This is the price of apathy?

I usually don’t take on Community Columnists at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. I was one once. But the one in Thursday’s paper is useful for a point, because it reflects what I see in liberal thought toward conservatives.

The 2010 election saw a full 50% of the electorate sit on their hands and do nothing. Among those who did vote, one has to wonder just how much effort was put into understanding the issues, the proposed solutions and the historical performance of the candidates.

via This is the price of apathy – JSOnline.

I’ve written about apathy before, even as a member of the Community Columnists. However, Mr. Bell is not really writing about apathy.

The Republicans got elected promising jobs and have pulled a fast one on all of us. Behind the foible of “budget,” they used the issue to drive home every bit of longed for right-wing goodies – and now, some who voted for them feel duped.

Yes, this is another screed about those no good Republicans.

What was that whole brown bag lunch that the liberals liked to ridicule so much, all about anyway?

That’s right. The budget.

How soon they forget.

But that seems to be the liberal tactic, that somehow the Republicans pulled a bait and switch on the people of Wisconsin.

“Jobs was what the Republicans promised.”

Well, yeah and the brown bag lunch. Living within your means.

Hmmm, I wonder if Mr. Bell was truly “duped?” Because the article sure didn’t give the feel of one who had been duped.

So who’s doing the duping?

As usual, what it comes down to is that the GOP lied and stupid people voted for them.

Same ol’ same ol’.

Wisconsin Senate Debate 10-08-2010

I watched the Senate “debate” tonight between Ron Johnson and incumbent Russ Feingold.

Like the governor’s “debate,” a couple of weeks back, this was not a debate like one we might have witnessed or participated in in school.

Again the candidates were asked questions and responded to them.

Also as in the governor’s debate, the Democrat trails the Republican in most polls and came out swinging.

As in the governor’s debate, the Republican didn’t make any mistakes and nothing that was not already known came out.  Consequently, as in the governor’s debate, there will be no change in the polls.

Wisconsin governor’s debate 09-24-2010

The first “debate” for Wisconsin governor between Scott Walker and Tom Barrett was held tonight. The next will be Oct. 8 and one will follow Oct. 15. There’s video here if you want to see it.

Here are my impressions.

First of all, it was not a debate. Opening statements were made by both candidates and then a panel of three took turns asking questions. There was little room or time for rebuttal. The debate ended with closing statements by both candidates.

Both seemed well-prepared. I didn’t notice any slip-ups although I’m sure some one will find some.

Nor did I hear any new ground. Most of the talking points I’d heard before. The themes for Walker were tax cuts and getting government to work for people again. Barrett’s themes were that Wisconsin needs adult leadership and we have serious problems that need serious answers.

Barrett was more often on the attack. Walker was content, for the most part, to present his program, although he attacked as well.

The winner? Each side will claim victory, although the format precludes determining a clear winner.

Consequently I’m voting Walker, Johnson and Kleefisch

[UPDATE (09/12/10) Brian Fraley…]

Leave it up to liberals to entice me to blog again.

Thanks, guys, for making up my mind for me.

Deke Rivers, [Barry Orton at ]Paul Soglin[‘s blog], mal, and best of all Jay Bullock.

Your support for their opponents shows me how much you fear these three.

Could you show me which other Republicans you’re afraid of?

Thanks.

Scott Walker

Ron Johnson

Rebecca Kleefisch

[I can add Sheriff Trawicki and Kurt Schuller to the above list.]

Scott Walker, college dropouts, and media coverage

Two friends (at least online friends) posted recently on remarks Scott Walker made to reporters after the debate in Oconomowoc. They based their posts on this article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel which “quoted” Scott Walker as saying,

Walker said he didn’t graduate because he got a job and he suggested that in the current economy college students close to graduating might consider doing the same.

Pretty plain and they drew their conclusions.

Might not be as simple.

At least when you look at the report on WITI channel 6  locally, which seems to have the entire quote. Here’s what Walker said,

“Bottom line is, I was offered a job. Like any person going into their senior year, right now particularly in this economy, if they were offered a job their senior year of college, I think most people these days would take it. That’s what I did at the American Red Cross.”

Kinda different to me. And I don’t necessarily blame the Journal Sentinel reporter although I would encourage him to work on that. But the quote in the Journal Sentinel, if read alone, is misleading.

Therefore my conclusions would be different from Chris and Cindy (although I don’t presume to think I’m changing anyone’s mind here).

Here’s my paraphrase of what Walker said:

In this economy, any senior who got a good job offer like I did at the Red Cross, might consider leaving school, since their prospects are dim even if they stay in school.

It goes without saying that it’s up to interpretation.

The Left’s other concern is voiced by Xoff,

Scott Walker, the degree-less candidate for governor, continues to describe his college career in ways that are terribly misleading if not outright fibs.

Xoff, in a magnanimous moment, says something I’ve been thinking about since this issue came up,

I don’t care whether he has a degree or not. Many dropouts, from Bill Gates to Lady Gaga to your truly (who falls somewhere in between those two) have had some success.

I don’t look at a candidate’s educational qualifications that much when deciding on a candidate. Certainly Mark Neumann and Tom Barrett are very well educated. Scott Walker does have experience running a government with a legislative body of the opposite persuasion. He’s won elections in a county that usually votes overwhelmingly Democratic.

I haven’t decided between the two yet, but I certainly wouldn’t rule out Walker because he didn’t finish college.

Russ Feingold – 2nd amendment advocate?

That’s right. Look at how this Craig Gilbert article in Sunday’s Milwaukee Journal Sentinel starts:

You won’t find too many Democrats these days attacking their conservative opponents for being soft on gun rights.

But that’s exactly what Sen. Russ Feingold did last week in a radio ad, trading fire with GOP challenger Ron Johnson over who’s a better friend of the Second Amendment.

“I have been one of the true leaders in fighting for a greater right to bear arms,” Feingold said in an interview last week.

My conservative friends are guffawing about now, and although Feingold doesn’t get good marks from the NRA, neither does he seem to get good marks from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

It seems mixed enough. he even seems to support concealed carry.

Not good enough for either side.

A maverick?

At least on guns.

Look, I’ll never vote for Feingold.

But he does seem to be a moderate on gun control.

A moderate? A DINO?

Nahhh.