How do you arrive at a gay slur from someone mentioning a woman having a boyfriend?

LOL. How typical. This from the person who claims others cast a gay slur toward them. Just another socialist left wing hypocrite. Too funny.

You'd better hope that your boyfriend doesn't read about the fondness for me that you wrote about. It may cause some problems if he finds out you're calling another guy buttercup.

You have earned all the fondness you now wimper over. sniff sniff sniff. Go wipe your nose and stop your trollish behavior. I for one will not bend over and cave by your, or anyone's, Alinsky tactics. My advice to you is suck it up buttercup.

RetiredAirForce, I doubt you're going to find others quite as willing to follow in your footsteps of name calling and disingenuous claims as they were last week. Both yourself and one of those that followed you ended up having derogatory comments about me deleted for that episode as well.

This is why RetiredAirForce makes light of his history of deleted derogatory comments about me and his coaxing of other people into following his lead as was demonstrated by his previous comment to 916WI.

916 if you keep filling up her victim card she will soon get 2 for free.

916WI said, "Sorry about the miscommunication with the second part of your post. I didn't realize you were completely void of common sense. When someone is speaking of an out of state student not paying taxes in the state where they are receiving their education..."

Cougarballer5 never spoke of an out of state student not paying taxes in the state where they are receiving their education. There you go again. How many times is that in just this one thread that you've put words in the mouths of other people?

And the "pesky laws" comment had nothing to do with the quirk in campaign financing. That comment was addressing a totally different subject and was made in a different article. You're the person who took my quote, re-worded it to fit your purpose and then tried relating it to the issue of this quirk in campaign financing.

Every comment of yours just becomes more and more disingenuous. I'm quite surprised you made it this far into the discussion before unleashing the personal insults. Hopefully you're learning to keep your equanimity under fire.

Here's five derogatory comments you made about me that were recently deleted in just one single day. I very much recall these comments as I was the named target.

1) On Founders, CEOs hand Wis. governor campaign cash

Posted on May 2 at 3:29 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

2) On Are WE THE PEOPLE of WI for sale?

Posted on May 2 at 1:28 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

3) On Founders, CEOs hand Wis. governor campaign cash

Posted on May 2 at 1:19 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

4) On Are WE THE PEOPLE of WI for sale?

Posted on May 2 at 9:01 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

5) On Are WE THE PEOPLE of WI for sale?

Posted on May 2 at 7:18 a.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Poobah......Good--now we're getting somewhere.
That makes your quote, ""Because Wisconsin state law says they can! Good enough reason? I know these pesky laws are getting in the way of Walker quite often, but the law is the law! And we are a nation of laws and not men, right?" seem kinda funny:)
You speak of "pesky laws" getting in the way of Walker, and the "law is the law".......until you find a "pesky law" that gets in the way of candidates you support, in which case in which you have no problem just purging it out of the system........Classic:)
Sorry about the miscommunication with the second part of your post. I didn't realize you were completely void of common sense. When someone is speaking of an out of state student not paying taxes in the state where they are receiving their education, I had no idea it would be so difficult for you to make the correlation between that out of state student not filing their tax return in WI and not paying taxes in WI........I realize it's a leap, and I guess I was giving you too much credit in thinking you could make it.....I'll try to be more sensitive to your needs in the future:)

"Republican super PACs and other outside groups shaped by a loose network of prominent conservatives – including Karl Rove, the Koch brothers and Tom Donohue of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – plan to spend roughly $1 billion on November’s elections for the White House and control of Congress, according to officials familiar with the groups’ internal operations.

That total includes previously undisclosed plans for newly aggressive spending by the Koch brothers, who are steering funding to build sophisticated, county-by-county operations in key states. POLITICO has learned that Koch-related organizations plan to spend about $400 million ahead of the 2012 elections - twice what they had been expected to commit." [ http://www.politico.com/news/stories/051... ]

jerseyboy, as you said, it certainly does stand up to recent Supreme Court rulings. That is why the state legislature and governor must act to correct it. Democrat Rep. Roys authored a bill to correct it. It was killed by the Republican controlled Senate in Joint Resolution 1.

And, of course, the law in question being repealed has nothing to do with the way in which unions, corporations and individuals funnel money into political action committees. That would continue, unfortunately, despite repeal of the law in question.

I would have to say that the "quirk" in the law stands up to recent decisions of the US Supreme Court in political donations and free speech. In addition, considering that Gov. Walker is facing a Recall only because the teacher and public worker unions are pitching a fit for now having to do what most of us do - pay for our pensions and health care (In fact, I pay 100% of both.), I have no problem with this quirk. By the way, did we forget what this recall is really about? It appears that is the case I would have no problem with outside unions donating just as much if a recall of a Democrat was just as unfair and only seeks to placate a special interest.

Speaking of special interest. Some of us do not want to admit that unions give out the mighty dollar as generously as "the rich" They too are more interested in power than in helping the regular guy. Their idea of the regular guys is the person who pays union dues. The fact is, many people are not in unions and receive no benefit from the unions having power. At least with "the rich" I always seem to lose money when the unions have their people in power than when the Republicans have power. Let us not forget that the "evil owners" who lord over the public unions are us taxpayers. If the union gets it's way, it raises my taxes. I am not against fair compensation. But nowadays, the public/teacher unions are getting pay raises when nobody else is getting any raises. The public/teacher unions still pay much less than most of us when it comes to health care and pension contributions. All we are asking is for you to pay your fair share in this difficult economy. That's right - I said it - fair share.

916WI said, "What exactly is the "quirk"(or law to the normal person) that you want to remove? Be specific. It sounds like you don't have a problem with the unlimited contributions, but only have a problem in the timeframe they are collected?"

You're again putting words in my mouth. I never suggested I was OK with unlimited contributions and never mentioned anything about a timeframe I had a problem with. I am very opposed to unlimited contributions. If you've read my previous comments on the subject, I am for removing all private money from politics. That includes individual, corporate, union, etc. money. My solution to this immediate concern is the assembly bill that I cited earlier that was authored by Rep. Roys. Assembly Bill 296 (2011). It applies the standard limitations to recall elections. As I said, the bill died in the Republican controlled Senate.

916WI said, "Are you not able to read? He specifically mentions an "out of state student" who "pays no state taxes".......What do you think he meant--an "out of state student" who has a permanent residence in the state but doesn't pay taxes here because he files them out of state!?!?"

cougarballer5 said, "They pay no state taxes." You said that cougarballer5 said they, "filed their income taxes in another state." It's quite clear to me what courgarballer5 said -- "They pay NO state taxes." Your misrepresentation of what cougarballer5 said is typical of how you twist words to suit your argument. I'm not going to assume to know what someone "meant." You need to stop putting words into the mouths of other people based on what you "think" they "meant."

Poobah.......ok.....What exactly is the "quirk"(or law to the normal person) that you want to remove? Be specific. It sounds like you don't have a problem with the unlimited contributions, but only have a problem in the timeframe they are collected? Please clear this up for us because you're all over the map here buddy!
As far as your second comment, "As you can see, cougarballer5 never said anything about them filing their income taxes in another state or anything about the state of their permanent, or transient, residence"....
Are you not able to read? He specifically mentions an "out of state student" who "pays no state taxes".......What do you think he meant--an "out of state student" who has a permanent residence in the state but doesn't pay taxes here because he files them out of state!?!? Unbelievable!
You silly liberals do sure know how to speak the language of nonsense well:)

916WI said, "Are you seriously saying that the law stating "unlimited contributions" actually means "limited contributions"??:)"

Will you please show me just exactly where I said that? You keep putting words in other people's mouths to create a situation for you to find some fault with something you yourself said! Unbelievable. And I suggest you re-read state statute 11.26. You will find that your quoted phrase "unlimited contributions" never appears there.

One way in which Walker and his cronies manipulated the quirk in this law was by having a Walker supporter, David Brandt, file the FIRST recall registration against Walker. This enabled Walker to beging to raise money immediately. Of course, Brandt withdrew his registration days prior to the deadline for turning in his petitions. A bill (2011 A.B. 296) was introduced by Democrat Rep. Helda Roys to make limits apply to recall elections and remove this quirk. It died under the Republican controlled Senate's Joint Resolution 1. Big surprise, isn't it?

916WI said, "The really funny thing is when another poster raised a question about the resident of another state, who filed their income taxes in another state and who had their permanent residence in another state, asked why they should have the right to vote in a WI election, you got all puffy chested and came up with this gem..."

That is not at all what another poster said. The other poster, cougarballer5, specifically asked, in entireity, "@Mouse, why should an out of state college student be allowed to vote in a Wisconsin election? They pay no state taxes. An in-state student doesn't need an absentee ballot, they can vote in their hometown that is mostly likely their permanent address anyway. Way to think that comment through."

As you can see, cougarballer5 never said anything about them filing their income taxes in another state or anything about the state of their permanent, or transient, residence. When are you going to quit putting words in the mouths of other people?

New Marquette poll shows Walker ahead by 7 pts. Maybe if Barrett actually had something interesting to say about what he would actually do "if" he was elected rather than point fingers and complain. Walker had the courage and the determination to take action to balance the budget. I wish he was our President. Just imagine how much money he could raise!

and we allow this kind to teach our children.

Poohbah.......The state law specifically states that candidates involved in the recall are allowed to accept an unlimited amount of contributions.....The law is very specific with regard to this. There is no overlapping law or a gap between laws that Walker is exploiting. I ask you again, based on how our state law reads, how has Walker manipulated it a way that it wasn't intended. Are you seriously saying that the law stating "unlimited contributions" actually means "limited contributions"??:)
The really funny thing is when another poster raised a question about the resident of another state, who filed their income taxes in another state and who had their permanent residence in another state, asked why they should have the right to vote in a WI election, you got all puffy chested and came up with this gem...
"Because Wisconsin state law says they can! Good enough reason? I know these pesky laws are getting in the way of Walker quite often, but the law is the law! And we are a nation of laws and not men, right?"
Really?? So you take the position that when those "pesky laws" get in your way--just change them.......correct??

Third_Eye said, "So the Democrat legislature and Governor that passed this law was not credible?"

I will take at face value that your statement that a Democrat legislature and Governor passed this law is correct, but I have not researched the passage of the relevant laws to know that is true for myself. That said, quirks in the law result from laws either overlapping with other laws and leave gaps between themselves and other laws -- hence the term quirk. Quirks in laws are called quirks because their effect was unintentional.

Democrats, indeed, will be the ones to fix the quirk, because Walker and his surrogates surely have no incentive to do so.

poobah May 30, 2012 at noon: "I am certain the next credible legislature and governor will correct this quirk."
So the Democrat legislature and Governor that passed this law was not credible?
I think we are seeing the law of unintended consequences in action here.

916WI said, "There is no "quirk" here."

There clearly is a quirk in the law. Several newspaper articles, in left and right leaning publications, have referred to it as a quirk.

I never said Walker accepting the money was illegal. Try as hard as you can, but you can't put those words in my mouth.

I am certain the next credible legislature and governor will correct this quirk.

Take not of what is happening in Chicago...(30% salary increase is what they are DEMANDING)

Teachers union ramps up contract fight with Chicago Public Schools

Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/2...
Stay on top of Chicago business with our free daily e-newsletters

Oh, but that we could.

feduptaxpayer....Taking your batteries out usually puts an end to that problem.

If you are talking big money here talk about the fact that the unions are being out spent approximately 25 million to 1 million and the fact that one contributor wrote Walker a check for 500,000 that is substantial so if money could win this election Walker should win by a landslide. but we are talking what voters will do and I think it is going to be close.

Well when you look at the stripping of rights religion race gender and other choices allotted
by the constitution and you wonder where walker is going with his agenda.

The truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth?????? This is politics!!!! There is no such thing. It only exist's in LEADERSHIP! So Mr. Eyster, stop with the phony, slanted journalism and act like a man of the cloth here!

Poohbah.....Too funny! The law CLEARLY makes a point of stating that during the recall process, those running are able to accept an unlimited amount of contributions. There is no "quirk" here--the intent of the law is obvious.......From politifact.....
"First off, there’s nothing illegal about Walker’s actions -- they are expressly permitted under a 1987 change in state campaign finance law.

Indeed, while Democrats have slammed the provision, the same state law also allows committees seeking the recall of an official to raise funds without worrying about the normal limits -- and Democratic state senators facing recalls had the same chance in the summer of 2011.

"It’s offensive to say it’s a loophole. It’s a clear statute," said Mike Wittenwyler, a Madison political law attorney. "If that’s a loophole, then the entire state statutes are a loophole."

In fact, though the change was supported by incumbents in both parties, Democrats were key to its birth in 1987 -- and state elections officials supported it at the time."
The part that I like is that the democrats are the ones that initiated the change:) Now we have their supporters calling state laws "quirks" that "need to be changed" when our state law doesn't benefit them the way they thought it would.......And I'm the one who is being disingenuous? What's that saying about people in glass houses Poohbah?

You original question was "Why does Walker need and/or accept contributions to proclaim that Wisconsin is open for business?"
I don't know how I misrepresented your statement--It sure does sound like you are saying that contributions are a condition of the claim. As I said before the two are not related. One involves donors approving the direction Walker is taking the state and wanting to offer support in staying that course. The other, what we are paying him for, is policy driven.....He doesn't need contributions to proclaim WI is open for business.......He has already done that without the contributions.......

If the blogger would like to take action on it being "record turnout" I will gladly be a taker against that proposition, and I will lay substantial action on it. I don't believe it will be anything near a record; as more and more simply could care less which side wins. As mega $$$'s infiltrate both sides to the point that they are spending over $400 per undecided vote, many are seeing the obvious. In that neither is looking out for the average person. As always, I will will offer up my vote up to the highest bidder to anyone who wishes to buy it. Any takers feel free to e-mail me. Just pay me cash, and you can have an extra vote in this supposedly critical election!

usaret writes....
Would Hendricks $500,000.00 donation to Barrett been as eye-popping to you? Why is it that those on the Left use "We the People" but seem to forget those on the Right are also "We the People"? Why are there a few who complain about the large donation by Mrs. Hendricks and saying how many jobs this could have saved, etc., but never say anything about the LARGE SUMS OF MONEY spent by the UNION's on this re-call election. How many jobs would that have save?
...This.

No_fascist, I believe Walker's initiatives and the resulting divisiveness have done a great disservice to this state and will continue to cause hardships for many families for years to come. That said, I feel your comment about Walker is extraordinarily inappropriate.

no_fascist, I get your passion and also think Walker is using terror tactics on Wisconsinites, but let's just vote this sucker out on Tuesday while we have the chance and forget the ceremonial burial at sea. He doesn't deserve it.

Third_Eye said, "I'm suggesting that politics is a dirty game and I implied that you indicated the democrat money is pure."

Don't worry, we all make mistakes. I won't hold it against you for mistakenly implying that I indicated that.

Poobah asks: What are you suggesting, Third_Eye?
I'm suggesting that politics is a dirty game and I implied that you indicated the democrat money is pure.
You answered that implication by asking this: "What are you suggesting, Third_Eye? That the Walker campaign has been illegally coordinating and/or interfacing with PAC's that have been supporting his campaign?
In plain and unencumbered language that even you can understand Poobah;
Both sides approach the political process by taking advantage of every opportunity to gain an edge. Both sides have a lot of 'wink, wink. nod, nod." going on.
Twist away.....

916WI said, "Yes, you absolutely did marginalize the law........By referring to Walker as exploiting a "quirk" and then, by going on to say "that quirk will be corrected""

916WI, for someone to point out that a person exploits a quirk in the law is NOT marginalizing the law. It is, if anything, calling into question the ethics of the person that exploits the quirk. In no way does it marginalize the law. Quit being so disingenuous.

You then asked, "As far as your question is concerned, when has Walker said that he needed donations as a condition of Wisconsin being open for business?"

He hasn't said he needed it as a condition of Wisconsin being open for business and that's NOT what I said he said. Please quit misrepresenting my statements. I point you back to his own office's comment on these large donors having increased access to him as quoted in the NY Times piece that John cited above. "The first year of his official calendar shows significant access for companies that helped him with large political donations, according to the nonprofit Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism.

Governor Walker’s office says this access only confirms how sincere the governor was in promising to seek out “job creators” and proclaiming Wisconsin “open for business” from his first day in office." [ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/opinio... ]

Why does Walker have to give access to, and receive large donations from, billionaire donors that want him to turn Wisconsin into an all red right to work state in order to proclaim Wisconsin is "open for business?" Isn't that something WE THE PEOPLE pay him to do?

Take a note from Oconomowoc Schools...

Oconomowoc Presses Forward with Reforms to Restructure Staff, Pay Teachers More in High School

Reforms Possible Because of 2011 Wisconsin Act 10

"The Oconomowoc Area School District unveiled a plan Tuesday that would make drastic changes to how their local high school operates. Their goal? Cutting staff to retain good teachers, paying these good teachers more for their added workload, and keeping educational offerings and class sizes the same while saving half a million dollars."

http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2012/04/...

No-facist.....Your comment is totally uncalled for. The goal is simply to unseat a devisive and destructive governor....no more, no less.

We don't have referenda to decide policy issues. That is why we have a legislature, and a Governor. Here's the deal: the referendum happened when Wisconsinites decided that the Democrat party wasn't the direction the majority of us ant to go. It doesn't get any fancier than that. ANd if Barrett wins, there'll be a Conservative backlash and a recall against Barrett - I guarantee you - and on and on we go. If Walker wins, should the recall folks be sent a bill for the millions this while thing cost? Probably they should get a bill. In the meantime, there is no valid reason to change Governors at this time.

No fascist......That's definitely breaking news. Can you please identify the navy ships, passenger airliners and embassy buildings that Walker is responsible for bombing?

poohbah......Yes, you absolutely did marginalize the law........By referring to Walker as exploiting a "quirk" and then, by going on to say "that quirk will be corrected" The law is very clear regarding the recall process and how much a candidate can accept from donors during the process, you might think it's insignificant enough to be labeled as a quirk, and that it should be done away with simply because the law doesn't seem to be favoring the candidate you support, but the rest of us are glad that such a law is in place.
As far as your question is concerned, when has Walker said that he needed donations as a condition of Wisconsin being open for business? They are two completely separate things. Donors donate because they agree with Walker's agenda and support the direction he is taking the state. I would think that those donations would be best used in clarifying his agenda and countering the democrats criticisms during this upcoming election.

Correction "she" must be far out

Mouse must be a bundle of nerves, he is far out.

Mouse
What is the world are you referring to?
I guess you prefer that the unions run Wisconsin.

Third_Eye said, 'Quote "Unions contribute money to political action committees which operate independently of the candidates they support." End Quote

You just keep believing that Poobah.'

What are you suggesting, Third_Eye? That the Walker campaign has been illegally coordinating and/or interfacing with PAC's that have been supporting his campaign? If not, what were you suggesting?

916WI said, "For you to marginalize our laws by labeling the ones you disagree with as "quirks" is pretty sad."

I never suggested we marginalize our laws. Those are YOUR words. I hope we can eliminate much of the corruption in this state by marginalizing your cadre of Walker/Fitzgerald conservatives. You should recheck what I actually said. And regarding my previous quote about being a nation of laws. That was in direct response to cougarballer5 asking, "Why should an out of state college student be allowed to vote in a Wisconsin election?" I responded to them that it is because that's the state law and we're a nation of laws, not men. A question which directly begged for that answer.

I never asked you why Walker should be allowed to accept a donation of $500,000 from a billionaire who wants him to turn Wisconsin into an all red right to work state. What I specifically asked was, "Why does Walker need and/or accept contributions to proclaim that Wisconsin is open for business?" Do you have an answer for MY question? Or are your answers only for your own questions?

You conveniently misrepresented what my question was so you can fit a re-worded previous quote of mine in as the answer. Only problem is, that wasn't MY question and it wasn't my quote, verbatim. It was yours.

The tax increases include: $540 million paid from oil company profits; $318 million by creating a new 7.75% tax rate for the richest 1% of taxpayers; $290 million in higher taxes on cigarette smokers; $215 million in higher corporate income taxes; and more than $85 million paid on capital gains.

BYW for any of you that think Walker is some hero for ias claims of "eliminating the defecit" , you need to look back at history, There have been multi-billion dollar defecits pased along for years. Doyle inherited one over 2 billion from the years of Tommy and McCallum, he was able to fix it without draconian ed cuts, at the end he had to make some ed cuts but nothing like these people have done. People TALK about tax increases of Jim Doyle during the GLOBAL crisis that cost every nation and state hundreds of thousands of jobs, millions globally and want to blame doyle directly? I never voted for Baldy , but how disingenuous can you be?? Wisconsin came out of the crisis far better than most states and if you actually analyze the horrible tax increases were NOT income tax, property taxes, or even sales tax. So please spare me the hero talk for the eagle scout, okay? You have all just been fooled by a bunch of double talking politicians. Welcome to the state in the worst economic climate in the country, WIsconsin! But hey at least we're "open for business".

""We are a nation of laws and not men.......right?"" you bet 916 , just like the law allowing us to recall politicians in Wisconsin. The law that Walker is NOW on record as wanting it changed, even though its how he took power and he also supported recalls against Feingold and Kohl not for illegal activity as so many suggest should be the only use, but for policy disagreements!! Funny how things change when the shoe is on the other foot.

As I said Poohbah, it is and has been state law for quite some time......We are a nation of laws and not men.......right? For you to marginalize our laws by labeling the ones you disagree with as "quirks" is pretty sad........The Walker supporters such as myself are thankful to generous donors like Hendricks who provide Walker the means with which to advance his agenda. It is a blessing that our laws specifically allow for this.

Quote "Unions contribute money to political action committees which operate independently of the candidates they support." End Quote
You just keep believing that Poobah. Politics are pure as the driven snow.

Shopierehuh

Do you support this?

"Cut his head off!"

http://youtu.be/jQNl0OQA4MU

my dad can beat up your dad.

Poopah and Mr Eyster. Mr Barrett sends his children to private school with a voucher, yet the journal sentinel found he voted against poor people sending their children to private school under the voucher plan, How do feel about that. I would really like to know. You can check this out.

Glenriven: Ditto.

johnnyreb6977 said, "I know that you think that if liberals do something then it is just fine but if a conservative does something it's always wrong. The donation from Diane Hendricks is no different that all money that the liberals received from the unions!"

johnnyreb6977, you should probably spend less time mind reading and more time with campaign finance law if you think Diane Hendricks contribution is no different than union contributions. Unions contribute money to political action committees which operate independently of the candidates they support. Diane Hendricks contribution was a contribution to the Walker campaign that allowed them to spend it as they direct.

poohbah: Liberals have been exploiting "quirks" as you call them in laws for years, they just call them loopholes. Now before you jump down my throat I know that you think that if liberals do something then it is just fine but if a conservative does something it's always wrong. The donation from Diane Hendricks is no different that all money that the liberals received from the unions!

916WI, your statement that the reason Walker accepted $500,000 from a billionaire wanting him to turn Wisconsin into an all red right to work state was because "Wisconsin state law says he can" is preposterous. He accepted it because he wants as much money as he can stash away!

That's as ridiculous as saying that the reason you work is because Wisconsin state law says you can.

916WI, one can exploit a quirk in the law to their personal benefit and still be absolutely unethical and immoral. Of course, Walker is the only gubernatorial candidate in Wisconsin state history to ever exploit the quirk. Once we marginalize the corruption in state politics that is your cadre of Walker/Fitzgerald conservatives, that quirk will be corrected.

Poohbah......He accepted the check from Hendricks because Wisconsin state law says he can! Good enough reason? I know these pesky laws are getting in the way of liberals quite often, but the law is the law! And we are a nation of laws and not men, right?

Seems to me I've read something similar to this in the comments section of another article before:)

"Deer hunters are more educated than you are"
so are the deer.

John, thank you very much for your informative blog today and for the website links. Regarding the NY Times opinion piece you cited, I think the most powerful message to recall voters was actually the last two paragraphs which stated:

"The first year of his official calendar shows significant access for companies that helped him with large political donations, according to the nonprofit Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism.

Governor Walker’s office says this access only confirms how sincere the governor was in promising to seek out “job creators” and proclaiming Wisconsin “open for business” from his first day in office. Recall voters should have no doubt about the real business of big-money politics signaled by that $500,000 check." [ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/opinio... ]

Accepting $500,000 from one contributor demonstrates just how VERY SINCERE Walker is about seeking out job creators -- for his own personal benefit. Why does Walker need and/or accept contributions to proclaim that Wisconsin is open for business? Isn't that part of the job that WE THE PEOPLE pay him to do?

I will be voting to get Walker out of here! He's has lied about "facts", didn't answer questions he was asked at the debate and only talks with "staged" groups. He's a winner alright...let him go somewhere else and mess them up!

What planet is this guy on? Seriously! Complaining about money talking with this whole mess bought and paid for by union money and left wing organizations. Not to mention the millions coming out of our pockets for the recalls because liberals have a big problem with rejection.
Scott Walker is doing EXACTLY what he promised.
Walker's re-election can't come soon enough for me.

Barret like eyester wouldn't know the truth if it slapped them in their faces. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/stat...

"Divide and conquer"- (Wisconsin citizens)

"Drop the Bomb"- (On Wisconsin Citizens)

Walker declared war on the citizens of Wisconsin. Those are his words. Some of you support this?

I sure hope that Wisconsin voters who are not aware of the history of the Progressive Movement in Wisconsin, including collective bargaining, and what it did for working men and women around the nation, do some research.
This short article from the Wisconsin Historical Society may help.
http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/topics/s...

Shopierehuh, Thants liberal garbage and you know it, you will try anything to get votes for barrett, Deer hunters are more educated than you are.

Just a reminder for those who value Wisconsin's public lands and outdoor recreation opportunities.

http://www.deeranddeerhunting.com/featur...

Would Hendricks $500,000.00 donation to Barrett been as eye-popping to you? Why is it that those on the Left use "We the People" but seem to forget those on the Right are also "We the People"? Why are there a few who complain about the large donation by Mrs. Hendricks and saying how many jobs this could have saved, etc., but never say anything about the LARGE SUMS OF MONEY spent by the UNION's on this re-call election. How many jobs would that have save?

No John, he will not " tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

He runs his campaign, his office and his life with lies and deceit. He surrounds himself with felons of various kinds. He is a dishonorable person.

Hopefully, WE will be rid of this scoundrel in a week or so.

Had hopes from a previous article but see this one is again filled with lots of capital letters and words where they do not belong. So not going to try to read it and judge the content ... do not like the print version of being yelled at.

http://bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_...

What's this "We" you keep refering to eyester? Do you have a mouse in your pocket? You stories should read Me and I! After all it's all about you! And you call yourself a teacher and a scientist. You are a disgrace to the real teachers and scientist!

Ted you mean continue to scream and cry.

Whatever John Eyster has responded on his blog “We the People,” I do NOT trust him to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I learned from Eyster's Blog. What do YOU think?

Instead of whining about the "Who is backing who... and why" things, why aren't you writing about the things at stake....our future in Wisconsin...I don't see any suggestions on how to correct all the "Alleged" wrongs...just the same old stuff that was the reason for the recall in the first place...
I also find in interesting that "Big Labor" seems to be backing off on their financial support for Barrett....Interesting...like maybe cutting their losses...
Hopefully after the election next Tuesday the Gazette can write some positive things about the winner (Either Walker of Barrett) and support them in the future, for all of us.

I do not trust Scott Walker.

John. The fact that you call yourself a political scientist is a joke. By definition, a "scientist" is someone who studies something with out prejudice. This is something that you seem unable to acomplish. The fact that you write under the moniker of "We the People" is a slap in the face to both "the people" and the writers of the Constitution. Writing a far left column under the guise of a political scientist is irresponsible at best.

"This from a UW Professor. Wow..."

No need for undo credit. This is a community college prof in the UW system.

Scott Walker has done what needed to be done. Good for students, good for teachers, good for Wisconsin.

NOT good for union masters, that's why the recall.

I think Gov. Scot Walker is a Hero.

WHAT DO I THINK? THIS column reads like it is WRITTEN by an ANGRRRY 2 YEAR OLD. As a Poly Sci professor, you seem to be in line with most of the other teachers in WI. You are unable to grasp the concept that balancing your own checkbook also applies to state government (Walker wiped out a $3.6 bill deficit). I think that June 5 will show the vast majority of state workers who are non-union are tired of paying for your health benefits to which you had contributed little. While I agree with referendums, you missed the most important point. These recalls were a complete waist of over $30 million taxpayer dollars. That is the process which needs fixing.

John, As a "political scientist...who is assessing our political culture and processes," how is it that you continue to blatantly ignore the will of WE THE PEOPLE who disagree with your version of Wisconsin's vision? The last election gave Wisconsin the governor that the majority of We The People wanted. And he has done what most of us desired and expected him to do. Yet, you still write as though this is some accident--some fluke. No, sir. This was the will of the People. And, I pray, will be proven to be so again on June 5th. At which time, I hope you will take off the blinders and acknowledge that "you the person," and your opinions, do not represent We The People.

Ohio lost two congressional seats, and a bunch of manufacturing jobs the last couple years. Where are the jobs going now? Indiana, thats right, Indiana.

By passing the right to work last February Indiana is getting jobs from Illinois, Ohio, Michigan.
Caterpillar closed two plants I know of, one in Japan, the other in Canada. Those jobs didn't come to Wisconsin, they went to Muncie Indiana, and Athens Georgia. Those states get the manufacturing jobs, Wisconsin gets the crazies beating drums at the capitol in Mad city.

Want to be like Ohio? No I'd rather be like Indiana when it comes to jobs and employment.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...

THANKS to "Rick_Raff" for the alert to my typo! Corrected now! Here we go... John W. Eyster

"I wish WI had the benefit which WE THE PEOPLE of OH had when they were able to use a REFERNDUM on the bill repealing collective bargaining in OH earlier this year."

Not to mention he can't spell. I wonder how many point he took from students over the years on papers with bad grammar & misspelled words.

It’s amazing the way you flail around, trying to cherry-pick examples from one state or another, and saying that’s exactly what we need to make WI perfect. Yes, voters in OH blocked the bill, but what makes you think the voters here would? You do realize that collective bargaining is way down the list of voter’s priorities, right? This is one of those “be careful what you wish for” kind of things, because we could very well have a referendum making this a right to work state, and I suspect it would have an excellent chance of success. But if we did that, then referendums would suddenly be very bad things, now wouldn’t they?