Why Scott Walker is Still Bad For WI
It’s two days before the June 5, 2012, recall election against sitting Governor Scott Walker, sitting Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, and against four Republican state Senators (three sitting, one who has already resigned), including my own Republican state Senator, Van Wanggaard. Basically, everything that can be said about the recalls — why I favor them, why I believe they are necessary and are a form of democracy in action — has been said.
But one thing I realized when reading over my previous blog, “Scott Walker: Bad for Wisconsin” is this — for whatever reason, I didn’t define why I felt Walker was bad for Wisconsin. Instead, I reflected upon all of the divisive things Walker did early in 2011 which caused a great deal of harm to public discourse and civility in Wisconsin, and hoped my views would be clear.
But in case it wasn’t, let’s try again.
Since Scott Walker was elected in November of 2010, he has divided this state in harmful, self-aggrandizing ways. He has not used his “bully pulpit” to good effect, as he could’ve explained why he wanted the so-called reforms as propagated by Act 10 (which repealed collective bargaining for public employee unions, something Wisconsin had since the late 1950s) rather than just do it by fiat. After Walker used his power to make such a drastic change, he proceeded to get upset because the 14 Democratic Wisconsin Senators left the state in an effort to delay Act 10 by any means necessary as the Wisconsin Assembly had already shown indications of passing Act 10. The “Wisconsin 14” did this to promote civic — and civil — discourse, because if they hadn’t left the state, Act 10 would’ve been approved within days of Walker “dropping the bomb” on the state’s voters; by leaving the state, every single voter in the state was able to become informed.
At this point, Scott Walker and his Lt. Gov., Rebecca Kleefisch, went on various right-wing talk shows, including many at the Fox News Channel, to discuss these “modest reforms” — things that were no such thing — and to say that the “Wisconsin 14” were a bunch of low-lifes who refused to “compromise” with Walker, the Republican Senate Majority Leader, Scott Fitzgerald, or the Republican Speaker of the Assembly, Jeff Fitzgerald (brother of Scott). This was classic Orwellian doublespeak on the part of Walker and Kleefisch; while Kleefisch, to a degree, could be excused for this because her position as Lt. Gov. has very little power, there was no excuse for what Walker said, nor for how he said it.
As we all know now, the Wisconsin Republican Senators eventually passed SB 10 by the vote of 18-1 in order to make Act 10 the law in Wisconsin. (The lone dissenting vote was Dale Schultz of Richland Center.) Some of the Republican Senators, including my own Van Wanggaard, had strong ties to unions — Wanggaard being a former policeman and past union representative — yet apparently had no qualms about stripping other union members of their rights, probably because police and firefighters had been exempted from Act 10’s “union-stripping” provisions.
After the Senate Rs did this, the Wisconsin 14 came home to a deeply divided state, where Scott Walker, Rebecca Kleefisch, the Fitzgerald brothers, etc., still said one thing and did something else. But the people on the ground (like me) who at that time weren’t affiliated with either party were outraged. Nine Senators — six Republicans and three Democrats — faced recall elections. Of those, four Rs and all three Ds were retained, while two Rs were tossed from office and officially recalled.
That, of course, was far from the end of the story, as in November of 2011 four more Senate recalls and the recall of Walker and Kleefisch started. Recall petitioners were told that we’d “never get” enough signatures, but we proved the naysayers wrong; ultimately, Walker, Kleefisch, Wanggaard, Scott Fitzgerald, and two other state Senators were recalled.
If you’ve read my blogs thus far, you know all this. You probably also know that Scott Walker has gone to more out-of-state functions than any other one-year Governor in the history of Wisconsin. He’s raised 60 to 70% of his campaign donations from out-of-state donors, some from extremely wealthy men and women. You probably even know that in some quarters, Walker is viewed as a hero, of all things, because he “refused to back down” when the unions “told (him) where to go.”
The only part of those beliefs that’s true is that Walker refused to back down about anything. But what people who insist on “standing with Walker” fail to realize is that Walker set this whole thing into motion himself — it’s not just the way he did things, which was execrable, but what he did that caused this whole mess.
All of this leads me to only one conclusion: Scott Walker is still very bad for Wisconsin. Because Walker has shown that he cannot and will not compromise with anyone, he’s shown he’s incapable of being Governor — a job where compromise is a must. And if Walker is retained on Tuesday, we in Wisconsin will be looking at more pain, more problems, and more frustration, as Walker will view this election as yet another mandate to do whatever he likes, even if he wins by .0001% of the vote.
That’s why I urge my fellow Wisconsinites to vote for Tom Barrett on Tuesday, June 5. Vote for Mahlon Mitchell as your next Lieutenant Governor, and for those of you in Racine County’s District 21, vote for John Lehman as your next Senator. All three men are moderates who will work to restore civility to Madison, which is why we need all three of them to be elected on June 5.
*****************
Edited to add: John Nichols explains very clearly why Scott Walker should be recalled and replaced here. Here’s a few words from his compelling and cogent blog:
Elected officials weren’t supposed to campaign on one set of themes and govern on another. They weren’t supposed to “divide and conquer” the state. They weren’t supposed to collect $500,000 checks from billionaires, and gather most of their campaign money in other states. They weren’t supposed to have criminal defense funds.
Amen, brother!
Just Reviewed London’s “Hadley Green” trilogy at SBR
Folks, I previously reviewed book 2 of Julia London’s “The Secrets of Hadley Green” trilogy, that being THE REVENGE OF COUNT EBERLIN. After reading that book, I was curious and wanted to read the previous book, THE YEAR OF LIVING SCANDALOUSLY, and the follow-up, THE SEDUCTION OF LADY X. Both were good books that diverted me for a few hours; they seemed reasonably historically accurate with a few quirks (granted, without the quirks, there’d probably be no stories there to tell).
At any rate, here’s the link to these most recent reviews, a “two for one” special at Shiny Book Review for Romance Saturday (as what’s a better time for a romance than Saturday, hm?):
Enjoy!
Just Reviewed Mosher’s “The Great Northern Express” at SBR
Finally, a great book!
That’s what I thought when I read Howard Frank Mosher’s memoir, THE GREAT NORTHERN EXPRESS. Mosher’s memoir is about his cross-country trip promoting his writing after receiving a prostate cancer diagnosis, but it’s really about so much more — it’s about what makes up an interesting life. What makes up the writer’s life in particular. And Mosher doesn’t stop there; he discusses why he went to Vermont, of all places, how he ended up falling in love with the place, and then about how he found his authentic “writer’s voice” — which, of course, led him to write a number of books where Vermont features prominently as a setting, including WAITING FOR TEDDY WILLIAMS, another book I reviewed at Shiny Book Review a while back as “a baseball romance with heart.”
Whether you’re a writer or not, you owe it to yourself to read Mosher’s excellent THE GREAT NORTHERN EXPRESS. It’s funny, touching, humane, and literate — exactly what you’d want a memoir to be, especially when it comes from one of America’s best living writers.
So what’s stopping you? Go read my review, which is here:
Then, go grab Mosher’s book, read it, and wait for this year’s top ten list at SBR — if I have anything to say about it, THE GREAT NORTHERN EXPRESS will be on it.
Ed Schultz and John Nichols to be in Racine County Saturday
After former President Bill Clinton’s visit to Milwaukee earlier today on behalf of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Barrett, I didn’t think anyone else of note would be visiting Wisconsin on behalf of either Barrett or the recall effort. But I couldn’t have been more wrong.
Due to the intense Wisconsin recall fight between sitting Governor Scott Walker (R) and challenger Tom Barrett (D), the current Mayor of Milwaukee, political commentators Ed Schultz and John Nichols will be in Racine County tomorrow — in Racine at noon, and in Burlington at 3 p.m. Schultz, you see, has kept abreast of what’s going on in Wisconsin; Nichols, who writes for The Nation magazine and is an associate editor of The Cap Times (formerly The Capital Times, headquartered in Madison, WI), has been Schultz’s most regular correspondent.
It’s not unheard of that someone with a national radio show and TV show, like Schultz, would come to Wisconsin. He’s done so before and has made stops in Madison. But to come to Racine, which is just shy of 90,000 people, is new for him; that he’s also going to go to Burlington tomorrow at 3 p.m., when Burlington has, at most, 10,500 people, just goes to show that Schultz is interested in every part of Racine County, not just the City of Racine.
As for Nichols visiting with Schultz, Nichols is from Wisconsin and he’s said before that he first voted in Union Grove (yet another small town in Racine County; Union Grove has approximately 4,300 people). As Nichols obviously knows Racine County; he undoubtedly realizes that the City of Racine has been either first or second in how much unemployment we have for the past seven years running, which may be one reason why both are coming here. And as unemployment is one of Schultz’s major “themes,” perhaps Schultz will take note of Racine’s problems in addition to his “get out the vote” efforts on behalf of the recalls of Walker, Lt. Gov. Kleefisch and the four Republican state Senators, including my own R Sen. Van Wanggaard.
If you’re planning to see Ed Schultz and John Nichols tomorrow, here’s where they’ll be:
12 Noon — at the Racine Labor Center, Racine, WI
3 p.m. — at Echo Lake Park, Burlington, WI
And their final stop will be in Baraboo — which isn’t in Racine County at all — at 7 p.m. at the Ringling Theatre.
See you there.
Just Reviewed Celine Kiernan’s “The Poison Throne” at SBR . . .
. . . and folks, I couldn’t be more disappointed if I tried.
Look. Celine Kiernan can obviously write. Parts of THE POISON THRONE were diverting, absorbing, interesting, etc., despite the fact that I saw all the weaknesses in sharp relief — the lack of plot organization. The overabundance of deus ex machina plot devices (if you don’t know what a deus ex machina is, it basically means that the author felt it needed to happen, so she forced it to happen rather than let it flow out of the plot naturally). The lack of sense being shown by most of the participants . . . and the fact that the King, Jonathan, of a kingdom that’s never named, is now the biggest bully the world has apparently ever seen, even though when Wynter was young (she’s now the ripe, old age of fifteen), King Jon was a good and gracious ruler.
None of that makes any sense, nor does the tame romance between carpenter’s apprentice Wynter and the Heir’s best friend, Christopher, considering that Wynter is young and virginal while Christopher is older, lusty, and has had his two middle fingers torn out for no reason. (There’s a whole lot of things that happen in THE POISON THRONE for no reason other than that the author wants it that way, which is why I mentioned deus ex machina plot devices.)
This is the first book I’ve ever given a D-plus at Shiny Book Review, and in some ways I hated to do so as it’s obvious that Ms. Kiernan can write. But my goodness! This book is an epic failure when it comes to young adult reads, because it shows that Wynter, herself, is unable to positively affect the outcome no matter what she does, even though she is a young woman of gifts, intelligence, and talents above the average.
Here’s the link to the review:
Hope you find it useful.
Brewers Fans: Leave Lucroy’s Wife Alone
I never thought I’d have to write this blog, folks. I never thought that anyone — much less a fan of the Milwaukee Brewers — would criticize any of the players’ wives for anything, as any given wife has little influence (if any) on her husband’s performance on the field.
But it appears some ill-bred Brewers fans are criticizing Mrs. Jonathan Lucroy due to the odd, off-the-field accident he suffered, resulting in a broken hand. Lucroy was reaching for a sock that had fallen under his hotel bed when his wife dropped a piece of luggage; this luggage landed on his hand, resulting in a very unusual “boxer’s fracture.” Mrs. Lucroy, by all accounts, feels terrible about this, because of course she never wanted to injure her husband.
Yet because Lucroy was hitting a ton, doing well as a Brewers catcher, and was garnering some national support for the National League All-Star team, these same ill-bred Brewers fans appear to believe that Mrs. Lucroy hurt her husband on purpose. And because they apparently believe this mistaken view should be shouted from the rooftops — or at least listed at Facebook, where Mrs. Lucroy apparently has a page (I haven’t been able to find it) — Mrs. Lucroy has actually received hate mail over this.
Here’s a link to the story from Fox Sports Wisconsin:
And here’s a relevant quote:
“It’s tough for me because it’s already a freak thing as it is,” Lucroy told WSSP. “My wife has been getting hate mail on her Facebook, messages and stuff. It’s really sad that these kind of things happen from a freak thing. She didn’t do it on purpose, man. It was an accident. Stranger things have happened.
“It’s been a battle for me, personally, because there’s no one to blame, and my wife is getting killed by this. It’s not like she’s not hurting enough already, feeling guilty enough already. I really wish people would leave her alone, leave us alone, just let us try to move forward and get this behind us.”
Now, this shouldn’t even need to be said, but since this has happened, apparently it does. Brewers fans, no matter what you think about Jonathan Lucroy’s accident, please leave Mrs. Lucroy alone. She feels bad enough as it is.
Now, let’s get back to watching the Brewers play rather than criticizing a player’s wife, shall we? Because as Brewers fans, we should have the class to leave players’ wives out of it.
Brewers Win, 3-2, over Dodgers; Lucroy to DL
These days, even when the Milwaukee Brewers win a tough baseball game, they still manage to lose out. Take today’s game against the Los Angeles Dodgers, for example; the Brewers played a good game in all aspects (especially defensively) and won, 3-2. Shaun Marcum pitched well; so far this year, he’s been the Brewers’ most consistent pitcher. John Axford picked up his 8th save, while catcher George Kottaras, never known for his defense, played exceptionally well behind the plate despite being hobbled by a hamstring injury. Shortstop Cody Ransom, a recent addition to the Brewers (claimed off waivers from the Arizona Diamondbacks), third baseman Aramis Ramirez, and first baseman Corey Hart all had good defensive games as well.
But despite tonight’s win, yet another player must go to the disabled list (DL). This time, it’s starting catcher Jonathan Lucroy, who broke a bone in his right hand by a freak off-the-field injury (his wife dropped a suitcase on his hand); the Brewers will officially place Lucroy on the DL tomorrow. Lucroy is expected to be out four to six weeks. This is particularly damaging to the Brewers because Lucroy has been hitting a ton thus far (.345 batting average with 30 RBI), and has also been steady behind the plate.
According to Fox Sports Wisconsin’s “Brewers Live” program, the Brewers will call up catcher Martin Maldonado from AAA Nashville along with pitcher Mike Fiers. Both Maldonado and Fiers will start on Tuesday despite the fact that if the Brewers were not so badly injured, neither one of them would’ve seen a whiff of the majors. (Fiers, while not terrible, has a 1-3 record with a 4.41 ERA; here’s the rest of his minor league stats.)
Here’s Maldonado’s current minor league offensive stats; as you can see, Maldonado isn’t hitting very well at only .198. But the Brewers don’t have any other options; had Lucroy not injured himself, Kottaras was probably headed to the DL. Now, Kottaras is going to have to be like several other Brewers who are playing through injuries — Ramirez (hit on the elbow last Friday by the D-backs), Ryan Braun (injured his Achilles a few weeks ago, hasn’t been able to rest it long enough for it to heal), Carlos Gomez (isn’t running well since he’s come off the DL due to a hamstring strain), and Kameron Loe (elbow tightness) — because the Brewers just can’t put any of these guys on the DL even if they normally would go there because the team is just too banged up.
This is why Hart is playing first base despite preferring right field. This is why Ransom is even on the team (the two shortstops the Brewers had on the roster to start the year were Alex Gonzalez, out for the year with a torn ACL, and Izturis, who’s on the DL with a hamstring strain). And this is one of the main reasons why Rickie Weeks, who’s hitting in the .150s (you read that right), hasn’t been sat down, either — he seems healthy, so he’s still playing even though he’s not been hitting well all season long. And that doesn’t even get into first baseman-outfielder Travis Ishikawa’s problem, who was put on the DL yesterday with an oblique strain!
Right now, the Brewers have seven guys on the DL (once Lucroy is added), and have three more who probably should be there (Kottaras, Braun, and Gomez) or should’ve been left on the DL longer (in the case of Gomez). The Brewers have fewer than six position players who aren’t playing with some sort of issue, and of those six, one isn’t hitting (Weeks) and one is playing out of position (Hart).
Despite that, the Brewers won a tough game today over the Dodgers. But as a Brewers fan, I can’t help but wonder which domino (that is, which player) is going to fall next?
Just reviewed Enoch’s “A Beginner’s Guide to Rakes” at SBR
Folks, A BEGINNER’S GUIDE TO RAKES by Suzanne Enoch is one of those books that just makes you want to scream if you have any knowledge of history at all. This book is set during the Regency Era, just after the British defeated Napoleon; it was not a time when women could operate legal gambling dens inside their residences.
That said, the romance here between Diane Benchley and Oliver Warren — both titled members of the English aristocracy — was actually good. The dialogue, while somewhat anachronistic, was crisp and sharp. I believed these two loved each other but really would’ve preferred not to do so, and enjoyed watching the sparks fly.
Basically, this novel didn’t pass the “smell test” — that is, I couldn’t suspend my disbelief long enough in this plotline to get past all the anachronistic elements. But if it had been alternate history, where a strong-minded woman could’ve indeed opened up a legal casino inside her own residence, I’d have enjoyed it thoroughly.
The only way around such a problem is to discuss it head-on, which I did in my review, which is here: http://shinybookreview.wordpress.com/2012/05/27/a-beginners-guide-to-rakes-fun-but/
Enjoy!
Barb Caffrey's Blog 