Gov. Baldspot

While I enjoy reading other blogs and respect their work, once in a while, one really stands out.  In My humble opinion a recent blog by Monologues of Dissent was about as good as a blog can get.  

For that that have not seen it, here it is in its entirety. I recommend putting MOD on your daily reader list! 

The Governor's Baldspot: Has the Blame Game finally gone too far?

Scott Walker has been playing the blame game forever - most notably in blaming former governor Jim Doyle and/or President Obama for everything that happened, ever, either before, during, or after he took office.

But his latest, most bizarre claim, might be the tipping point for Wisconsinites who've had enough of his failure to take responsibility for his administration's many failures.

And it's all about The Baldspot™.

Apparently, the governor is so insecure about this that he felt strangely compelled to compensate for it by drawing attention to its dominant appearance in the cartoons of Phil Hands.  However, rather than laugh it off in a self-depreciating way, as he apparently intended, Walker instinctively launched into an elaborate story about how the bald spot isn't his fault:

The bald spot, he said, was the result of a repair incident in the kitchen when he banged his head on an open kitchen cabinet door while making repairs requested by his wife, Tonette.

She kept telling him to go to the doctor to get the scar on his head looked at, he said. When he finally did, the doctor said his hair would never grow back in that spot, the governor explained.

Tonette still points to the bald spot as a reminder that he should always listen to his wife, he said.

Now, first of all, WHO CARES IF HE IS BALDING?!  Why are even talking about this totally inconsequential matter when half a million Wisconsinites are uninsured, our state is dead last in jobs growth, our public education system is under direct attack, and hundreds of thousands of families are barely making ends meet?

And yet...I can't help but fixate on this moment - not because I care about The Baldspot™, but because I can't help but wonder:

How pathological a liar do you have to be to blame a cabinet,
and, in a passive-aggressive way, your wife - for your bald spot?  

If she hadn't made him fix that cabinet, he could be Fabio right now.  Or at least Paul Ryan.

And in case you're giving the Governor the benefit of the doubt here, I present Exhibit A:

The Baldspot™

Blaming a cabinet - and by extension his wife for making him fix it - for this um, "scar," is outrageous.

But it's par for the course in Walker's blame game.

Governor Walker blames a cabinet for his bald spot like he blames workers for not being "skilled enough" to have jobs.  When the myth of the "skills gap" has been disproven time and time again.

Like he blames teachers for the failings of underfunded schools.  When his cuts to public education are the largest in history.

Like he blames students in poverty for not "performing" and says the only solution is to privatize public schools.  When his demands for "accountability" prevent educators from focusing on the students who need the most help, and his voucher expansion is destroying the very fabric of the social contract that provides an equal playing ground for all Wisconsinites.

Like he blames the uninsured and underemployed for not being enterprising enough to get "good jobs" that pay a living wage. When he laughs about the $144K salary he earns as governor not being "real money" and insists that the minimum wage "doesn't serve a purpose."  And the insurance companies who contributed to his campaign are seeing massive paybacks from his decision to reject OUR federal taxdollars in Medicaid funds to keep people off BadgerCare.

Scott Walker is not new to the blame game.  It comes very naturally to him.

But when you blame a cabinet for your bald spot, people have to stop to wonder.

If we can't trust him to be honest about such a trivial matter, how can we trust him on anything?

The short answer is: we don't.

At least half of us, who've been paying close attention for the past 4 years, have been calling out the governor's fabrications all along.  Even on the right-leaning Politifact, 68% of his statements that have been put to the test have not passed the lie-detector.  And yet: the governor's success in "dividing and conquering" this state during an already divisive national political climate has been enormous: people on Team Walker are now assumed to be so firmly entrenched in their belief in him that they won't question any of his prevarications.

But maybe, just maybe, a little white lie will be big enough to wake up "the believers" and plant some seeds of doubt.  And maybe, just maybe, people who haven't been paying much attention - or who've been dismissing the he said/she said as more partisan bickering will start to see the light. 

It's a matter of principle.

And Wisconsin deserves better.

No Food For You!

 

By Jeff Simpson


H/T Our friends at Monologues of Dissent for this great piece on the Waterford School District.

 Agreeing among themselves that "the FDA standards are going beyond where they should," the conversation is largely hijacked by one Dan Jensen, who argues early that "there shouldn't be any federal lunch program" and cites his "Libertarian standpoint," evoking the specter of Milton Friedman, to defend the idea that since he "doesn't have the right" to ask someone to pay for someone else's lunch, he somehow does have the right to deny local taxpayers of federal funds they support with their own tax dollars.  While they cite a decline in lunch participation and an increase in throwing food in the trash, board members betrayed their real reasons for opting out of the program in fairly short order (emphasis mine - see the full video and story here):

The Board was split on the need to offer a free and reduced program to low income students in the district. Dan Jensen stated he did not feel it was the district’s responsibility to pay for anyone else’s lunch (video 1 at 4:34). Jensen the went on to describe that WGSD could in the future determine the family income levels that qualify a student for free and reduced lunch and what they would be given to eat if they did.
Board member Dawn Bleimehl stated that she hoped that any free and reduced lunch offered by the WGSD “looks the same” as the lunch served to other students (video #2 at 3:57). Dan Jensen went on to disagree that a free or reduced lunch need to look the same and that as a youngster (in RUSD) he was not bothered by standing in a special line while waiting to receive his free or reduced lunch. He agreed it would matter to some students in WGSD, but felt that was the price those students have to pay for receiving a lunch paid for by others (video #2 at 4:40). Unfortunately, the district would then stand to lose many tens of thousands of dollars in Title funds because it would be much less likely to identify and document students from low income households.

The board is, in essence, robbing local taxpayers of the federal funds THEY help support because of a personal "belief" that students who can't afford to eat don't deserve to eat. 

Once again, Heather nailed this important topic perfectly(go there and read the whole post).   she also sums up exactly how we got into this mess:

 This is precisely what happens when anti-child, anti-education people are elected to represent our schools.  When politics and personal opinion trump the educational success and welfare of our children, something is broken beyond repair. 

YOUR local elections MATTER!!  Vote Tomorrow!  

PS:   Here is a quick video Dan Jensen, the board member who does not feel it is his job to take care of the kids he represents(h/t QC)!!!

Matthew 25:35-40

 ³⁵ For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, ³⁶ I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

³⁷ “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? ³⁸ When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? ³⁹ When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
⁴⁰ “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Steve nASS Denounces Local Control

By Jeff Simpson

In case you did not know, Steve nASS(R-I don't like paying child support), has authored and had passed the Racist Mascot Preservation Bill.   Our friend Heather at Monologues of Dissent has been documenting this bill brilliantly:

When they aren't too busy focusing on creating jobs legalizing rubber duck races, Wisconsin Republicans are actual drafting legislation that would turn back the hard-fought advances toward equity in public schools by "rewriting" the law requiring schools to abandon racist mascot names, and shift authority on the matter from the Department of Public Instruction to (guess who?) Scott Walker's Department of Administration.  Because one belligerent district refuses to comply with the name-change requirement, our children will be subjected to continued humiliations and the unconscionably bad example of normalizing racism in the classroom.  Even in their own press release, Sen. Mary Lazich accidentally betrays the true purpose of the backward-looking bill: to ensure total control so that no schools will have to change their mascots, to "avoid imposing costly re-branding on school districts."  Using words like "treasured mascots" and referring to the "principled positions" of school districts who refuse to abandon their beloved traditions [of racism], the Republican legislators' complete disrespect for how deeply offensive these racist mascot names are to many Wisconsinites is now on display for all to see. The repulsive irony is best seen in the words of Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, who told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that the blatant disregard for civility and equity is "the best path forward." 

  


As he has been known to do, Republican Senator Dale Schultz(R-last bit of sanity), has seen how controversial this bill that overturns current law is and has offered up a compromise.

“As a member of the State Tribal Relations Committee for the past couple years, he has found a new appreciation and understanding for the Native American community,” said Schultz’s chief of staff, Todd Allbaugh. “He just thinks it’s the right thing to do.”

Schultz, of Richland Center, will offer a compromise when the Senate meets Nov. 5. His proposal would require the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction to review all school nicknames and mascots, rather than waiting for a complaint to be filed. There are roughly 35 schools in the state that use Indian nicknames and logos.

Under the Schultz compromise, if DPI feels a name could be race-based, it would turn its findings over to the local school board. The local school board could then work with the Great Lakes Inter-Tribal Council to negotiate an agreement, arguably avoiding any lawsuit.

Allbaugh said Schultz had discussions with Ho-Chunk President Jon Greendeer, who testified against the bill at an Oct. 9 Senate public hearing. Greendeer worked with the Wisconsin Dells School District to reach a compromise on its use of the nickname Chiefs.

Greendeer's discussions with the district led to the tribe presenting a traditional headdress to Wisconsin Dells High School, where it is displayed along with a description of the school’s tribal connection to the community.

So Dale Schultz (R-only "R" listens to his constituents) has seen controversy and the need for compromise, has studied the issue, talked to all sides, watched how it has played out successfully in history and pulled all of this together into a palatable solution for all involved.  

As Schult'z Chief of Staff correctly puts it:

 
“His bill forces a true discussion at the local level,” Allbaugh said. “As Republicans, we are always preaching about local control. So let the issue be worked out on the local level like it was in the Dells.”

 Well palatable to all except for the furthest end of the right wing spectrum.  Unfortunately, thanks to district gerrymandering, that is who is making our laws.   Let's here from Steve nAss, I mean Mike Mikalsen speaking for Steve nASS or himself or well whoever does the thinking in their domestic partnership.

Mike Mikalsen, Nass’ chief of staff, said Nass does not support the compromise.

“At this point, he has already compromised as much as he’s going to,” Mikalsen said. “Remember, his bill was initially a complete repeal (of current law).”

The bill proposed by Lazich and Nass would largely undo a 3-year-old law passed under former Gov. Jim Doyle that required schools discontinue using their nicknames, logos or mascots if they were found to be offensive. Once one individual filed a complaint, a review process would be triggered by the DPI to determine whether the school's use of native imagery was offensive.

Through compromise, Nass has agreed to allow for a complaint process. However, it shifts the responsibility for proving something is offensive to the complainant by requiring an individual to collect signatures totaling 10 percent of the school district’s student population. Those who sign the petition must by 18 or older.

Nass’ bill also would cut DPI out of the process by allowing the state Department of Administration to assign a hearing examiner to the complainant’s case.

There we go, Mike nASS is in favor of Big Government dictating exactly what you have to do and to what level you can be offended.  Mike nASS is against the decision being made by the local democratically elected school board.   The local school board of course is elected by the voters of the actual school district that would be making the decision about the fate of the Mascot. 

 

 Apparently, Mike nASS thinks that he is much more qualified to decide the issues of  your school district than you or the people you vote for are.   

 

 

Why is Mike nASS against local control?  Let's let Jason Priest, Republican Montana Senate candidate, explain.

 

Here is Mike nASS in his own words and immensely outclassed by Representative Jon Richards:

Blog Roll Addition

I just added Monologues of Dissent to my blogroll and suggest that you go check it out.

Not only is a fellow dissident, but also quite clever, including this poster for the #weeunion folks: