Wednesday, January 29, 2014

Mary Burke Goes Rogue

By Jeff Simpson

Democratic President Barack Obama, fresh off of his Rousing State of the Union speech, is doing what every president does.  Heading out to the people to sell his agenda.   Luckily for the people of Wisconsin, we are part of his tour stop(Milwaukee and Waukesha).


The Speech, as always, was great.  Let's let Wisconsin Democratic Party chair Mike Tate explain:

 “In tonight’s State of the Union address President Obama laid out the Democratic vision for opportunity and action.

“The President’s vision stands in stark contrast to Scott Walker’s so-called ‘Blueprint for Prosperity’ -- a tired retread of the same Paul Ryan plan that voters overwhelmingly rejected in the last election. Instead of moving forward, the Walker/Ryan plan would take us back to the failed policies of the past and continue a rigid social agenda instead of putting Americans back to work.

The President gave a brilliant speech that goes against everything that Scott Walker stands for.  President Obama wants to get America working again, strengthen our economy, raise the minimum wage and generally help the middle class(I know some exceptions may apply...Cough TPP . cough).

However with that message, and being the President of the United States and the leader of the Democratic party, you would think that the current frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for Governor of Wisconsin would embrace this opportunity for party unity.

You would also be wrong

Madison -- Democratic candidate for governor Mary Burke won't be present for President Barack Obama's visit to the state Thursday.
"Mary Burke has a full day scheduled in western Wisconsin Thursday and will not be able to join the president during his visit to Wisconsin," spokesman Joe Zepecki said.

Apparently Mary Burke is too self rightous to support her President and her party.  I know someone could point to President Obama's sinking poll numbers, but let's get real -  President Obama is still THE most popular politician in the world  and if you run from sinking poll numbers, would we expect the down ticket races to not want to be seen with Ms. Burke?

As Ben Franklin has stated:

We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
   
Finally, the great team that Mary Burke continues to tout, has Tanya Bjork as her top campaign strategist.  Tanya Bjork, recently came from working the Obama campaign in WI and is now poorly advising to stay away from her former boss.  Proving as I said all along , Tanya Bjork is out for Tanya Bjork(and Capital Navigators) and no one else! 


When Mary Burke is ready to run a real campaign that proves she wants to actually win, I will be the first on board!  Until then we need to find someone who can actually end the reign of the worst most extreme Governor in our history!   

Contact Mary Burke and tell her to stop disrespecting our President and the people of WI.    Do not expect party unity if you are not willing to show it!  


Burke for Wisconsin
P.O. Box 2479
Madison, WI 53701
@burke4wi  



29 comments:

  1. Wow. OK, so does anyone else think that maybe the stop in Milwaukee for Obama isn't a campaign stop? It's to push the agenda he laid out in the SOTU address. Taking time out of his "whistle-stop" tour to campaign may not be on the top of his priority list, and so having Burke there may not be what he prefers. I could be wrong...but ask yourself this: are there any other candidates for office speaking at the other stops Obama is making?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On top of that, Burke isn't the official Dem candidate yet; there are two other people (whom I've never heard of) registered with the GAB as intending to be candidates for the Dem primary.

      So it would be entirely reasonable for the president to not want to get 'in the middle of' the race before there's an official candidate. I think it is possible that Burke may not have been invited to appear.

      Now, if it is the case that she wasn't even invited, then the 'optics' here are all the worse...

      Delete
    2. Lets not forget its the Democratic Party, with Debbie Wasserman Schultz who came here and let it be known they wanted Burke to be the Candidate and did not want a primary.

      With that kind of help, you would think Burke would be there just to thank them and not leave them hanging!

      As for if this is campaigning, Scott Walker campaigns 24/7, he campaigns in lieu of Governing. It would be a huge mistake for Mary burke and President Obama not to also always be campaigning.

      Lets skip the we will have a primary Bullshit, every knows that just isnt true. Harry Trivedi is not a primary.

      Delete
    3. (though I'm certainly not expecting anyone to) others can still join the race until early June.

      Delete
    4. There is no progressive savior riding in to save Wisconsin from itself. Get over it and put the pressure on the Burke campaign - no donations, no vote until they develop a clear platform and the candidate portrays herself as the leader she claims to be.

      Delete
    5. YES! Others can still join the race and what a GREAT time for a populist candidate to come in out of nowhere and actually start a movement!

      Mark Harris? Tom Nelson? Mandy Wright? Chris Taylor? Mandela Barnes?
      Tony Schulz? .......

      Delete
    6. Yes, yes. All Progressives who'd make interesting candidates for Governor and yet none except Harris dipped a toe in.

      Delete
    7. Guys, I'm not arguing that Burke isn't going to be the candidate.

      I'm saying that it would be entirely reasonable for a sitting president to have a standing policy to NOT get involved in a state race unless and until there is an official candidate.

      And as such, I am questioning whether Burke was even invited to appear with Obama in Waukesha.

      Delete
  2. Burke's M.O. is shaping up to be "ruffle no conservative feathers". Not a problem, in her opinion, if the union and lefty feathers get ruffled. What ya gonna do - vote for Walker? Stands to reason that she can not be seen with Obama. P.S. - I personally hate all this shit. It's like there are an unlimited # of ways the political elites are telling the people to f**k off.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This post is right on. Talk about a tired, naive strategy. The idea that if Burke doesn't appear with the President she can't possibly be tied to his less popular aspects by the media and GOP. Um, OK. Let's see if that works when Americans for Prosperity really get started with the "issue ads". No, she instead misses a huge opportunity to rally her base and Independent voters. This is the guy who stands between America and the crazies (GOP legislators, Koch's, religious freaks). And while he may not be the Progressive savior, he's slowly but surely moving the country's thinking back to the center. Big mistake by Burke. She looks like a coward and it tells loyal Democrats as well as thinking Independents that she plans to offer no policy alternative to Walker. If anything, Jeff, you underrate the seriousness of this mistake. We all needed to give Burke a chance, but now that we have, wow, is she bad at running for Governor.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Replying to robertearle at 10:26. Nonsense. Of course Burke is the candidate and of course she would be "invited" if she chose to be and not only that but she is the type of candidate who he would stump for down the road (female, progressive-leaning, pro-choice, pro-business, etc.) and certainly his wife would. Although, who knows. Perhaps this campaign cycle the President will draw the line at supporting sheer incompetence and that's unfortunately what we have here. Burke must get it together - whether it's re-shaping her team (I know nothing of this Bjork character but she and her husband on paper appear to be total losers) or getting back to basics - defining a clear set of policy positions, warming up in her interactions with people, presenting herself more energetically and competently, etc. In short, she needs to get much more serious about acting as a leader. It's a real miss to not appear with the Leader of the Free World - even on the periphery.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As near as I can tell, Mary Burke stands for nearly nothing except getting herself elected governor. I for one will continue to support Scott Walker and his efforts to move the view of Wisconsin from government centered, to people and industry centered. A place where taxes can be still lower, and that individuals can prosper by working hard, not making bad decisions in their lives and fending for themselves. A place where we look to answers to problems in our lives inside ourselves rather than to some government bureaucrat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She probably stands for something but her crack advisers have decided that the opposition has less to attack. I can see this maybe working during a Presidential election year but not an off year. No matter when in the election cycle, this strategy assumes an idiot electorate and that's sad coming from the Democrats. But the remainder of your comment is manna from heaven. Name one aspect of Gov. Walker's priorities centered around improving the well-being of Wisconsin families and tell me, which industries - and more importantly size of businesses - are benefiting from his policies? Any connection to who donates to his campaign? Is the Governor really articulating a strategy of lower taxes or the end of Progressive taxation? Which will cost the majority of WI taxpayers more? So individuals haven't been prospering by working hard in Wisconsin up to this point? What an insult to those of us whose families have farmed Wisconsin land, toiled in her factories, and educated her children since 1848. Shame on you. I would love it if people working in heavily subsidized industries fended for themselves and weren't continually feeding off out of the taxpayer trough. Say, when the Gogebic and the frackers destroys the land, air and drinking water, they'll be held accountable right? WI taxpayers won't end up on the hook? And how is it working out for Gov. Walker and his aides to search within for the answers to their problems instead of using the courts? Bring it, Anon 11:22.

      Delete
    2. anon 11;22....thats awesome. If that was even remotely close to what Scott walker stands for Id be there with you. Unfortunately for WI he is the exact opposite of that fantasy

      Delete
    3. Yes, individual who work hard do get the benefits of their labor. The problem is that our taxation and redistribution system would seem to take from those that work hard and give it to those that don't. The fault of your argument is that you assume the improvement of the lives of Wisconsin families is governments job. Government services and the level they can be provided is a derivative of the economic well being of the state. We would be best served in getting rid of this notion that we need to have progressive taxation or equality of outcomes. We should use our economic prosperity as the method of distributing scarce resources. Take the schools for example. There is a huge drain of funds from communities that have prospered to the sewer that is Milwaukee where they spend thousands more per student and get less results. Some bizarre notion of "equalization aid' is supposed to transform those schools, but in fact, all it does is hurt the school system as a whole. Success should be rewarded, not punished with taxes that don't end up in the community from where they are drawn. I would welcome an end to progressive taxation. A rich person really doesn't abuse our highways any more than any other person with a car. Why should they have to pay more for the same highway? why should a wealthy person pay more for the protections of the environment that a poor person. I agree that industry shouldn't be propped up either. But there is no government without the benefits of the commercial enterprise. Given the choice, i would rather prop up a business that keeps people employed, creates wealth, and improves the economy, rather than a failing school system or a welfare system that does nothing to encourage those on it,to leave it.

      Delete
    4. Anon 1:02, so this is really all about blacks and latinos in Milwaukee getting any resources. If Milwaukee is the sewer, you suburban SE Wi-ers are the red neck swamp surrounding it. And no, living in a McMansion and drinking Caymus doesn't make you a cut above. First class isn't an airline ticket, it's a way of living and treating one another. Why should a wealthy person pay more in taxes proportionately? Because we are in life together. We are here to serve one another. And when one of us climbs we should make sure the rungs of the ladder below us are strong and durable. And any Christian, the faithful sort as opposed to the self-righteous sort, knows that wealth is a set-back to their salvation, not the path. Specifically I would just encourage you to take a good look at test scores from charter schools and public schools in Milwaukee and then comment on the "less results". I would also point out that "equalization aid" isn't descriptive of the goal of spending on social services - but I admit I'm not of the swamplands and indeed from a flourishing part of Wisconsin where we invest in our people. I would argue that the top marginal tax rates are far from punishing and a fraction of those post-war years that saw America growth into the most powerful, successful nation - geez, maybe a 90% marginal rate at the top isn't so bad. See the problem with the swampland thinking is that it's either/or, this/that, one thing/the other, black/white. Maybe travel the state and country, read from a variety of news and opinion sources, gather some facts. A heavily subsidized business holding onto all capital isn't worth a lot to the taxpayers, the government nor anyone but a few people at the top. So why not prudently direct subsidies to start up's for a period of time or businesses bearing the costs of transformation to meet environmental standards and decrease subsidies to mature businesses or businesses who only hire low-skilled labor and will replace the labor within the next few years with advanced automation? And why not close loopholes to better enforce top marginal rates and redistribute inefficient capital? Still a lot of wealth at the top with today's marginal rates for those who wish to live it large in the swamp and pretend to class, while funding education, healthcare, infrastructure and all the pieces of the puzzle that keep the whole pie growing? Given the choice you'd let a person die before a company. Can't get more either/or that that, although I suppose you can get a lot uglier.

      Delete
    5. The most heavily subsidized employees in this state are the public employees. If we want to stop subsidizing activities in this state, lets start there.

      Delete
    6. A subsidy as well as a tax break is an incentive to take a certain action - start a business, move a business, change a process, etc. A public employee is paid for services they perform. But I get that in the swamps surrounding Milwaukee you've swallowed hook, line and sinker that public employees are out to get you. What a bunch of rubes.

      Delete
    7. Immediately, two myths must be exposed. The argument about schools is not about race whatsoever. It's about effectiveness. Milwaukee schools by many accounts are among the poorest performing in the nation, yet they receive more taxpayer funding than nearly any other district in the state. And the only answer proposed is that we spend EVEN MORE money to fund these programs that continue to fail. Public, charter, private almost doesn't matter. A more logical response would be to direct our resources to the places where they generate the best results, not the poorest. And yes, that may well be the suburban schools and others out state, The same is true for businesses. Why would we subsidize a business for growth that doesn't show the promise to make money. Many of these so called green initiatives are not making money. It is just as useless to prop them up as any other failing business. And in fact, it won't matter. Even if you believe industry is causing climate change, have you seen the levels of pollution that major industrial countries like China produce? There were even bad smog days when the Olympics were there. Have you seen the jungle stripping and water rights issues in South America where land and water rights are sold out to the highest bidder? And yet somehow it is the evil American that is at fault here. We could probably make our industries as green as anyone could imagine and not make an ounce of difference in the long run.

      Which brings us to the second great myth that is completely unsupported is this notion that "we are all in this together." As a genuine cynic, I will give you my take. There is almost no basis in history, fact, objective review of society or anything else that this holds true. Any group or society we join is only to benefit self interest. From survival to success, our interest is ALWAYS self interest. So called altruism can be viewed as merely a person indulging their resources so they can "feel good" or minimize their guilt or advance some other personal interest. Virtually every human relationship and community seek to advance self interest. Perhaps God is different, but human beings are not. The fact that we are even here on this planet is an act of self interest of one sort or another by our parents. I often ponder the fact that I had no choice in this matter, I didn't ask to be part of this, so why should i worry about anything or anyone besides my self interest.

      So "are we in this together?" Certainly not. If your kind wins, I lose. If I win, you lose. I have NO propensity to want to redistribute wealth. The current state of things has worked exceedingly well for me. I have gone from a less than zero in the bank college student to a point I can easily retire at any time barely scratching fifty. And do I wish to share my hard earned gains with people who didn't apply themselves in their education, make life choices I would not agree with, or frankly haven't had the discipline, made sacrifices, or had the ambition to find their own success. I think not!

      Delete
    8. Ah, yes, you read Ayn Rand. And like everyone else who read her books ages 14-17, you thought it was fantastic, had to share excerpts with indulgent parents, and then unlike the rest of us you didn't grow up, discover great literature and philosophy and you failed to mature beyond pure narcissism and self-righteousness to at the very least an enlightened self-interest. So cool, I've been blog commenting with a Paul Ryan acolyte this afternoon. You must be quite narrow in your reading because even a two minute study of the Journal Sentinel would enlighten you on the Milwaukee schools current initiative and it's costs. Perhaps you might consider retiring to Somalia? I believe there you won't be expected whatsoever to pay your fair share for things like roads, schools, sewage districts and as an added bonus, no winter. Enjoy and good riddance.

      Delete
    9. You are quite wrong in two assumptions. I have heard of Ayn Rand but I am pretty sure i have never read anything authored by her. Most of my philosophical studies were some years ago in college and my connection to cynicism from the Greek Texts and the student of Socrates. And being cynical and self centered is actually something I matured to. This is largely because, as a careful, well read and frequent observer of life, it is the only philosophy which holds any water at all. Aside from technological advances, i can scarcely find anything on this planet that is getting better. There was a time when I had some of the optimistic beliefs that some you espouse. HIstory tells us that civilizations rise and fall, and most certainly this one is on a downward spiral. My best advice is look out for yourself. Surely no one else is.

      Delete
    10. Translation to Anon 4:34: It seems bad to use the Randian talking points. I'm now going to throw student of Socrates out there like a little puzzle because I heard that once in a college course. And really what are the chances of a Progressive knowing anything about western philosophy? I better tell this Anonymous person she must be an optimist (note to self: better look that up,,, awhile later: huh, that's what Candide was about, who'd a thunk). In close I must state a teaching from history. I shall select that civilizations rise and fall. It's really a toss between that and there's a sucker born every minute. Now onto Blogging Blue where I shall dazzle them all with my conservative brain and shriveled soul.

      Delete
  6. Anon 1:02, I've saved you the trouble of seeking out information outside your bubble as a starting point:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/01/the-geography-of-the-american-dream/283308/

    Gaze upon your handiwork and see where GOP policies have brought the GOP south not to mention the entire SE WI region. That's right, your entire region of the state is in the red. Know what that means? You're in it together and the only way out is to invest in the prosperity of your entire region and the well-being of all your people. Big goal but a positive step forward might be to not refer to Milwaukee as a sewer.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As much as I support our President, voted for him, worked for his campaign, I didn't see hide nor hair of him in Wisconsin during the ACT 10 strife. So get off your self-righteous chest beating, want four more years of Scott Walker keep up the whining.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again and again with Act 10 and the recall. It's the Benghazi chant of the left in Wisconsin. Give it a rest.

      Delete
  8. So Walker is now going to meet with Obama while Burke is unable to rearrange her western Wisconsin itinerary. Walker gets the free photo-op, TV and radio time in the southeastern Wisconsin media market, while Burke gets a private phone call. Are her campaign consultants idiots or is this some kind of political rope-a-dope strategy? Perhaps Burke is merely embarrassed that the President proposed raising the minimum was to $10 per hour while she is only willing to concede a 30 cent increase to the undeserving rabble.

    But don't criticize Burke, don't even offer suggestions, because that means you want Walker to win and are a shrill left wing extremist, a cynical twist on the old calculation that criticism of Bush meant you wanted the terrorists to win.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Been reading this post for a while, so now I am going to share my 2 cents.
    Most put party before country.
    Orwell warned us about this over 60 years ago.
    Our current 2 party system is systematically destroying this country. The continuing Miller Park " Tommy Taxes" imposed by both Thompson and Barrett has forced working people to pay for rich peoples hobbies. I believe Eddie Mathews said it best when question why he didn't go to baseball games when he retired " Who wants to go watch a bunch of millionaires play baseball"
    Read more on my site milwaukeecountycorruption.blogspot.com and fell free to comment

    ReplyDelete
  10. Walker shook the President's hand and what remains with the voters is that their Governor wasn't afraid to meet the Democratic President. They will see this as demonstrating courage while Burke hid out in Western Wisconsin. What an awful, awful move by Burke and her campaign. But then apparently she's running as the non-partisan, business candidate according to the Cap Times today. No matter that businesses actually don't care if you're partisan or not. It's all about their deal. So unless you're prepared to offer up even cheaper labor, less regulation, and lower taxes, you're really not going to out pro-business Walker. What a shambles Burke's campaign is while Wisconsin so desperately needs a thoughtful, strong, serious opposition strategy.

    ReplyDelete