Archive for January 2012
Just reviewed “How Carrots Won the Trojan War” at SBR
Folks, I just reviewed Rebecca Rupp’s HOW CARROTS WON THE TROJAN WAR at Shiny Book Review. Rupp’s opus is a fun, fast, highly enjoyable read about, of all things, vegetables. There are many interesting facts to pique your interest, and Rupp’s writing style is both winning and witty.
Here’s the link for your delectation:http://shinybookreview.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/rebecca-rupps-how-carrots-won-the-trojan-war-is-one-great-read/
Enjoy!
WI Recall Petitions: Far More than Enough to Recall Walker, Kleefisch, and Wanggaard
Today’s Wisconsin recall update is as follows, folks:
- Over 1 million signatures have been turned in to recall Governor Scott Walker. (Approximately 540,000 were needed)
- Over 800,000 signatures have been turned in to recall Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch. (Approximately 540,000 were needed)
- Over 24,000 signatures have been turned in to recall State Senator Van Wangaaard (R-Racine). (Approximately 15,000 signatures were needed.)
Please see this link from today’s online version of the Racine Journal-Times for further details.
As for how these numbers compare? Well, with over 1 million signatures, it’s highly likely Scott Walker is going to be facing recall; considering recall organizers got nearly twice as many signatures statewide as needed, it seems very, very likely that Walker will be recalled and replaced no matter who his opponent is.
With regards to Rebecca Kleefisch, the main reason there weren’t quite as many people willing to sign to get her out (though still quite a high number at an estimated 845,000) is because she’s a cancer survivor, a former anchorwoman for one of the biggest news stations in the state (WISN-TV in Milwaukee, WI), and because as a few men of my acquaintance have said in the past, “What a shame about her politics; she’s cute.” (For the conservative men of my acquaintance, let me point out that Lt. Gov. Kleefisch is also Mrs. Joel Kleefisch, as she’s married to a state Assemblyman.)
As for Wanggaard, the fact that 24,000 people signed to get him out is historic; I believe this is more than the amount of signatures that had been gathered to recall George Petak (R-Racine) in 1996, and Petak was indeed successfully recalled and replaced by then-Democratic Assemblywoman Kim Plache. (I wrote about that historic election here.) While this isn’t nearly twice as many signatures as needed as seen in the statewide Walker recall, it is still a very high number of people who were willing to sign to get Wanggaard out of office. (If I were him, I’d be quite worried.)
As for what State Senator Wanggaard has to say about it? From a different article at today’s online Racine Journal-Times:
Wanggaard, R-Racine, said in a press release that for union bosses and Democrats today marks the start of the “do-over of their loss in the November 2010 elections.”
While others focus on recalls and politics, Wanggaard “will continue to focus on my efforts to help Wisconsin create and retain good-paying jobs,” he said in the release. “Recalls and further division do nothing to show job creators that Wisconsin has a stable business environment and continues to poison the well of politics.”
So did you catch that? Wanggaard says that people are trying to “do over” the 2010 elections. By doing so, he’s attempting to belittle the organizers of the recall effort against him, but it’s not going to work. (And notice, Wanggaard didn’t say anything about how “the people have spoken, but I intend to win them over,” which would’ve made far more sense and wouldn’t have demeaned those who’d signed the petitions against him.)
But at least Wanggaard commented at all (even if it was by a press release); so far, both Walker and Kleefisch have been unavailable for comment.
Oh, one more thing; it appears that State Senators Moulton and Galloway, and the biggest fish of them all, Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, have also had more than enough signatures turned in to recall them. So all six recalls have completed their first phase; now it’s on to the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board and the courts to first verify the signatures, then figure out when the recall elections will be scheduled. (As always, I’ll keep you posted.)
————–
Personal note: This is bittersweet, as I really want to talk with my friend Jeff about all this. He knew I was active in helping Bob Wirch (D-Kenosha) retain Wirch’s seat; he knew I was planning to help work on the recall petitions against Walker, Kleefisch and Wanggaard. And he was very much in favor of this, because he felt all three of them deserved to be recalled — he even said so in our last conversation on 11/11/11.
I very much wish Jeff were still alive just so I could tell him about all this; even though I couldn’t do very much due to Jeff’s sudden death (nowhere near as much as I’d hoped or planned to do), I did gather some signatures and I did, personally, sign the petitions to recall all three individuals. I hope, wherever he is now, that he knows I did my best to get these three people removed from office, and that he’s happy that all three will, indeed, face recall.
And I’ll not even start on my feelings about how I wish I could tell my late husband Michael about all this, too. Because I know that he, too, would’ve been in favor; he’d probably have called this a “classic overreach” and have signed right along with me.
Randolph Brandt is right: Recall Van Wanggaard. Now.
Folks, Randolph Brandt is mad at my state Senator, Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), and he’s not afraid to say so. In a recent op-ed published by the Racine Journal-Times, Brandt excoriates Wanggaard for many of the same reasons I have, including:
- Being a former police union member and voting against collective bargaining.
- Being a former police union representative, yet still voting against collective bargaining.
- Criticizing the practice of “double-dipping” (where someone takes a pension in two places from various state entities), while benefiting from that self-same practice himself.
- Stripped $2M of expected state tax revenue from the City of Racine, meaning the City must either raise taxes or cut services (or, as seems to be the case, both).
- Cut over $16M aid to Racine’s public school system.
- Voted for district 21 to be “redistricted” as Racine and Kenosha counties, which usually tend to vote for Republicans, and district 22 to be comprised of the Cities of Racine and Kenosha, which tend to vote for Democrats.
All of this is bad enough, but the fact that Wanggaard doesn’t seem to see any of it as a problem is quite distressing. Brandt states:
Under a gerrymandered redistricting plan approved by the Republicans and scheduled to go into effect with the November elections, Sen. Wanggaard was to be rewarded with a nice, safe, new Republican-dominated district that’s designed to excise the City of Racine from its new boundaries.
With this plan, your supposed state senator, Van Wanggaard, won’t represent you at all anymore. He’ll exchange the Racine voters he’s failed to support in favor of a whole bunch of new voters in western Kenosha County instead.
Basically, he’ll desert us, the citizens of Racine, leaving us to suffer for his poor decisions.
As I’ve been saying this for months now, it’s good to know that at least one newspaperman agrees with me. (Brandt is the former editor of the Racine Journal-Times.) Brandt’s commentary explains what voters should do to Wanggaard (in essence, why Wanggaard should be recalled), and concludes with the following:
Don’t stand by and watch him be rewarded for this faithlessness to his Racine constituents, the Racine voters who helped elect him in the first place.
Stop him before he skips town, across that new, safe border he voted to establish for himself, just as he once negotiated the union contract that now pays his Racine city pension. Stop him, before he gets away, reneging on his civic debt to you, for you to pay yourself.
Recall Sen. Wanggaard while you still can, before he gets away with it, before he walks away, laughing at you — the citizens of Racine — well knowing he’s left you holding the bag, for his city pension, for his budget cuts, and for his hypocrisy.
So, did you catch all that? Brandt criticizes Wanggaard for Wanggaard’s hypocrisy — something I have railed against for months — and points out to the voters of Racine County that Wanggaard’s own actions have brought Wanggaard to this point, which is certainly the case.
You see, many people in Racine knew Van Wanggaard because Wanggaard was a long-time city policeman. Then Wanggaard was a County Supervisor. And finally, in a heavily Republican year, he squeaked out an election and won the state Senate seat — mostly because people felt they knew Wanggaard and that he wouldn’t vote against the best economic interests of the City of Racine.
Yet that wasn’t the case, was it?
Racine is still locked in a cycle of extremely high unemployment (we’ve been either first or second in the state, unemployment-wise, for years now), and Wanggaard hasn’t exactly done much about it except pay it some lip service. Yet Wanggaard has had a full year in office to have tried to do something — economic development, a bit of extra state aid, something — and he hasn’t done one blessed thing.
This is why I’ve heard from so many people in Racine, City and County, who’ve said variations on the theme of, “I expected better from Van.” Or, “What is Wanggaard’s problem? Doesn’t he realize we’re suffering? Doesn’t he care?”
I don’t know whether Wanggaard realizes it, cares about it, or whether we should’ve expected better from him. But I do know this: I was very proud to sign my name to Wanggaard’s recall petition, and I was glad to gather some signatures (not as many as I’d hoped) on behalf of his recall.
I fully expect that Wanggaard not only will be forced to a recall election, but he will be replaced by a Democrat once the recall election is called (probably former state Senator John Lehman, though no one has officially announced his/her candidacy as of yet), staged, and counted.
As he’s sown, so will he reap — and in this case, Wanggaard has reaped the whirlwind. As Senator Wanggaard deserves all of what is about to befall him, I cannot feel sorry for him.
Oh, yes. One more thing: May I be the first, Senator, to wish you well in your impending retirement from public life?
———
Note: From unofficial sources, it looks like state Senators Galloway and Moulton also will be recalled, while there’s still a chance to recall Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald. All signatures must be gathered by Saturday at 11:59 PM, so all I can say to those trying to recall Fitz is, “Good luck, God/dess bless, and may the wind be at your back.”
And, of course, Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch will be recalled — easily — as I fully expect upwards of 850,000 apiece to recall (when 540,000 was the number required by law, that being 1/4 of the total vote of the last gubernatorial election) to be turned in on January 17, 2012 — four days from now. I’ll keep you posted.
Forgotten First Lady: Ellen Axson Wilson
Recently, I’ve grown interested in learning more about some of our First Ladies — that is, Presidential spouses — and have been reading with great interest a biography by Frances Wright Saunders, ELLEN AXSON WILSON: FIRST LADY BETWEEN TWO WORLDS . This is a woman I’d never previously thought anything about, other than maybe a brief reference as “the first Mrs. Wilson” as she died in 1914, but Ellen Axson Wilson (1860-1914) was an extraordinary woman in her own right, being an artist of some renown, as the picture of her painting Side Porch, Griswold House (1910) reproduced here shows.
But art wasn’t the only thing the first Mrs. Wilson was great at; she was extremely bright and helped her husband, Woodrow Wilson, with the research for many of his books as she read and spoke German, French, and Italian whereas he only was able to read the languages (and that laboriously by his own account). But she was a well-educated, articulate, artistic woman in her own right, someone who insisted that her three daughters be educated to the limits of their ability and that they be prepared to live the best lives they could whether they married or didn’t (as indeed, eldest daughter Margaret remained single). Ellen Wilson helped her husband yet lived her own life, too. And saw no contradiction in doing so, as indeed, there should be none . . . but who’d expect this from a woman born in 1860? (Which just goes to prove the “value” of stereotypes . . . but I digress.)
One thing that struck me from Saunders’ biography that I wish more First Ladies would emulate was Mrs. Wilson’s absolute indifference to being fashionable. Mrs. Wilson dressed well, yes. But she did not wish to be a fashion plate, saying that she had better things to do with her time and money than that — and she put her money where her mouth was, using her time for her art and to learn, grow, and change productively.
Ellen Axson Wilson was someone who lifted up everyone around her, seemingly effortlessly, because she wanted what was best for them. She put several of her cousins through college as she believed very strongly in higher education; she took in her younger brother, Edward, and made sure he, too, was well-educated and had a good start in life. And she was the type of woman who judged people by their minds, not by how much money they had or their status in life — in fact, people who were stereotypical “social butterflies” bored her silly, and she wasn’t afraid to say so.
The more I’ve read about Mrs. Ellen Wilson, the more impressed I’ve been by her — truly, she embodied the adage that “behind every great man is a great woman,” and considering her abilities and skills, it’s really a shame that her story isn’t better known — especially the fact that even nearing the end of her life (she died young at age 54 from kidney disease), she insisted that poor blacks who were living in abject poverty in Washington, DC’s alleyways be helped. And because she was such a powerful personality, even as she got closer and closer to death, the Congress actually passed “alley” legislation because it’s what she wanted.
Please see this link at the American Presidents blog for more about Mrs. Ellen Wilson; the content is great even if the spelling isn’t always up to par, and it will give you an idea of just how special the first Mrs. Wilson really was. Which just goes to show that lives matter — what we do, what we learn, and who we interact with matters — whether others realize it, or not.
Just Reviewed Joan Slonczewski’s “The Highest Frontier” at SBR
Folks, I enjoyed the science, but not the characterization, of Joan Slonczewski’s newest novel, THE HIGHEST FRONTIER. Slonczewski’s novel is very strong, scientifically, as makes sense due to Slonczewski’s own scientific background. What I hadn’t expected is the dearth of characterization, as the main character, Jennifer Ramos Kennedy (scion of two Presidential families, one being those Kennedys), while likable, just wasn’t strong enough to hang a book around.
This made writing a review for THE HIGHEST FRONTIER more difficult than it might’ve otherwise been, as the “sense of wonder” feeling was definitely present, and in style. I admired the science, the world-building, the intense detailing, and everything that went up into making a near-future world (our Earth, set about 100 years in the future) both plausible and palpable.
Anyway, please go read my review at SBR and tell me what you think:
Enjoy!
Politics, Money, and Super Pacs — the Road to South Carolina
New Hampshire’s primary election results both confused and baffled me. How could the Republican Party electorate be so fragmented that not one, not two, but five Presidential candidates drew 10% or more of the vote?
And the putative winner, Willard “Mitt” Romney, didn’t exactly impress anyone even though he took 39% of the vote due to how close, geographically, New Hampshire is to Romney’s home state of Massachusetts. While he gained seven delegates, Ron Paul did quite well in gaining 23% of the vote and garnering three delegates, while Jon Huntsman came in a strong third with 17% of the vote and gained two delegates.
But I’d rather talk about something else aside from the bare results today; to wit, it’s time to talk money. Namely, Super PAC money.
Where is all this money coming from? Most of it is coming from a handful of individuals, supremely wealthy sorts who can spend millions like it’s going out of style, which allows the various candidate-affiliated Super PACs to run all sorts of negative ads. Some of which actually have some resemblance to the truth.
Now, are the candidates supposed to be affiliated with the Super PACs that are helping them? Of course not. But it’s hard to believe that Jon Huntsman’s father, Jon Huntsman, Sr., isn’t talking to his son about the ads he’s running on his son’s behalf; it’s really difficult to believe that the folks backing Romney haven’t talked with him about the ads they’ve aired on his behalf, either.
As most long-time political watchers are aware, the best-funded candidate often wins rather than the best-qualified candidate, mostly because he or she can take command of the narrative in a way that it can become tough to rebut if there’s enough money to throw at an election.
But if you read that as, “if there’s enough money to throw an election,” you might not be too far wrong, either.
So here’s the deal, folks; we have way, way too much money in politics, something MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan often discusses during his afternoon show. We have Super PACs who can raise unlimited amounts of money and who don’t, necessarily, have to disclose who’s funding what with whose money due to the controversial Supreme Court of the United States’ “Citizens United” decision. And we have a completely broken, fraudulent system that’s become more like an oligarchy than the putative democracy most of us grew up to know, study and love.
So the road to South Carolina is littered with all of that, which is why this is such a mess.
What I see is this: we have Romney, who a whole lot of Republicans and right-leaning Independents don’t like. We have Rick Santorum, who is a Christian conservative — he’s a kind-hearted and well-meaning man by all accounts, but some of his public statements (especially regarding GLBT Americans) are, to be charitable, questionable at best. There’s Newt Gingrich, who is a smart, wily politician — I don’t agree with many of his stances, but I’ll never deny that he has skills and smarts — but who has a great deal of ground to make up if he intends to win the Republican nomination for President. There’s Rick Perry, who can’t seem to get over his disastrous debate performances to gain any traction. There’s Ron Paul, who has become attractive to many people, mostly because he speaks his mind and isn’t anywhere near as “packaged” as the rest of the folks running for President. And there’s Jon Huntsman, who really looks like he’d be a great President down the road — but not this year, methinks.
All of these candidates, were there some semblance of a level financial playing field, would be far better served than they are right now. Gingrich has said so, and so has Perry to a degree; I applaud them both for their stances, even though what they’d do to fix this mess as conservative Republicans is to make every candidate have to fully and freely declare who’s funding whom and why. (To my mind, that’s a good start. But it’s only a start.)
As I see it, the road to South Carolina is filled with all sorts of potholes, unintended sinkholes, and way too much money to be borne. So the media will clean up, the populace of South Carolina will largely tune out, and it’ll be much harder for any candidate to gain any sort of legitimate traction than it would’ve been with a more level playing field.
Because of that, my best guess is that if there is an upset here, it’s going to come from Newt Gingrich. I think Paul will once again be a factor and gain delegates. I think Romney will draw at least 25%, and I think if Huntsman continues to represent himself well, he’ll get at least 9% or 10%, a respectable showing. But it’s also possible that Rick Santorum will do well in South Carolina; because Santorum and Gingrich both are trying to take Romney down, that might split the “anti-Romney” vote between them which allows Romney to eke out another narrow win.
And I do think, for whatever it’s worth, that South Carolina is Rick Perry’s final stop on the 2012 Presidential merry-go-round.
One final thought: I’d really love to find out how much money Romney’s five sons are earning as “campaign aides.” I believe the only person, by law, a Presidential candidate can “shield,” financially, is his spouse — that’s because a married couple is counted as one, legally. And I’m fine with that; I don’t really need to know how much money Ann Romney needs at this point, nor Callista Gingrich, nor any of the other candidates’ wives, either.
But Romney’s five strapping adult sons are another matter. They are all listed as “campaign aides,” which means they’re drawing a salary. I think it’s time we know how much Romney’s paying his five sons to do a bunch of make-work on the campaign trail, don’t you?
Just reviewed Lee and Miller’s “Ghost Ship” at SBR
Folks, if you want an interesting, mind-blowing adventure that capably continues the journey of pilot Theo Waitley, half-Liaden through her father’s side and related to the current Delm of Korval (an extremely powerful personage), seek no further.
Hie thee hence to my latest review of the inestimable Sharon Lee and Steve Miller’s Liaden Universe (TM) epics, GHOST SHIP, at Shiny Book Review. Go here, if you’re like the folks of Clan Korval and believe “I Dare” to be your calling card (as well you should):
Because if you haven’t read any of Lee and Miller’s novels yet, what’s stopping you?
Enjoy!
Rep. Robin Vos (R) Calls Recalls “Frivolous” Because “They Cost Too Much”
Representative Robin Vos (R-Rochester) is at it again.
Vos doesn’t like recall elections, even though his own party, the Wisconsin GOP, went after three Democratic state Senators last year — Bob Wirch of Kenosha, Jim Holperin of Conover, and Dave Hansen of Green Bay. All three easily withstood their recall elections and were retained. (Maybe Vos only dislikes them because his own party lost when they attempted to unseat these three Democratic Senators. But I digress.) He believes they are too expensive, and asked Wisconsin’s Government Accountability Board how much it’s going to cost for the election to recall Governor Scott Walker and Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch — as that’s a statewide election — mostly because he seems to believe that widely publicizing the estimated cost of the statewide recall election will somehow stop the recall process in its tracks. Note that the gubernatorial/Lt. Gov. recall election is estimated to cost $9 million according to Wisconsin’s county clerks and the GAB; this cost covers only one election, not with the sure-to-come primary beforehand. Supposedly, having Kleefisch on the ballot as is usually the case in any gubernatorial/Lt. Gov. election will cost more, something I highly doubt.
Please see this link for further details:
Worse yet, in this article, Vos calls the recalls “frivolous,” saying:
“People cannot say this is somehow worth the cost to have these frivolous recalls. It’s a shame we’ve come to this.”
I have news for Rep. Vos. He is misusing the word frivolous, which is defined by the Free Dictionary as:
friv·o·lous (fr
v
-l
adj.
1. Unworthy of serious attention; trivial: a frivolous novel.2. Inappropriately silly: a frivolous purchase.
Note that these recall elections, while they are expensive, have not been undertaken lightly. It takes a lot of effort to gather 540,000 signatures statewide in two months, which is what is required to recall both Walker and Kleefisch, as that’s 1/4 of the total votes cast for Governor in the 2010 election. And that effort, by its very definition, is the epitome of seriousness — in other words, Rep. Vos, no one would ever undertake such a grueling effort unless they were quite serious
So the first definition, that of being “unworthy of serious attention,” fails.
But what about the second definition, “inappropriately silly?” Do these recalls qualify for that definition, either?
No, they do not. Once again, the recalls may well be wrong in certain lights; certainly, they are in the eyes of Robin Vos. But one thing they are not is “inappropriately silly,” especially considering Vos’s own party, the GOP, supported the recalls of Holperin, Hansen, and Wirch last summer. (I guess we’re supposed to have short memories about that, huh?)
The main reason I see for Vos to do this is because it’s the only play the Wisconsin GOP has left, to wit: stall. Obfuscate. Cast aspersions on the people recalling Walker, Kleefisch, state Senator Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), and more — because it’s the only thing the Rs can do, as they’re very well aware that Walker and Kleefisch will be recalled. They’re also very well aware that Wanggaard will be recalled, and that other senators who are in danger of recall (including Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald and Senator Pam Galloway, R-Wausau) may have to defend their seats as well.
So the way I see it, the only reason Vos is saying and doing all this is because he knows his party will lose these recall elections. He’s the co-chairman of the Legislature’s finance committee — a very powerful leadership position — yet Vos has to know which way the winds are blowing in Wisconsin. The GOP’s days are numbered; it’s quite possible that the Wisconsin Assembly (lower house) will go solid blue next year due to the GOP’s overreach. And Vos’s own seat, which has been a safe Republican haven for at least twenty years, may even be in jeopardy because people are that angry over what the GOP has done.
I’m most unimpressed with Vos on these issues, and believe his logic chain, at best, is suspect. His understanding of the adjective “frivolous” is flawed. And he’s crying sour grapes because of how expensive the recalls are, when as Wisconsin Democratic Party chairman Mike Tate said here:
“The $9 million cost of a statewide recall election is great, but the cost of doing nothing is far greater. This undertaking is the biggest investment in the future of our state and families we can make.
It would take more than 7 recall elections to equal the cost of Walker’s tax increase on seniors and working families. It would take more than 11 recalls to equal the tuition hike Walker foisted on University of Wisconsin-System students and their families. And Walker’s $2.3 billion in tax giveaways to out-of-state corporations and the super-rich would pay for more than 255 recall elections. Wisconsin simply cannot afford Scott Walker any longer.
At the end of the day, no matter how Scott Walker and his Republican Party try to spin it, the people of Wisconsin called for this election. There is no price tag on democracy.” (emphasis mine — BC)
Agreed, though they way I’d put it is that Vos’s complaints about how expensive the recall elections will be are an attempted framing of the narrative that should not stand, as it is fundamentally flawed both on its merits and its ethics.
So let’s bring on the recalls already. Because whether Vos or the Wisconsin GOP likes it or not, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander; if the GOP can undertake recall efforts as they did last summer, they have absolutely no right to complain now. (Or as I said the other day with regards to Wanggaard’s impending recall election: “Them’s the breaks.”)
Just Reviewed “The Crystal Variation” at SBR
Folks, if you’re looking for three great books at a very nice value, look no further than Sharon Lee and Steve Miller’s latest Liaden Universe (TM) omnibus, THE CRYSTAL VARIATION. In this compilation of three earlier-published novels (including CRYSTAL SOLDIER, CRYSTAL DRAGON, and BALANCE OF TRADE), Lee and Miller do something extremely difficult: they have a nice balance in the two prequels (CRYSTAL SOLDIER and CRYSTAL DRAGON) between information long-time readers such as myself want and need and the action-adventure that’ll help draw in new readers without confusing them. This is a very neat trick that very few authors can pull off.
Now, the third novel, BALANCE OF TRADE, is a stand-alone novel set two hundred years or so before the bulk of the Liaden Universe novels but over one thousand years after the prequels CRYSTAL SOLDIER and CRYSTAL DRAGON; thus, we see Liadens and Terrans who distrust each other far more than they do during the time of LOCAL CUSTOM, SCOUT’S PROGRESS, etc. The clash of cultures narrative is striking, but what’s even more striking is that this is one of the few young adult novels Lee and Miller have written — it has no sex, little violence, little if any swearing, and yet it’s as riveting as if it had all those things, which is another neat trick to pull off.
Excellent stories at an excellent value. How could you want anything more? (Except for a sequel to BALANCE OF TRADE, that is. I definitely want that, m’self.)
Here’s the link to my review:
Enjoy!
Barb Caffrey's Blog 