What a stupid article. Referring to the release of emails from Scott Walker's time as Milwaukee County Executive (the #1 post in the county), Politico says:

No crotch shots. No mistress in Argentina. And no political vendettas featuring a bridge.

Scott Walker is one lucky guy.

Lucky? The implication is that he was just lucky that he wasn't caught with all of the call girls, p*?n, and drugs that he was so obviously doing! That's what at least half the article deals with: look at all these pols brought down by their shenanigans with the ladies. Gosh! isn't Walker lucky he wasn't caught like that! They then go on to compare him to Christie's bridge scandal before finally dealing with the only thing that is really a problem in the emails, the racist comments made by his assistants. That's it, 19 paragraphs down, after saying it was too bad Walker wasn't like those other pols, they get to the only thing that is actually a problem with the emails.

If I were the editor...

For mom. Click to embiggen:

WEAC has its own union troubles - JSOnline

Delicious irony:

This week, National Support Organization, which bills itself as the world's largest union of union staffers, posted an online notice discouraging its members from seeking work with the Wisconsin Education Association Council.

"Don't apply for WEAC vacancies!" screams the headline.

The reason for the boycott?

Chuck Agerstrand, president of the National Support Organization, is accusing WEAC officials of "breaching staff contracts and destroying any working relationship with its employees."

Unions lose big in Wisconsin | Campaign 2012

In the end, the union-backed Democrats picked up only two state Senate seats in Wisconsin last night, at a staggering cost in time, effort, and of course money. One of the seats was solidly Democratic, held by a Republican due to an apparent fluke of nature. The other was held by an alleged adulterer who had moved outside his district to live with his young mistress, and whose wife was supporting his recall.

I was biting my nails last night. It came down to the Darling race in my parents' district. She was behind at first, because Milwaukee reported before the suburbs and came in heavily for the Dem. But as I started looking at the numbers, and projecting each community forward, even with 12 of 51 districts still out for Milwaukee, Darling had a lead that looked to hold. When the bulk of Milwaukee poured in, it was done. In the end, she won by over 5,000 votes--not even close--not even the absentee votes can make up that difference--and not even within the cheating margin. (Remember, as Hugh Hewitt says: "If it's not close, they can't cheat!")

Republicans hold off Dems in recalls, win enough seats to keep majority in Senate

"The revolution has not occurred," said UW-Milwaukee political science professor Mordecai Lee, a former Democratic lawmaker. "The proletariat did not take over the streets."

What an idiotic statement. Proletariat? Who do you think cast all of those votes? Government unions are hardly the "proletariat", but are a privileged class.

John McCullough was an icon of local TV news - JSOnline

Good bye John McCollough. Milwaukee's anchorman is gone.

Trains cost Wisconsin taxpayers millions - JSOnline

There is so much wrong here!

In the beginning I was drawn to the fact that it reads more, much more, like an editorial or an opinion piece than a news article, but in the end it was the barely named presence of Amtrak that got my attention.

I think I got really riled up when the article mentioned that the state of Wisconsin was supposed to pony up the money for...

While some of those figures could change, it appears the state eventually could spend $11.7 million on a temporary maintenance base, up to $60.1 million on a permanent maintenance base, up to $10.2 million on train shed upgrades at the downtown Amtrak-Greyhound station, $6.6 million on signal upgrades at the station and at least $10.4 million on new locomotives - all costs the federal government would have paid.

So, what exactly does Amtrak, you know, the business this is all subsidizing, pay for?

Apparently not for their own maintenance facilities and, shockingly, not their own TRAINS either! Why the &^%$ does the state of Wisconsin have to buy the locomotives for the quasi-independent, quasi-federal business Amtrak? If WI buys them, does the state get to keep them? Can they put a big "Owned by the people of Wisconsin" sign on them? If WI puts up the money, does Amtrak pay leasing fees? Or is this a beneficent gift from the taxpayers of Wisconsin to the behemoth and boondoggle that is Amtrak?

But let's take this a step further. This is happening in Wisconsin; should we assume that it is also happening in the other 50 states? How may other states are buying Amtrak their trains, building their lines, and building their facilities? How much money are states pouring down into the black abyss of Amtrak? What does Amtrak actually do on its own, except run the system others have bought for them--essentially managing the passengers and employees (badly.) Why not outsource their contribution to a management company, and keep the trains and tracks in state hands? It would probably be much more efficiently run and cost a whole lot less.

Amtrak is perennially broke, to the tune of billions of dollars; this despite heavy federal subsidies. What I never have heard before--or noticed before--is that it also apparently relies heavily on state subsidies as well.

And that's not even getting into the whole freight rail versus passenger rail problem. (One is extremely efficient way of moving its load, the other isn't and makes the other less efficient by tying up their rail lines.)

According to this on the BizJournal site, the upper midwest lost tons of jobs. Adding up the losses from: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, the region lost 2,150,100 jobs in the last ten years.

The original of this post disappeared in the Blogger Blackout.

[ Politifact ] Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wisconsin.

Moore began her remarks by referring to the keynote speaker, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick, and his new memoir, A Reason to Believe.

"I was thinking: How in the world can you believe, what reason would you have to believe in anything, when you had just elected a governor who says that Wisconsin was open for business and therefore closed to every single human being in the state," Moore said to applause.

This is someone who flatly and openly hates business. The logical inference from her comment is that Wisconsin should not be open for business, because businesses hurt people.

This is the mindset of the loony left. Where is Pat Moynihan where you need him? I believe he once said that the Democrats had to come to terms with the fact that you can't be pro-employee without being pro-employer. Apparently, such thinking is dead and mouldering right along with the much-missed Moynihan.

Moore is undoubtedly someone who wants lots of public services and lots of taxes, but doesn't understand that it takes productive people and businesses to pay those taxes.

It's the therefore in Moore's comments that really gets me: you're pro business? Therefore you must, you simply MUST, be anti-human.

So, is the fight in Madison over some long-held, deeply-cherished cornerstone of decades of public union powers?

Not according to John Fund in the WSJ:

The governor's move is in reaction to a 2009 law implemented by the then-Democratic legislature that expanded public unions' collective-bargaining rights and lifted existing limits on teacher raises.

So, Walker is actually just trying to take back union powers that they've had for a whoppin' 2 years.

On the flip side, since they've only had these powers for two years, you can't really blame the collective bargaining rules for the deep doo-doo that Wisconsin is in.

On the other flip side (we're up to three) since the unions did not have this power from 1848 through 2009, they can't really make the point that removing them would be a catastrophe and lead to working conditions where there's a guy beating on a drum while another guy walks up and down with a lash.

Update: I tried to find some contemporary coverage of Fund's claims, and I couldn't really find anything. The closest was the extension of collective bargaining to various teachers at UW--including grad students. If you read his words carefully, this might be what he is talking about, but it is not the wholesale implementation that he seems to imply.