioneerpr✧✧✧.c✧✧
Updated: 07/13/2010 10:44:27 PM CDT

Police responded early Friday to a call of shots fired at a home in Roberts and found a man apparently hallucinating an attack by clowns.

The 40-year-old man, armed with a shotgun, had fired several shots in his mother's home. It also appeared that he fired a shot at his mother and visiting father as they fled from the home in a vehicle, said St. Croix County Sheriff Dennis Hillstead.

"Pellets probably hit their windshield," Hillstead said.

Police arrived about 4 a.m. and surrounded the home. The man came to the door at one point and was "yelling at what he could see in the yard, but there was nothing there," Hillstead said.

The man went back into the home and fired more rounds, Hillstead said. In total, about 22 shotgun rounds were fired into the walls and ceiling of the home.

The man then went to the porch with the shotgun in hand and a bag of ammunition around his neck. He did not respond to police commands, but after the man slipped and fell, deputies were able to take him into custody, Hillstead said.

While being taken to a hospital for examination, the man indicated he had taken a hallucinogenic drug. He said he believed that people dressed as clowns were attacking his mother's home and that he had shot and killed a number of them, Hillstead said. He also said he had shot dogs that were attacking him and that his mother had been shot and killed.

"He was ... not in touch with reality," Hillstead said.

No one was injured in the incident.

The man, who was visiting from Arizona, is being held in a mental facility while he undergoes a psychological evaluation, Hillstead said Tuesday.

He has not been charged with a crime, and police have not released his name.

Andy Rathbun can be reached at 651-228-2121.

i'm just going to keep reviving this thread when i read shit like this:

http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/proposals/sb507

quick summary: 'Senate Bill 507 introduced by Senator Grothman and requires the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board to emphasize nonmarital parenthood as a contributing factor to child abuse and neglect. '

grothman lives alone w/ his mom btw

http://www.care2.com/causes/wisconsin-equal-pay-law-repealed-because-money-is-more-important-for-men.html

"Wisconsin Equal Pay Law Repealed Because “Money Is More Important For Men”"

this fuckin' guy

it's really pretty next-level

basically the trolls are in charge right now in this state

yup i bet there is no difference between walker's behind-closed-doors meetings and a youtube comments box

He also repealed a law allowing hospital visitation rights for same-sex couples. Guess he figures since he's about to be recalled out of office, he may as well cram all this shit in.

i feel like i'm living in an alternate universe these days. like a twilight-zone style instructional purgatory.

He also repealed a law allowing hospital visitation rights for same-sex couples. Guess he figures since he's about to be recalled out of office, he may as well cram all this shit in.

― Frank Youngenstein (Phil D.), Monday, April 9, 2012 8:19 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

he did this last may, actually.

our new senator, ron johnson, hard at work: http://www.rollcall.com/news/in_pivot_to_messaging_ron_johnson_looks_to_purge_staff-213740-1.html?pos=hftxt

“He’s an interesting case study of someone who has talked more than he has listened, lectured more than he has developed relationships with his colleagues, and now he’s having a tough time because of that behavior in advancing his policy goals,” one senior GOP aide said. “It’s kind of like watching a temper tantrum by a 2-year-old in the middle of the grocery store.”
“The Senate is still about relationships, and he doesn’t seem to get that,” the aide continued.

man this blows.

how are the senatorial recall elections going? is that a possible silver lining?!?

yeah i can't any news on that. well, scott fitzgerald survived a recall, no surprise there. but no word on the really contentious ones.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/152346265.html

walker's margin of victory will likely decrease quite a bit as most results from the city of milwaukee aren't in. but walker will still win.

feel free to make wisconsin jokes; we deserve it.

I can't be too smug about Minnesota. Some of us will keep voting her into office until she remembers that she's supposed to be in the kitchen.

x-post re Wisc.

$30.5 million: Amount raised by Walker to fight off the recall effort

$3.9 million: Amount raised by his challenger, Tom Barrett, the Democratic mayor of Milwaukee

Thanks for nothing DNC in not getting involved.

As was said on the other rolling us politics thread

lol, by "her" I meant the one who is not to be named, apparently; but it should be obvious

democrats seem to have lost all the senate recall efforts too. pardon me, i'm going to go shoot myself.

have you cleared that with jesus?

i'm enjoying the comic relief from what this thread was started for vs what it's used for now

i'm not

i'm breaking out the cheap whiskey here. gonna be a long night bros.

you think this is something wait til november!

We'll all be honorary Wisconsinites then?

Green Bay goes @Detroit and @New York Giants back to back end of November.

fuck this noise. fuck the dnc, fuck obama for making a fucking TWEET the sum total of his support, and frankly fuck the party for picking a guy who had ~already lost once~ to run again.

sorry, amateurist. i feel like "solidarity" is a corny thing to say here, but--you know.

http://www.journaltimes.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/elections/as-republicans-see-victory-lehman-declares-win/article_90a8c3ae-af76-11e1-ba46-0019bb2963f4.html

this mayyyyyyyyy be a win for the senate, which would give it back to the dems.

yes but there are new elections in november so we could either consolidate gains or lose the senate to the republicans again.

things are bleak my friends.

though it's too bad i don't get to type "Wanggaard" much longer.

why was support from the party so lacking?

you mean the national party? b/c i think their strategists decided barrett didn't have a chance and they (a) didn't want to throw good money after bad and (b) didn't want to strongly connect barrett's loss with obama and the democratic party in general.

(c) The Democratic Party is not particularly fond of unions anymore and doesn't need their money.

That's not a joke.

Walker outraised other guy seven to one. National Dem support was not going to close that gap.

Future protestors and whatnot, take note: this is what happens when a movement gains inertia without a leader. Walker had months and months to prepare before the Dems even named (that is, found) a candidate to supplant him. Maybe they were all hoping Russ would jump into the fire?

I wonder if Wisconsin is at all in play for Mitt? Spin is no, no chance, but I don't see how anyone can be so certain.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYPrcqQSsVg

270 To Win has both WI and IA as "in play" states.

(c) The Democratic Party is not particularly fond of unions anymore and doesn't need their money.

That's not a joke.

Unfortunately very true.

Isn't that kind of true across the board in America right now?

Edroso: The one significant and ominous thing about the Wisconsin recall election is that most of the voters in a state that is not in the deep South think the problem with our economy is that garbagemen and schoolteachers make too much money.

Everyone thinks everyone else makes too much money shockah

lol let's get real here, that's not the issue. It's not "schoolteachers make so much money" it's "why are we spending so much money on these unions when most of us have to pay our own healthcare and we have a huge defecit". The Dems take this if they can get a better candidate. I dislike Walker but this recall was stupid; we're already having budget problems and we just blew 18 million just for nothing. W2G Wisco

I don't get this, are there people who think teachers in Wisconsin don't pay for their own healthcare?

Well the thing with teachers in WI is kind of a crappy situation; obviously they do pay for it one way or another, but IIRC the health care company they use is wildly inefficient and siphons $$$ from the school system (of course, it's closely connected with them) rather than letting them freely shop.

I dunno, I always supported Walker trying to scale back union benefits, but not to the extent that he did. I'm surprised that he was even able to get to private unions.

Frum. His last sentence is wildly optimistic:

1) The age of austerity will bear hard on public-sector unions, or rather, even harder than it already has. An electorate that has seen its standards of living corrode will not pay taxes to sustain superior pay and benefits for its public sector employees. Over the past 3 years, we have seen the state and local public sector shrink. Over the next decade, we will see its pay relentlessly ground down, as private sector pay has been ground down over the decade past.

2) Wisconsin has definitively exposed the failure of the American left to build an effective populist movement despite the worst economic crisis since the 1930s. The Wisconsin recall vote was a battle at a time and place of the unions' own choosing. They still lost, and in one of the bluest states of non-coastal America. Who'll fear them now? Say what you will about the Tea Party, it collected scalps. The unions plus Occupy plus the remnants of the '08 Obama campaign have not. Perhaps that will change if a Republican wins the White House - but until and unless the left loses that fight too, we won't know.

3) Yet at the same time, Wisconsin tells us less than one might think about the outcome of that White House vote. The exit polls in Wisconsin show that state still favoring President Obama. The issue map in November will be very different: expect to hear a lot more about how the Republican call for the repeal of Obamacare will mean higher prescription drug prices for seniors. Nor can Republicans expect the same huge money advantage nationwide as in Wisconsin.

4) Democrats interpret Wisconsin not as a battle over wages and benefits, but as an illegitimate attempt to rewrite the rules of politics to their permanent disadvantage. They are confirmed in a view that the Republican party is a force for concentrated wealth, contemptuous of democracy and fair play. Democrats will emerge from this loss radicalized, not chastened.

They still lost, and in one of the bluest states of non-coastal America.

So, in one of the bluest states when you don't count most of the blue states?

I feel like this is some kind of weird land-area bias, when people think of "the coasts" as some kind of weird unrepresentative fringe of America, while in fact the coasts are notable for being where most people live.

[Democrats will emerge from this loss radicalized

i have no doubt some will. but since conservatives have won the messaging war forever and ever amen it doesn't matter.

xp At the moment I feel like anyone who has any upbeat predictions for the American left is being wildly optimistic. It's depressing as hell.

Eh, Wisconsin's historic blueness is a pretty big deal. Sort of like IL, which starts out every election night the first state colored blue in all the news coverage. If IL started veering right it would be a big deal, too.

"The coasts" is sort of disingenuous, considering one "coast" is three states, and the other is, like, 12, with more than its fair share of fringes. I mean, Maine to Florida? When people talk about the east coast they are of course talking about the mid-Atlantic states, which obliquely means they're talking about NYC, which is mostly because that's where the media is centered.

the worst part is that those who are the most committed to grassroots activism seem to have absolutely no interest in supporting or even working with the democratic party

the party has no-one to blame but themselves for that & no amount of "you're so stupid! support us no matter what, we're the best you're going to get" will change that

The democratic party pretty much blows, i think that's the real issue here

"the democratic party" of wisconsin attempted this recall because its what its members wanted to do

when the GOP was in the wilderness in the late fifties and early sixties it studied the methods of liberals. Richard Viguerie and his direct-mail campaigns, WFB Jr's magazine created networks and ways of disseminating information. Fractions thrived but were sublimated to the message. Eventually they changed the direction of the GOP.

Great Lakes are "coasts" too just sayin'

there is a point where the activist - party dichotomy stops making sense

the party has no-one to blame but themselves for that & no amount of "you're so stupid! support us no matter what, we're the best you're going to get" will change that

no argument, but it's sad to see the only apparent option for viable resistance to conservatism in american politics self-destruct. fwiw, i don't see the democratic party as a monolithic or consistent thing. it's a product of the interactions of those it comprises, and it takes different forms in different places and at different levels. the more committed leftists disengage from it, the more conservative ("moderate") it becomes on the whole, and the less representation non-conservative voices receive.

http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/blog/pollacktootsie.jpg

"This is a coast too, George. Wisconsin is a coast."

Also I think the 'casual' voter had no idea what Barrett's plan even was - his whole platform seemed to be "you hated Walker, and I'm not Walker" - similar to John Kerry's great 2004 campaign; doesn't exactly galvantise people to come out and vote for you

Plus, citizens don't like recalls.

yeah i said that on the main politics thread

i'm shocked at the margin. 10 points!

You do that so much better than D4v1d 3hrenste1n, Alfred.

the party has no-one to blame but themselves

who is the party?

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgDBgG9BZLlExGLvasWxN6zdurZz9F5W-jeBM5XyqWk4Bc2_EbMA

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR2cnyZ-jFb0Ni0RJmXHDmS2ymGRtFpXXLCSOITGknknf5FJQIN

Oops. http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR2cnyZ-jFb0Ni0RJmXHDmS2ymGRtFpXXLCSOITGknknf5FJQIN

Obama in 2012!!!!

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTjq0-EXd4aaG8IVDVsxbRmoiNyUNLHqHckbGMcDILpTDtknlfvsA

Somebody has some opinions.

I agree insofar as a recall is an aberration for use only during emergencies.

People For The American Way email:

we must consider that Walker, in large part, was running against the recall process itself -- and that was a contest he clearly won. A whopping 60 percent of polled voters said that “recall elections are only appropriate for official misconduct,” and another 9 percent said they were never appropriate, showing that voters didn’t necessarily support Walker, they just opposed the recall. This is a testament to Walker’s ability to downplay his radical overreach as mere “policy disagreement” -- something he was only able to do because of his unprecedented campaign war chest and the massive spending of his allies.

Also I think the 'casual' voter had no idea what Barrett's plan even was - his whole platform seemed to be "you hated Walker, and I'm not Walker" - similar to John Kerry's great 2004 campaign; doesn't exactly galvantise people to come out and vote for you

― frogbs, Wednesday, June 6, 2012 10:39 AM (6 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah barrett didn't really have any time to get solid messaging out.

here are some thoughts:

- as the passage quoted just above says, i do think that much of this vote was a referendum on the recall itself. for example barrett actually got a smaller percentage of the vote in some blue counties than he did two years ago, indeed smaller than in many past state elections. my sense is that there were actually a significant number of people who are either "independents" or habitual democratic voters who voted walker this time. why an antipathy to a recall should cause one to vote for walker and not simply abstain is confusing to me.

- HOWEVER i don't think this is separate from the extraordinary fundraising advantage walker had for this election. i think the idea that "recalls are unwarranted" was, if not entirely implanted, then significantly amplified by the GOP ad campaign itself. to put it simply, i can't really believe that so many people had firm opinions on this question of electoral policy before. the idea that a recall should be limited to unseating those who e.g. committed a crime is simply not in the books; the many people repeating this in exit poll interviews seem to be echoing the GOP's messaging. which focused not just on walker's supposed great deeds and barrett's problems but on the idea that the recall itself was an unnecessary process driven by radical elements.

- some info above is wrong. first of all, public employees pay for their own insurance. i should know, i'm a wisconsin public employee. the state pays a share, like any other employer who provides benefits to its employees. the fact that a lot of people in this state think we _don't_ pay for insurance is a good sign that the GOP's themes are reaching people. that said, i think we could afford to pay a bit more and i actually wasn't opposed, like most in my union, to the increases that the unions agreed to prior to walker taking office. then he took office and, in addition to increasing the share we pay for health insurance, simply eliminated our bargaining and other rights. note that walker has not, as yet, touched private-section unions although obviously he and the rest of the GOP would love to make wisconsin a so-called "right to work" (ugh) state. if democrats succeed in keeping the state senate in november (we have it in our hands as of yesterday but it's a lame duck senate since they don't convene again until january) then that will never happen. if the GOP retakes the state senate then we are probably fucked.

- finally (?), i agree with whoever said that the dems needed to put a strong candidate out front earlier and get out the message consistently over a longer span of time. (i don't think much about barrett came through in the last month except "i am not walker.") HOWEVER i'm not sure how the dems would have been able to do that, given the compressed schedule from recall certification to primary to general. there is a genuinely lack of inspiring politicians in this state (surprise surprise) who might have succeeded where barrett failed.. feingold was never going to get into this race and i really got frustrated with those waiting for him to drop out of the sky. feingold will be back someday, but in national, not state politics.

This fuckin' guy.

only slightly disappointed by that not being a link to frogb's user page

lol

Here's a perspective: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/06/wisconsin-recap-thanks-to-obama-american-left-lies-in-smoldering-wreckage.html

But it’s not complete to say this is just Obama’s doing. Obama has done everything he’s done with the support of labor leaders, Democratic supportive groups like Moveon, foundations, liberal pundits, African-American church networks, feminist groups, LGBT groups, and technology interests. Any of these could have stopped him by withdrawing support and overtly attacking him, but only the LBGT community fought for their rights.

Did what now?

only slightly disappointed by that not being a link to frogb's user page

lol, that fight isn't even worth fighting anymore

yeah well why don't you just flag one of my posts instead of being a bitch about it

i miss suggest ban

flag post isn't the same

(the above two posts have nothing to do with frogbs)

yeah well why don't you just flag one of my posts instead of being a bitch about it

if only the Democratic Party had followed this advice in Wisconsin

How clear was the message that the unions were not upset about making consessions about benefits and pay--they had already made those concessions multiple times--but were defending their collective bargaining rights?

Did the general public understand how radical Walker's overreach was? Did they even understand it in Wisconsin?

flag post isn't the same

It isn't, is it. Very unsatisfying.

How clear was the message that the unions were not upset about making consessions about benefits and pay--they had already made those concessions multiple times--but were defending their collective bargaining rights?

I'm not sure whether people know that state employee unions had already agreed to pay cuts, but I would say that people's impression is that state employees wouldn't have been asked to take pay cuts, or would have been asked to take smaller pay cuts, if Barrett had been governor in the first place, and I don't see any reason to doubt that. So I'm sure there are people who have what they think of as a moderate stance ("Public employees should take pay cuts but should have the ability to bargain collectively") but feel that they're not likely to get this from either a D or R state government. It doesn't matter if a lot of people take this position; what matters in a 50-50 state is that, say, 10% of Democrats feel this way, and that doesn't seem so unlikely.

As for "the unions were not upset about making concessions about benefits and pay," I think that's just not true. Teachers _accepted_ those concessions as inevitable, but they were upset about it, that's for sure.

A for "the unions were not upset about making concessions about benefits and pay," I think that's just not true. Teachers _accepted_ those concessions as inevitable, but they were upset about it, that's for sure."

My phrasing was ambiguous. I mean that the shitstorm at the capitol was in response to the parts of Walker's legislation that undercut the unions structurally.

We're going to witness a full meltdown of the Unions in the coming couple of years, as pensions come due and states don't have the money to pay them. We're already getting murmurings in Chicago from the Gov. and Mayor Rahm, and I admit I totally get it. Their position is basically either come to the table to give up a bunch of benefits - like, a lot - or don't, but if you don't, don't complain when we literally can't afford to pay you. It's a major issue, especially in Illinois, and it's inextricably linked to the Union debate. The pension bomb, from a budget standpoint, is not unlike bank insolvency, and I can imagine the economic repercussions could be even worse. The state pension system here has spent so many years borrowing against itself that it's something like $80 billion in debt.

I mean, what alternative is there, when pensions come due and there is no money to pay them? I'm pro Union, but practically speaking, can I be pro Union at a cost to everything but the Unions?

xpost Like, the collective bargaining issue is a red herring (so to speak).

I mean, what alternative is there, when pensions come due and there is no money to pay them?

Maybe none -- but if and when cities/states do this, they need to concede that it's not a policy change, it's a bankruptcy. That's what it's called when you tell people "we're not paying back the money we owe you." And it makes no sense for state employees, alone among the state's creditors, to get paid pennies on the dollar.

It's one thing to change the rules for new hires, another to renege on agreements already made. As far as I can see, what this would amount to is the states saying "We hired you at a certain salary, which we promised to pay you partly now and partly later, and the fact that you were stupid enough to trust us is your problem, not ours."

I take 'red herring' to mean that you agree that making it more difficult for public unions to organize and to lobby the legislature is not the solution to the 'pension bomb'.

Yeah, whether unions retain that collective bargaining ability or not has no bearing on said pension bomb. In fact, unions can be given even more power/rights/etc., and no money still means no money.

Aren't a few states technically bankrupt as it is? I mean, yeah, maybe they haven't technically defaulted on all sorts of stuff yet, but that's because they keep kicking the can down the road, borrowing against pension funds to fund current pensions and accruing a debt that can really never be repaid short of something radical.

See, unless I'm reading this all wrong, there will never be enough money to pay the pensions as promised. So what can you do?

gather that it would be a bad idea to sign into the Illinois pension system this summer?

So what can you do?

You can renege on all your financial commitments, not just the ones you made to your employees. But of course this is probably politically impossible. State employees are the softest target.

But it's not fair to call it an easy target is it? There literally is not enough money to pay off commitments promised to unions. Alternatives are a) cut a billion programs to loosen up cash or b) raise taxes a huge amount on everyone, which hurts everyone for the sole benefit of unions and their pensions. Which is a mess of a baby out with the bathwater paradox.

There isn't enough money for the state to pay back what it's borrowed from banks either, but AFAIK there is no discussion of telling banks "sorry, we're changing the rules and we've decided not to pay off our debts." The banks get paid back first:

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/State-s-creditors-always-first-in-line-for-payment-559813.php

That's what I mean by "soft target." Banks have the power to really punish the state for not paying; the teachers (even when unionized) don't.

I understand that, but it's still the way of the world: if the banks fail, everything fails, which is why they hold so much sway. Not paying pensions will not spark a global depression (or maybe it will!) but the banks have the power to bring down literally everyone who uses money with them and the unions don't.

And actually, there has been plenty of talk of changing rules for banks. But a) that takes place largely on a federal level b) it's been pretty minimal and met with partisan pushback and c) regardless, banks are vital to the global status quo. Banks are a different battle.

I don't think we're really disagreeing then. Just saying that the answer to "Why should all the people have to suffer higher taxes for the sole benefit of state employees and banks?" is "That's who the people borrowed the money from, via their elected representatives."

http://assets.thefiscaltimes.com/TFT2_20101228/App_Data/MediaFiles/3/6/5/%7B3659A54B-525C-4501-B927-626F6F92A3B4%7D03232011_states1_inline.jpg?w=570&h=600&as=1

You know what's going to be great for the economy is a bunch of retirees with zero purchasing power because their pensions got borked.

Still trying to figure out how breaking unions in Wisconsin is going to help the pension crisis in Illinois.

It's not? I was just saying upthread how this is just the start of lots of similar stories nationally, a real problem being exploited by conniving politicians taking advantage of the weak positions unions find them in.

You know what's going to be great for the economy is a bunch of retirees with zero purchasing power because their pensions got borked.

If the states avoid paying out billions in pensions, it's not to just horde it but to spend it on state programs, right? Other budget stuff? So everyone benefits, including retirees, right? But if the pensions get paid, that money either comes out of state coffers or our taxable pockets (including the pockets of pensioners, ironically enough), so everyone loses ($$$). Right? Either pensions get paid and states go broke (which would mean no more pensions), or pensions get deferred and states stay solvent (or go broke anyway?).

Wasn't there someone on ILX who is an honest to goodness economist who can explain this stuff? Because it doesn't seem to me, a layman, to be as simple as "yay unions!" or "boo unions!" It's a total, cataclysmic economic clusterfuck. Isn't it?

i have a BA in economics from a terrible school, does that count?

my professional economist opinion: fuck everyone, UNIONS FOREVER

this argument is a red herring in re. wisconsin because as you can see in that infographic above our pension fund was extremely financially solid. walker ginned up a fake "crisis" to impose the policies that his rancid mix of libertarianism and cronyism demanded. indeed he referred to the state's debt to say that we were "bankrupt," which as every reasonable critic (including several conservative ones) pointed out, is, to put it in technical terms, total fucking bullshit.

and now we're stuck with this dude for another 2.5 years. i'm really depressed.

If the states avoid paying out billions in pensions, it's not to just horde it but to spend it on state programs, right?

in illinois and new york: sure, probably. in other states: no, it'll be leveraged with tax breaks for millionaires etc. in wisconsin walker cut nearly 2 billion (that bears repeating, folks: nearly 2 billion) from education while not only cutting taxes for the wealthy but effectively RAISING taxes on the poor by eliminating or reducing various tax credits for low-income households.

as a few blogs pointed out, tuesday's election was like turkeys voting for thanksgiving.

Actually, that helps put things back on track with the thread (sorry). I knew but had forgotten that Walker had ginned up the crisis.

The president pardons one turkey every Thanksgiving, which is more than you can say for the other 364 days per year.

i'm just waiting for all the people who either voted for walker or chose not to vote to start complaining about the absence of certain benefits etc. e.g. students who whine about tuition increases but failed to vote against the party that has greatly accelerated the defunding of higher education.

Don't hold your breath.

?

i am sure i will encounter such people in the next six months. i will bet money on it.

but not 2 billion dollars.

i'm just waiting for all the people who either voted for walker or chose not to vote to start complaining about the absence of certain benefits etc. e.g. students who whine about tuition increases but failed to vote against the party that has greatly accelerated the defunding of higher education.

Those folks think that tuition is high because the janitors get paid too much and have health insurance, not because the state has cut funding to UW in half.

It's a total, cataclysmic economic clusterfuck. Isn't it?

Is it? I know there are impending pension-funding problems in many state governments, and around the world. But are these problems actually cataclysmic clusterfucks, or are they navigable challenges?

I've heard a lot of apocalyptic language around social security that doesn't actually pan out.

I assume there are multiple causes for pension-funding problems, and a range of solutions that vary from case to case.

I'm not sure how navigable they are. That why I was searching for some guidance. Some states, like IL, NY and CA, seem totally screwed, and that's a lot of people.

How similar is the pension crisis to the social security crisis? I honestly don't know. SS seems like something talked about periodically, like the health benefits/dangers of eggs.

NY has a fully-funded pension program and 85% of the money comes from return on investments. It's true that they got hit hard in 2008 by the downturn in the market, but they're bouncing back nicely. And it's true that there is a retirement bubble, but the comptrollers office has been anticipating and planning for this for decades.

So why does NY seem totally screwed?

Florida's doing OK yet our governor decreed we'd have to contribute a percentage of our salaries towards a pension. A court order put a stop to it a couple months ago.

Dunno. I thought someone said NY was totally screwed. My bad if NY is solvent.

if the right succeeds in making us replay the late 19th century then we can have another '30s when all of us are in our 70s

cool
*readies 2062 suicide note*

grand old badger state!

http://progressive.org/walker-cop-nabs-me-for-being-a-reporter

also, thanksgiving reading food for thought

http://www.amazon.com/Unintimidated-Governors-Story-Nations-Challenge/dp/1595231072/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376661961&sr=8-1&keywords=scott+walker+governor

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/scott-walker-rasmussen-poll-031314

I'm pretty demoralized at this point, which clouds my thinking on this. Burke does not have much name recognition and frankly for someone who will be up for election pretty soon she hasn't made her presence felt as strongly as she could (in part b/c a lot of the usual campaign donors--especially unions--have been drastically defunded because of the various anti-union measures the legislature/Walker passed in 2011-12). so I imagine that any major shift in the polling reflects folks' dislike of Walker more than anything else.

as those outside the state may not know, Walker has been the likely target of two federal probes--one now defunct, the other ongoing. they stem from his time as Milwaukee County chief exec and the recall election in 2012. several of his former aides have already been convicted of using work time (paid for by taxpayers, naturally) to do campaign work for their boss. it's been revealed that Walker had a "parallel" email system set up on premises of his country (and later state) office so that his employees and him could use work time to deal with campaign stuff without, or so they thought, those emails having to be made publicly available. but the emails were part of the first probe, and an open-records request meant that all of those emails are now out there. Walker's aids come off as racist dipshits (no surprise there). by comparison sounds rather matter-of-fact. he doesn't take part in the joshing, etc. but the overall sense that he condones that kind of thing, or at least doesn't mind it, is unmistakable. also, it's clear that he not only knew of his staff abusing work hours for campaign work on a huge scale, but essentially orchestrated this. so far he hasn't been formally accused of anything, but he has famously lawyered up.

my sense all through this is that most voters couldn't give more than half a shit. after all, using work time for campaign stuff is probably something that most politicians and their employees have done. it's bad, but it's a banal, everyday sort of bad. it's usually when pols are caught using public _money_ for a campaign that things start to look real bad. but the fact that folks can't actually attach Walker's name directly to any of the racist/foul-mouthed/incendiary emails seems to be protecting him.. for now.

but yeah the GOP here just passed a really onerous voter ID law, which prohibits all kinds of things that can't even conceivably have to do with voter fraud (like opening polling places earlier so people who work long hours can vote) but have everything to do with preventing poor people from voting.

what's most amazing to me is that the wisconsin GOP is full of lots of people you wouldn't want to take seriously. not just the clownish asshat legislators who say dumb stuff that gets quoted on MSNBC to fuel ratings, but the folks who speaker of the house, president of the senate, etc. people in power positions. like Walker they are not especially bright, are firm believers that their own easily-won righteousness forgives sins of avarice and corruption, decent but by no means great political tacticians. in many other states these guys could have been steamrolled pretty easily. but someone the democratic party here is so dysfunctional, so absent of viable candidates and charismatic figures (since Russ Feingold retired from politics), so inept in basic organizing, and now so in trouble financially, that they can't get much movement.

anyway.

sorry for lots of typos. "SOMEHOW the democratic party..."

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/senate-back-in-session-after-democrats-delayed-key-votes-b99223756z1-249764691.html

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2014_03/another_curb_on_the_innercity049471.php

Republican state senators narrowly approved bills Wednesday to end weekend voting before elections, allow lobbyists to make political donations earlier in the political season and curb lawsuits by those exposed to asbestos.
Under one bill, approved by a one-vote margin, early voting in clerks’ offices could occur only on weekdays between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m. Clerks would not be able to hold early voting during all of that period, however, because they would be limited to allowing a total of 45 hours of early voting a week.

curb lawsuits by those exposed to asbestos.

if men are to be free the iron grip of Big Lung must be broken

yeah there are lots of things like that happening in wisconsin. first you think, "why would any legislator want to sign a bill like that into law, much less introduce it?" then you think, "oh. $$$$$$$$"

oh wait I mean "limited government"

wow. wisconsin is so much more fucked up than i realized! no offense of course. but i really had missed a lot of that..

oh yeah, it's crazy town here.

http://host.madison.com/news/local/writers/jack_craver/dale-schultz-i-am-not-willing-to-defend-them-anymore/article_7c3598f2-ae16-11e3-8097-0019bb2963f4.html

Wisconsin state Sen. Dale Schultz, R-Richland Center, will not ride off quietly into the sunset.

In an appearance on the Devil’s Advocate radio show (The Mic/92.1 FM) last week, Schultz told hosts Mike Crute and Dominic Salvia that his party’s support for a series of election law changes was indefensible.

“I am not willing to defend them anymore,” he explained when Salvia asked why Republicans sought to limit the number of voting hours a municipality could offer. “I’m just not and I’m embarrassed by this.”

Since announcing his retirement in the face of a tough primary challenge from conservative state Rep. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green, the Republican iconoclast has become more strident in criticizing the party in which he has made a political career. Schultz has served as a legislator from southwestern Wisconsin since 1983, including two stints as Senate majority leader in 2003 and 2005.

Last week, Schultz argued that there were no legitimate justifications for some of the election reforms pushed by Republicans.

“It’s all predicated on some belief there is a massive fraud or irregularities, something my colleagues have been hot on the trail for three years and have failed miserably at demonstrating,” he said.

However, the suggestion that his party holds a sincere but misguided belief constituted one of Schultz’s gentler criticisms of the GOP. He hinted that Republicans are trying to gain an electoral advantage by depressing voter turnout.

“It’s just sad when a political party has so lost faith in its ideas that it’s pouring all of its energy into election mechanics,” Schultz said. “We should be pitching as political parties our ideas for improving things in the future rather than mucking around in the mechanics and making it more confrontational at the voting sites and trying to suppress the vote.”

Although Schultz voted for the voter ID bill passed by the Legislature in 2011, now tied up in the courts, he said he now believes that a lack of access to the polls poses a far greater threat to the integrity of state elections than voter fraud.

The course his Republican colleagues are charting, he said, is a depressing departure from the legacy set by those who championed voting rights during Reconstruction and later during the Civil Rights Era.

“In the spirit of the champion of the 1957 Voting Rights Act, I have been trying to send a message that we are not encouraging voting, we are not making voting easier in any way, shape or form with these bills,” he explained. “Back in 1957 with the leadership of Dwight Eisenhower, Republicans were doing that. And that makes me sad, frankly.”

Later, Schultz attacked a bill aimed at helping companies escape asbestos litigation that has been criticized by groups representing veterans, who account for a disproportionate number of those suffering from mesothelioma, a cancer linked to asbestos exposure.

“This bill is certainly a slap in the face at the very least to some of the people who gave some of the most vital years of their life in the service of their country,” he said.

need more dudes like this

Government by "drafting error"

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/290789421.html

yeah, that was all folks around here were talking about today

i think he's just realizing the amount of blowback this is getting and how it will hurt his presidential chances

i mean, you couldn't come up with a parody of a conservative ideologue that would be any more asinine than this guy. he literally removed "the search for truth" from the mission statement of the University of Wisconsin.

There's just something so LITTLE about this guy, the way he can't even just say "OK, that change was a bad idea, thanks for letting me know," he has to make this transparently false claim about it being a typo. It's really infuriating.

Appropriately leading Drudge Report poll atm.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/herman-cain-tops-mitt-romney-in-latest-cbs-nyt-poll/

i love how every single story is like 'the governor, who does not have a college degree'

'the governor, who doesn't know shit'
'the governor, who is a dumbass little resentment monkey'

yeah having 15% in a 38-man race not all that thunderous

made the NYT editorial page: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/opinion/gov-scott-walkers-drafting-error.html

The citizens of Wisconsin, clearly more appreciative of the state university than is their governor

Or, the citizens of Wisconsin, clearly more appreciative of their asshat Gov they keep electing than students are of them?

yeah, that was an optimistic gloss. there's a lot of contempt for the UW around the state, most of it due to the kind of anti-intellectual scapegoating Walker engages in, but a little of it earned. that said, Walker's attempt to change the charter was so ham-fisted that even his supporters are balking.

He's a douchebag, but he's been elected multiple times and he survived a concerted recall effort. When I go up to WI I see Walker stickers and signs everywhere. Clearly the state of WI does not give a shit.

that depends on who you ask, as always

it's not like being reelected in a low-turnout election means that the populace universally holds you in high regard

Absolutely, I just mean, from personal experience, I see stickers and signs for him all over the place in and around Milwaukee. Not sure I've seen more than a bumper sticker or two for Rauner here.

Or, you could say a low turnout election is a sign that even a dick this awful can't get people out of bed.

I canvassed up in WI during the last national election, and people I talked to were so sick to death of elections. Down here, you generally know how things will go (this year excepted, I guess). But people there were literally pleading with us to stop sending people to their door asking them to vote.

i'm not disputing anything you're saying, really, except the breadth of your generalizations.

reagan . . . bush . . . walker!

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a33275/how-scott-walker-is-defeated-by-butterfat/

This is from 2013, but I just now came across it, missed any earlier discussion: reprisals for some who signed recall petitions(This American Life, "It Says So Right Here, " Act III)
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/509/it-says-so-right-here?act=3

http://www.thenation.com/article/199369/how-scott-walker-built-career-sending-wisconsin-inmates-private-prisons#

This is from 2013, but I just now came across it, missed any earlier discussion: reprisals for some who signed recall petitions(This American Life, "It Says So Right Here, " Act III)
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/509/it-says-so-right-here?act=3

― dow, Monday, February 23, 2015 6:24 PM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

how do you play this? :(

click the little white arrow pointing right in the purple circle

More on the Inglett story.

http://www.wiscnews.com/news/article_216e9d60-d4aa-11e2-a860-001a4bcf887a.html

https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1622070_932117096822772_3022253640380038444_n.jpg?oh=5b7912cb2bb081641f65fb70f1236981&oe=55BD3402&__gda__=1434252095_660741297df523beedd3f88f147c7bc0

i hate macros, but... yup.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-destruction-of-the-wisconsin-supreme-court

That New Yorker article reads like a Clive Barker-novel level of horror absurdity. I used to laugh tongue-in-cheek at my wife bemoaning the craziness in her home state, but now I have a front row seat to watch Rauner do the same in Illinois. It's hard to cheer for such a stooge as is Madigan.

One of the only major media pieces I've seen that gets Wisconsin politics roughly right.

http://languagepolitics.org/2015/06/01/uw-post-mortem-outcomes/

good inside UW source to follow

http://www.jsonline.com/news/national-focus-on-uw-sharpening-over-tenure-governance-b99511901z1-306017731.html

it's a disaster.

and probably coming to your state next

what a nightmare.

http://m.host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/education/university/regents-won-t-fight-controversial-tenure-changes-by-legislature/article_23e46e2f-f03e-54d3-b5e2-b4be9a31aeee.html?mobile_touch=true

regents oked it

full vote tomorrow

something like 16 of 18 regents were appointed by scott "i flunked out of college" walker

http://www.startribune.com/uw-madison-professor-discouraging-prospective-students/316118691/

A University of Wisconsin-Madison professor is under fire for encouraging prospective students to go elsewhere because she believes academic freedom is in jeopardy in Wisconsin.

Sara Goldrick-Rab has acknowledged searching Twitter for future Badgers and says she wanted to inform them of changes to faculty tenure and shared governance. She tweeted the changes will hurt the quality of their education, but that the university isn't telling them about that.

lol

http://academeblog.org/2015/07/17/in-defense-of-sara-goldrick-rab/

Even worse, the executive committee of Madison’s Faculty Senate declared in a statement. “As faculty members of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, we support free speech and diversity of opinion, as has been our tradition. Such freedom requires responsible behavior and in this respect we are deeply dismayed with the actions Professor Sara Goldrick-Rab has taken toward students and faculty on Twitter in recent weeks to discourage them from coming here. While claiming to stand for academic freedom, she has in fact damaged that principle and our institution with inaccurate statements and misrepresentations.”

wtf indeed

http://www.wkow.com/story/30204204/2015/10/07/republican-lawmakers-seek-gender-restrictions-on-wi-school-bathrooms

once again, the wisconsin supreme court, ladies and gents

http://www.jsonline.com/news/rebecca-bradley-called-gays-queers-who-opted-to-kill-themselves-b99682686z1-371276861.html

http://www.salon.com/2016/12/14/gop-super-pac-linked-to-paul-ryan-used-illegally-hacked-material-against-democratic-house-candidates-report/

schadenfavre

https://deadspin.com/brett-favre-loses-another-one-late-1845575041