Paul Ryan - Where Are You?

By Jeff Simpson

Ryan Solen is the Democratic candidate for the 1st Congressional District in Wisconsin.  He is challenging some guy you may have heard of  - Paul Ryan (R-Wall St.).    However, Mr. Ryan who is currently the Speaker of the House(the third most powerful position in America), is ducking the debate.  

While its an overplayed cliche, there is some ring of truth to it in terms of if you can't stand up to your political opponent in a moderated debate, how can you possible stand up to ISIS.  

Ryan Solen has done all the leg work for a debate to happen from setting the time, securing the venue, etc.... now all he needs is Paul Ryan to actually respect the people of the 1st Congressional district and show up!  

The following invite was delivered to Mr. Ryan's office recently:

                                                                                                                          October 18, 2016

Dear Mr. Speaker,

My name is Ryan Solen and I am your Democratic opponent. I have been attempting to contact you since we each won our primaries in August as I would like to engage with you in that great American campaign tradition: a debate. I have decided to make it easy for you and have set one up. All you need to do is attend.

I have booked Blackhawk Technical College, located in your hometown of Janesville at 6004 South County Road G, for October 29 from 2PM to 4PM. The room holds up to 250 people and will be open to the public. Mike Daly, host of the Daly Show on WBEL “The Big AM” 1380 is set to moderate and the station will broadcast the debate live. Additional media will be invited and may broadcast or record the event. I will be happy to meet with you or your representative ahead of time to discuss the debate format.

Please RSVP by October 28 at 5PM, the day before the debate. I know you are very busy and I want to give you plenty of time to get your schedule set to include this debate. You can contact my Chief of Staff, Lauren Young, to RSVP by phone at 404-788-8096 or by email at lyoung@solenforcongress.com.

Looking forward to a great debate with you!

Sincerely,

Ryan Solen

Let's hope that Mr. Ryan has the respect for our democratic process to show up and debate.

In the meantime, Mr. Solen can use some help.   Send him a few bucks or a couple hours of your time.   You can reach him via his facebook page or his website!   Watch his Wisconsin Eye interview here.

My name is Ryan Solen. I am a husband, father of four children as well as an Iraq war veteran, and former Army officer. I am well versed in how to get tasks accomplished, regardless of who I may be working with. At one point in my life, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. That oath has not changed, nor has it expired. I am more concerned with what is right than what will get me re-elected. I made a commitment that I would not accept funds from corporations, organizations, or PACs. Votes are not to be bought. They should be earned. I believe our leadership and our representatives should be held to a higher standard.Some of the things that I believe will help us the most:
• Balance the budget and pay-off the national debt to put the ~$260 Billion in interest payments to better use.
• Universal health care to ensure a healthy and productive population.
• Investment in our crumbling infrastructure.
• Reform university tuition and student loan regulations.
• Revise and simplify the tax code.
• Protect Social Security; raise the taxable income cap on it, and prevent any privatization of the system.
• Strict term limits on the Senate and the House of Representatives.

Paul Ryan Buries His Head In The Sand!

By Jeff Simpson

Paul Ryan (R-Wall St.), who ducked debates two years ago, and Rob Zerban finally got together to debate last night.

The highlight of the debate that is making national news, is this statement by Paul Ryan (R-Bankster Bailout):

“I don’t know the answer to that question,” Ryan said. “I don’t think science does, either.”  Ryan also said efforts to combat climate change are costly and unproven, a popular position among the Republican base he will need should he seek the GOP’s presidential nomination in 2016.

The interesting thing here is that earlier, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel gave a speech on a Pentagon report:

AREQUIPA, Peru - Rising sea levels and other effects of climate change will pose major challenges for America's military, including more and worse natural disasters and the threat that food and water shortages could fuel disputes and instability around the world, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said Monday. Addressing a conference of military leaders as the Pentagon released a new report on the issue, Hagel said, "Our militaries' readiness could be tested, and our capabilities could be stressed."

U.S. military officials have long warned that changes in climate patterns, resulting in increased severe weather events and coastal flooding, will have a broad and costly impact on the Defense Department's ability to protect the nation and respond to natural and humanitarian disasters in the United States and around the globe.

The new report - described as a Pentagon roadmap - identifies four things that it says will affect the U.S. military: rising global temperatures, changing precipitation patterns, more extreme weather and rising sea levels. It calls on the department and the military services to identify more specific concerns, including possible effects on the more than 7,000 bases and facilities, and to start putting plans in place to deal with them.

Of course a republican with Presidential dreams does not have time to listen to the military leaders.    If he would have stopped voting to end Obamacare at say just 50 times though(instead of the 54 times they actually have), then maybe he would have had time to read a report from NASA.

 A cloud of methane gas about the size of Delaware was detected over the Four Corners area of the American southwest years ago. The readings were so unusually high that NASA scientists dismissed them. A new study confirms the methane hotspot is real.
 .....
 Methane gas is the most potent of the so-called “greenhouse gases” that trap the Earth’s heat and contribute to global climate change. Carbon dioxide, another greenhouse gas, is far more plentiful in the atmosphere, but methane is about 80 percent more efficient at trapping heat than carbon dioxide, according to an article on The Atlantic’s CityLab website.
....
 The source of the methane is believed to be extensive coal-mining activity in the San Juan Basin, according to Eric Kort, a professor of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and lead author of the study. He calls the Basin “the most active coalbed methane production area in the country.”
The study shows that there were 0.59 million metric tons of methane released every year during the period 2003-2009, 3.5 times more than earlier estimates.

 We know that Mr. Ryan, can not continue to hold republican Presidential ambitions and embrace science, so maybe he could actually pay attention to the Pope for a change!  

Speaking to a massive crowd in Rome, the first Argentinian pope delivered a short address in which he argued that respect for the “beauty of nature and the grandeur of the cosmos” is a Christian value, noting that failure to care for the planet risks apocalyptic consequences.
“Safeguard Creation,” he said. “Because if we destroy Creation, Creation will destroy us! Never forget this!”

 Unfortunately for the people in the first district of Wisconsin, Paul Ryan has a long history of making up his own facts! 

 

Time to send Paul Ryan(R career politician) into the land of lobbyists and out of our Government!

ELECT ROB ZERBAN!

Mary Burke Needs Your Help!

By Jeff Simpson

One of the interesting parts, and stupider questions, of the night was "say something nice about your opponent" and Ms. Burke stumbled!





While her team has never been the most competent or the wittiest, let me offer a couple solutions:

A:  I admire Scott Walker's ability to work with Lieutenant Governor Rebecca Kleefisch, when we know from Walkerdocs how much he and his team despise her.  

or 

A:  Scott Walker has been so unethical and worked so hard to divide the state, that has allowed many new opportunities for overtime for the hard working men and women, in law enforcement. Mr. Walker has also created numerous opportunities for law firms in WI to have record profits. I also am amazed at his creativity, as I had no idea you could actually fly from Middleton to Madison.

There are a couple of my suggestions, now add yours.  let's all give Ms. Burke some suggestions on how she should have answered that question!

That's Not Debatable

In the Milwaukee area, with two weeks to the primary election, there were two very important debates scheduled for Tuesday night.

Chris Moews

One debate was for the candidates running for Milwaukee County Sheriff.  Somehow, the incompetent failed to show for the debate.  Apparently, he's not interested in keeping his job since he is so willing to insult the voters and/or so afraid of  his opponent, Chris Moews.
incumbent, David Clarke,

At least it gave Moews the chance to shine and show that he is easily the better choice.

The other debate was between the candidates for Assembly District 19, which include Milwaukee County Board Chairwoman Marina Dimitrijevic, Jonathan Brostoff, Sara Geenen and Abele Party Candidate Dan Adams.

Marina Dimitrijevic

It has been reported to me that Dimitrijevic was very polished and presented herself very well.  Likewise,
Brostoff showed that he is no slouch and also did well for himself.  Geenen appeared to be very intelligent but timid.

That said, it was Dan Abele Adams that provided the comedic relief for the evening.  Not did he only prove himself to be a dyed-in-the-wool Abelebot, but spent a great deal of time trying to convince the audience he really is a Democrat.  Between that and trying to justify Act 14, which concentrated power in Milwaukee County in Chris Abele's inept hands, he had members of the audience laughing at him.

Here's a pro tip for Abele-Adams: If you're running for office in one of the most progressive districts in the state and you have to waste time trying to convince people that you're really a Democrat two weeks before the primary, you've got serious problems.

Was Thompson At A Debate Or At The End Of A Bar?

This is the best the Republicans can come up with? No wonder Karl Rove had to drop a million dollar ad buy for him. But even then, there is no way to make him look good:



H/T Jud Lounsbury

Tommy Doesn't Know!

Tommy wants to crack down on Iran! His stock in the company selling uranium to Iran must have taken a hit!

According to Thompson's personal financial disclosure, he owns up $50,000 worth of stock in such firms. Some of the smaller investments include up to $1,000 in the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, Gazprom and the China National Petroleum Corporation, which were all cited in a recent Government Accountability Office study as having done business with Iran.

Thompson owns up to $17,000 worth of stock in Royal Dutch Shell, which the GAO also named, and between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of stock in oil services firm Schlumberger, which has been probed by the Justice Department over its Iran work.

Perhaps most significantly, Thompson owns between $1,000 and $15,000 worth of stock in the mining operation Rio Tinto, which is partners with Iran in mining uranium. Iran owns 15 percent of a uranium mining operation in Namibia with Rio Tinto.

Now we know why Tommy needed to make a shekels when he left the Governor's office, he had to invest in Iran going nuclear.




What is laughable is that Tommy says "He did not know about his stock" and when he did he sold them. HuffPO found out about his ownership in these stocks, by going through his personal financial disclosure(which can be seen here),   The problem with Tommy's story is the personal financial disclosure was released on 1/27/12 - yesterdays date was 10/19/12.

Tommy had 10 months to look at his own PFD along with the time it took to compile this form.  Which brings to mind 2 questions. 

1.  Is Tommy that rich that he has no idea where over $100,000 worth of stock is?

2.  If Tommy can not read his own PFD, how can we expect him to be a good steward of our money??? 

Mitt Romney's Beliefs

Mitt Romney believes women belong in a binder, not the boardroom.

And, when did he suddenly believe in women being able to obtain contraception? Mitt Romney does not believe in abortion or birth control. He's been very vocal in cutting funding for Planned Parenthood. His running mate, Paul Ryan, wrote a "Personhood" bill that seeks to give rapists legal rights to take their victims to court to bar them from obtaining an abortion. Can we get more extreme than that? He does not trust women to make their own health care decisions. Romney does not believe in equal pay. He doesn't believe that women have equal rights in the workplace.

Mitt Romney does not believe in keeping jobs in America. His record as a businessman, which he loves to talk about, PROVES he is in China's best interest, not our own. He doesn't believe in American workers, American ingenuity or American integrity. He will sell us to the highest bidder.

Mitt Romney has some wild thoughts on gun control. Starting out by talking about having kids after you're married, doesn't address the problem. He was actively seeking the endorsement of the NRA and panders to their extreme gun agenda.

Mitt Romney does not believe in affordable education. He seeks to CUT Pell Grants, and double interest on student loans. He doesn't support teacher's unions and he seeks to cut federal funding for public education.

Mitt Romney's tax plan would add upwards of $5 trillion dollars to the deficit. Tax cuts are not free. Someone has to pay for them. Those handing over the credit card would be those most hurt by his economic policies - the 99%.

Mitt Romney says he's going to fight for the middle class, but we know that his true belief is that we are nothing but entitled moochers. 47% of Americans. You know, working class families, veterans, the disabled, the elderly, students. All whiny suckers of the government teat.

Mitt Romney says he would make it easier for immigrants to come here legally. We know this just is not true. He wants to make the situation for immigrants so awful that they "self deport" themselves back to their home countries. His immigration adviser wrote the racist Arizona bill that the GOP loves.

Mitt Romney thinks he's different from George. W. Bush. But in reality, Romney would be EXACTLY like Bush, if not even worse.

Mitt Romney believes Ronald Reagan was an economic demi-god. The truth is that Reagan was a terrible president. He raised taxes 6 out of the 8 years he was president. The economy was awful under his watch. And let's not forget he allowed terrorists to obtain weapons. He allowed men, women and children to get slaughtered in Columbia. He wanted to escalate the Cold War to a fever pitch. Star Wars anyone?

Mitt Romney believes in letting big oil companies run the show. He has no interest in investing in green energy. He wants to stick an oil well on every piece of land. He would never end corporate welfare for them. He would rather see the earth melt before letting any of his oil overlords lose any money.

But above everything, Mitt Romney is a rich oligarch who wants to keep the working class down, and the wealthy and elite up. He wants to sell America's soul to China. He looks at us with dollar signs in his eyes. He is everything America should never be. 1% of the people can't represent 99% of the people. President Obama is who America needs. A change of control of congress is what America needs. We need peace, freedom and equality. America can't survive under a Romney administration. Consider this on November 6th!

Twinkle Toes Ryan

From the incomparable Stuart Carlson:

Gish Gallop - Romney Style

The other day, I introduced the gentle reader to the phrase "Gish Gallop", which is another term for spreading, which in turn can be defined thus:

The Gish Gallop, named after creationist Duane Gish, is the debating technique of drowning the opponent in such a torrent of half-truths, lies, and straw-man arguments that the opponent cannot possibly answer every falsehood in real time. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education.

The formal debating jargon term for this is spreading. You can hear some mindboggling examples here. It arose as a way to throw as much rubbish into five minutes as possible. In response, some debate judges now limit number of arguments as well as time. However, in places where debating judges aren't there to call bullshit on the practice, like the internet, such techniques are remarkably common.

Another way to put it all into context is this rather strongly worded review of the first debate:

It is curious that any observer was surprised that pathological liar Willard Romney came to the debate armed with a mountain of lies. One has to wonder if any spectator expected Willard to stand on that stage and tell the American people he intended to slash education, give $5 trillion in tax cuts to the wealthy, reduce the number of police and fire fighters, or admit that he has contempt for 47% of the population, and yet the blogosphere was rife with articles recounting the number of lies and flip-flops Romney is best known for. It was also somewhat surprising to see critics assailing President Obama for not calling out each of Romney’s lies, and if they looked at the bigger picture, or understood the nuances of debate, they may have couched their criticism and gave the President the credit he deserves, and he does deserve credit for not succumbing to Romney’s tactics.

Of course Willard lied, it is what pathological liars do, and as a master liar, Romney distinguished himself as the best. He took his lying seriously too, even resurrecting a Sarah Palin lie that won distinction as “Lie of the Year” in 2009 regarding the dreaded “death panels.” Romney has not come up with any novel ideas throughout the campaign, but up until Wednesday night he primarily parroted Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush rhetoric in hopes of appealing to conservatives stuck in the 1980s and early 21st century. However, when he complained that the Affordable Care Act contained a provision to ration healthcare, he put himself on the same level as Palin.

It was not the first time the Romney-Ryan tandem entertained the notion that a group of appointees would decide if grandma was worthy of healthcare or lifesaving medical attention, because last week in Florida Paul Ryan took the opportunity to expound on Palin’s death panel sophistry. For the record, the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a panel of Senate-confirmed experts, are explicitly prohibited from rationing care, shifting costs to retirees, restricting benefits, or raising the Medicare eligibility age, so obviously they do not have power to dictate to doctors what treatments they can prescribe. However, Willard did not mention the truth about the panels and the President did not waste valuable time debunking 2009′s lie of the year again, and it leads to why President Obama did not squander his time discrediting each and every Romney lie.

There is a tactic in debating called “spreading” that involves throwing as many unproven assertions as possible at an opponent in hopes they waste time refuting lies instead of expounding their message. If the President had spent his limited time refuting every lie Romney told in Wednesday’s debate, he could not have shared his vision for America’s future or how he intended to fight for Americans who are not in Willard’s wealthy elite class. What Americans were treated to, was a President with a clear vision and message, replete with specifics, that the people have come to expect from Barack Obama. Romney’s tactic was popularized by a creationist maniac, Duane Tolbert Gish, who without facts or valid arguments to back up his creation myth ideology, drowned his opponents in lies, half-truths, and straw-man arguments in rapid bursts they could not answer in real time. Romney utilized the tactic well, but he failed to take one simple fact into account. His lies on Wednesday night do not square with his campaign rhetoric and he came off looking more transient on the issues than ever, and it is a misstep he has made throughout his run for the White House.

Romney and, indeed, all Republicans fail to understand that in the information age of instant reporting and video tape, every statement a candidate makes is easily verified or, in Romney’s case, debunked within minutes of uttering a contrary position or outright lie. On Wednesday night, Romney not only lied as pathological liars are wont to do, but he contradicted his own position and statements he made just a day earlier and that is the peril for pathological liars; they lie with such ease that they lose touch with reality and forget the lies they told just a minute earlier, and one has to wonder if President Obama knew Romney was digging himself into a pit of mendacity with no way out.

This rather well sums up the whole Republican philosophy as well, doesn't it.

Even when they think they're winning, they are really losing. It's just that they are taking the rest of us down with them.

Mitt is Cold Busted!

Now that we have time to look at the tape and digest what happened in the debate, we know while Mitt Romney appeared at the time to have "won", a closer looks reveals much about who Mitt is as a person. 

The fact checkers tell us that Mitt spent much of the debate flat out lying, while I pointed out that there was one time he actually told the truth. 

Now going back to "the tape" we see that Mitt needed a cheat sheet(which is against the rules).  If you remember, Sarah Palin(showing off her 3rd grade intellect) wrote crib notes on her hand(and even had typos) for her debate, and George Bush needed to be wired (a'la Hercule-Savinien de Cyrano de Bergerac) to be able to get  through his debate.  

Which brings to mind three very important questions:

1.  If all Mitt twas going to do is lie anyway, what the hell did he write on his cheat sheet?   

2.  Since we have a clear patter of cheating by republican candidates, how will Paul Ryan (R - Wall St.) break the rules? 

3.  When will the republicans learn that you can not get your information from sources like this or this and expect to be able to hold a conversation? 

The Challenge Paul Ryan Is Afraid To Try

Paul Ryan is a manly sort of man.

He can run marathons in less than three hours.

He can climb 40 mountains on a Sunday afternoon.

Heck, I've heard that he swims from Washington, D.C., up the East Coast and through the Great Lakes and back again on the weekends to save airfare.

But there is one thing that makes this manly man a cravenly coward - trying to defend his preposterous claims that he can balance a budget or grow the economy.

Yup, he refuses to come out of hiding to debate his opponent, Rob Zerban.

To help encourage the little darling to come out of his hidey hole, Zerban has started an online petition telling Ryan to come home and face his constituents, no matter how scared he is.

Now it could be that Lyin' Ryan is worried about the numbers in the latest polls and is afraid of losing any more points, since he still wants to feed off the government gravy train he set up for himself. After all, just like struggling Sean Duffy, Ryan knows that $350 bottles of wine don't grow on tress.

So tell Paul Ryan to come back and face his challenger in a public debate.

Highlights From The First Debate

Or for Walker, the first debacle.

Barrett vs. Walker - The First Debate

Just after the primary election, Tom Barrett challenged Scott Walker to four debates.  Walker would only agree to two.  Tonight's debate shows why Walker was afraid to debate Barrett and why Walker probably wishes he didn't agree to any.

The debate started with each candidate giving an 90 second opening statement.  If I was playing any sort of drinking game, I would have been blotto by the end of Walker's opening statement.  I counted no less than sixteen separate lies in those ninety seconds.  That's a lie every 5 seconds.

The lies went everywhere from his disproved claim of creating jobs to balancing the budget to not raising taxes. To be honest, when he said he was glad for the opportunity, I think that might have been a lie, but I didn't count that one.

I lost count of Walker's lies after that, because I wasn't sure if I should be counting repeated lies or not.

Walker's nightmare started right way when they started talking about the reason for the recall.  Walker tried to paint it as that it's working (it's not, but you already knew that) and saying his own mistake was not talking about it enough before he "dropped his bomb."  Considering that it was recently discovered that he was working on his bomb within days of the election, the only way he could have talked about it beforehand was if he campaigned on it.  And he admitted, under oath, that he didn't do that.

That said, it would've been nice if Barrett had figured out that he needs to stand with the working people of the state if he wants to win this thing.  If he continues to ignoring those that brought him to the dance, he's gonna be in for a long walk home on June 6th.

The next thing, Walker was telling his fable about how he supposedly balanced the budget without raising taxes.  Barrett countered with the fact that not only did Walker raise taxes, he did so on the elderly and the poor by cutting the Homestead Credit Act to shreds.

I missed the rest because I was busy screaming about how Walker's budget cut $5,500 out of my salary, cost my wife her job and our taxes still went up by 5%.  (I would love to see one of his supporters, like Owen Robinson or James Wigderson give up more than 40% of their income, on top of a tax hike, without a say in the matter and  say that it was a "reasonable" share.)

I then got distracted for several minutes by Walker's body language, which was giving the tell that he was lying - things like his eyes becoming hooded, the drop in his chin and the sloop of his shoulder.  I was then distracted by several minutes more by how much his bald spot has grown.  The stress of perjuring himself to Congress, having Walkergate breathing down his neck and trying to spin the entire disaster his administration has been is catching up to him.  It was almost like watching the "The Portrait of Dorian Gray," but through his hair - or what's left of it.

Then John Doe joined the debate.

Walker tried desperately to spin it, claiming he did nothing wrong, that he asked for the investigation and that  he had the high integrity of an Eagle Scout.  Barrett countered with the fact that he is the only sitting governor with a legal defense fund and the secret router. (That brought a cheer from me!)  But there was a few points that I had tweeted regarding Walker's claim:

• We know that the investigation started before Nardelli met with the DA, so that is a lie.
• We also know about Walker's email to Tim Russell, showing that not only did he know what was happening, but he was directing it.
• Why would he initiate an investigation into the veterans fund when he knew he was violating the Ethics Board directive to get the fund away from his control?
• Was it's Walker's Eagle Scout integrity that got him kicked out of Marquette University for violating the election laws and displaying his boorish behaviors when he unsuccessfully ran for student body president. (He lost that race in a 4:1 ratio to a guy running as a write in candidate.)

The rest of the debate was much like this. Like when Walker was trying to spin something, like adding money to Medicaid and Family Care and Barrett pointing out that the federal government had to order Walker to put the money back in and that he was still kicking tens of thousands of people off of Medicaid.  Of course, this doesn't mention all the tax dollars going to social workers like myself as we put in overtime to clean up Walker's mess.

One last thing from the debate stood out to me.  In his closing statements, Walker gave his usual spiel about putting the power back into the hands of the taxpayers.  I found this very odd, since Walker has put the control of the state directly into the hands of his corporate sponsors and under his budget, they don't pay taxes.

Overall, Barrett owned Walker at almost every step of the way.  Barrett's greater experience and formal education as a lawyer shone against Walker's innate corruptness and poor understanding of what was going on in the state, outside of the talking points which are spoon-fed to him.

Barrett was able to successfully state his positive image for the future of the state and calling Walker out on his wrongful acts, whether it was the damage done due to Walker's policies or Walker's breaking the public trust with his criminal acts.  

Walker on the other hand, failed to respond to any questions in a forthright manner, ducking them or ignoring them completely as he went on a talking point tangent.

Barrett clearly send the more positive message and showed a lot more leadership than Walker did.

Walker Afraid To Defend Record In Debates With Barrett

Mayor Tom Barrett called out Scott Walker and challenged him to four debates before the June 5 recall election:

Tom Barrett called on Scott Walker Wednesday to join him in four debates in four weeks - focusing on jobs - in the 2012 race for Wisconsin governor.

"Scott Walker loves to launch misleading attacks on jobs, so let's meet face-to-face and compare our records and our visions on jobs for the people of Wisconsin," said Barrett. "He can explain why Wisconsin lost more jobs than any other state in the nation under his watch."

Barrett has been invited to a number of debates in the general election by respected organizations and media outlets, offers that no doubt have also been extended to Gov. Walker. There are several opportunities for Barrett and Walker to debate over the next four weeks to compare their records on jobs.

"Walker likes to lob assaults in news conferences and press releases, but let's see if he will join me head-to-head to talk about jobs," Barrett said. "The people of Wisconsin would much prefer the candidates for governor share the same stage on the most important issue on the minds of voters."

Walker campaigned for governor in 2010 promising to create 250,000 jobs. Instead when he assumed office, Walker launched an ideological civil war that divided Wisconsin like never before and took Walker's attention, energy and focus away from the economy.

Under Walker's watch, Wisconsin lost more jobs than any state in the nation in 2011, and was the only state to suffer 'statistically significant' job loss over the past 12 months.

Later in the same day, Walker sent out his Hooter's Girl/Spokeswoman Ciara Matthews to state that Walker would agree to only two of them:

The Friends of Scott Walker campaign announced this afternoon that Gov. Walker will participate in two statewide televised debates against Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett leading up to the gubernatorial recall election on June 5.

I can't imagine what Walker would be afraid off, unless he's tired of answering questions, especially those pesky ones from Watergate investigators.

I would also suggest that Team Barrett have their eyes and scanners on for any mysterious bulges or electronic signals coming from Walker's back. Especially if Walker starts speaking intelligently.

Anyway, the debates are thus:

The Wisconsin Broadcasters Association will host the first debate on Friday, May 25, and the second is scheduled for Thursday, May 31, hosted by WISN-12 UpFront with Mike Gousha, in partnership with Marquette University Law School, WisPolitics.com and the UpFront network of affiliates.

Better stock up on snacks. This is going to be fun to watch.

My Evening At The Forum

Last Friday, shortly after my appearance on The Sara Schulz Show, I received  a phone call.  Apparently, there was going to be a forum debating the merits of the Scott Walker recall.  The person who was to be pro-recall part of the panel was called away for business and would not be able to participate.

The event was scheduled for Tuesday evening and was going to be held at the beautiful facility of St. John's on the Lake.  The host and moderator of the panel was Tony Busalacchi.  Tony was featured in this Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article from a couple of years ago, and yes, his collection o art is gorgeous.

The anti-recall pundit was Rick Bass (pronounced boss), who had a very impressive bio, including being a member of Homeland Security and being a ranking officer in the Republican Party of Milwaukee County.  (That's the same group that had members like Darlene Wink and Tim Russell also as ranking officers.)

The other member of the panel was Professor Edward Fallone of Marquette University, a most learned man with whose work I was familiar and for whom I had a great deal of respect.  Professor Fallone would be a neutral participant there to explain the legal and historical background for recalls in Wisconsin.

Would I be willing to stand in as the pro-recall part of this panel of distinguished men?  I almost burst out in open laughter at the thought.  Who was I to be on stage debating the future of Wisconsin with these distinguished gentlemen?  But after a few minutes of cajoling and flattery ("Who else knows all the issues as well as you?" is like kryptonite to a blogger), I squelched the voice of reason and suppressed the drive of self-preservation and agreed to take part.

Later on, Tony called me and explained the format to me.  He would introduce the panel and then Professor Fallone would speak for a few minutes to explain the history and legal issues surrounding recalls.  After that, the panelists would be able to ask each of the other panelists one question.  After that, the panel would answer questions from the audience.

Seemed easy enough.

But then I spent the weekend obsessing about what questions I should ask.  I contacted some trusted friends to use as sounding boards and to get their input.  (Thanks for your patience, guys!)  I neatly wrote out the questions that I had in my notebook.  I reviewed the things that I had written and what others had written regarding the recall to prepare.

Tuesday morning finally came. I was as ready as I'd ever be.

I got dressed in the same ensemble that I wore last year when I participated in a panel discussing the role of social media and the protests.  I wanted to remember the support I received from my #wiunion brothers and sisters that day and use those memories to help carry me through this day.

After work, I went straight to St. John's.  I got there a little early, so I figured I'd take the time to review my notes in preparation.  But there was one slight hitch to that plan.

I forgot my notebook at home.

Feeling the panic rise, I did what came naturally.  I cried.  OK, not really.  What I did do was get on Twitter and tweeted about my nervousness.  The response was immediate and overwhelming.  Despite the fact that they couldn't be there in body, my #wiunion family was with me in spirit.

I took that strength and went in.

I met Tony and my co-panelists.  Tony then went over the format again.  He said that after Professor Fallone  gave his introduction, Mr. Bass and I would each have five minutes to speak towards our cause and then we would go to the questions.

Mentally, I started screaming.  A speech?!  A bleeping SPEECH?!?!  No one told me about a speech!  First I forgot my notes and now I had to ad lib a speech?!  Well, wasn't that great?

I then remembered having written a post about the five reasons to recall Walker.  I tried to remember all of the reasons and try to figure a way to put in a shortened version.

The crowd came in.  There was about 50 people there, almost all of them residents of St. John's.  They were a charming group of kind senior citizens with a reputation of being very active in their community and having a consistently high turn out in the polls.  But Tony had advised us that, like the rest of the state, this was a community divided, with very strong feelings on both sides of the issue.

My nervousness was starting to climb again.

As it turned out, Professor Fallone was a life saver without meaning to be.

In his introduction to recalls, he gave a brief history on how the recall process was introduced into the state constitution.  He said that at the time this law was being written and made part of our heritage, the people were outraged.  He told the group that the people felt that the businesses were having too much influence on the government.  The people felt that the politicians were being controlled by these businesses and that they were no longer paying heed to the citizenry.

Gee, now who does that sound like?

I won't bore the reader with a blow by blow account of the discussion, but I do want to give you some of the highlights.

My question to Professor Fallone dealt with all of the money that Walker was collecting, purportedly for the use of defending himself against the recall (but got the taxpayers to pay for).  As I had surmised, Walker gets to keep collecting unlimited amounts until a recall date has been set, which explains why he is pulling all these stalling tactics.  (On a side note, I called it - the teahadists are going to sue to prolong the process.  I guess legal defense attorneys don't come cheap.)

My question to Mr. Bass was to explain why it was OK for Walker to come into the Milwaukee County Executive position on a single-issue recall and to call for Doyle's ouster in 2006 for supposed corruption by his administration but it was wrong to recall Walker under the same offenses.  He dodged answering that one.

Mr. Boss' question for me was whether there would be the protests or the recall if the unions had not been harmed.  My answer was an unequivocal yes.  I pointed out that many of the protesters and recallers were non-union, private sector workers.  I added that it was people from all walks of life that were at the Capitol for months on end and it was this same wide sampling of Wisconsinites that braved this winter to collect the nearly two million signatures to trigger this round of recalls.  I added that as far as I was aware, there were no public sector unions that consisted of senior citizens, or of children, or of housewives, parents and/or grandparents.

I think that the most moving and inspiring part of the night is that each and every question was directed to Mr. Bass and challenged him on the current state of affairs.  That told me that everyone was seeing through the standard talking points offered by Mr. Bass and by WISGOP as a whole.

Mr. Bass took an interesting approach by stating that he's not there to defend Scott Walker and that Scott Walker could defend himself.  The other thing that I noted was that during the question and answer time with the audience, he often deflected the question to me to answer first.  It was as if he was more comfortable reacting and attacking my points rather than to try to defend or even endorse Scott Walker's actions.

I would say that I scored one of the biggest points of the evening when I, in response to a question about the mining bill, pointed out that it was the mining company that had written the bill and tied that into what Professor Fallone had taught us about the origin of the recall procedure in Wisconsin.  Another big point, judging from the reaction of the audience, was when I pointed out Walker's ever-present hypocrisy and made a comment to the effect of, "In Scott Walker's world, every day is Opposite Day."

After the event, Tony invited us all up to his apartment for a nightcap and a riveting conversation.

I would like to thank Tony and the others at St. John's on the Lake for a lovely evening and a warm reception.  I also thank them for the bottomless coffee cup.  I think I will by making more use of that than I'd care to admit.

I would also like to thank Professor Fallone and Mr. Bass for a lively discussion and making the nice a success.

I would most like to thank my brothers and sisters of #wiunion, who gave me support and cheered me on, and gave me their strength to successfully meet this challenge.  If I were to name each one, it would double the length of this article.  But at the risk of alienating all of the others, there is one person I'd like to thank for the strength lent to me and the inspiration to be as good as I could be: Thank you, Diane.