On Curt Schilling’s personal blog, he has written a post where he discusses his impending free agency. In it, he expresses a desire to go to a team that has “a legitimate shot at being in the post season and/or World Series.” The Brewers are on that list.

It’s true, Schilling is getting old – but he proved in the playoffs that he can shut other good teams down. Who knows if he can do it for a full season. He has said he’s looking for something in the one-year, $13 million range.

This begs a larger discussion of what the Brewers plan on doing in the offseason. They have a little money to spend – dumping Geoff Jenkins nets them $9 million. Kevin Mench being gone saves $3 million. Getting rid of Corey Koskie saves them $2 million – his salary was over $5 million, but the Blue Jays were still picking up the majority of that.

Since the end of last year, I’ve been thinking a lot about what Torii Hunter would look like in a Brewer uniform. It seems like money-wise, they could make that happen. Hart in right, Hunter in Center, and some kind of platoon of Gross, Nix, and Hall in left would be ideal. And I still like Gwynn.

Although if some team goes crazy over Hunter and outbids the Brewers, I can see Schilling as a decent option. He may be able to prevent the team from completely collapsing when Ben Sheets’ arm inevitably falls off in August.

Either way, it’s nice to see Milwaukee get the love it deserves from the game’s stars.

With the state budget having worked its way through the legislative process like a rat working its way through a snake, things are much quieter on the media front.  Over the summer and into the fall, the rhetoric was flying about who was to blame for the late budget.  Now that the process is done and we’ve gotten a glimpse of what really happened, it’s instructive to exhume that issue and provide an autopsy of how it was covered at the time.

As everyone can recall, the Republican Assembly was pitted against the Democratic Senate and governor in negotiating a final budget.  The budget as passed by the Senate was chock full of new taxes on hospitals, oil companies, and cigarettes, just to name a few.  The Assembly sought to remove those tax increases, arguing that natural growth in state revenues were enough to cover the state’s spending obligations.  Negotiations were at an impasse for some time, with both sides holding firm.

And how was this impasse portrayed to the state’s public?  Naturally, it was just taken for granted that it was the fault of Assembly Republicans.  In fact, some media outlets came out and said it directly.  Take this editorial from Tom Giffey of the Eau Claire Leader-Telegram, entitled “Assembly Main Culprit in Budget Impasse.”

While the latter two parties still aren’t blameless, it has become clear the Assembly is the major roadblock to the budget’s completion. Last Monday, on a 44-53 vote, they rejected the latest version of the budget, which had been presented to the Legislature by a frustrated Doyle, who called a special session to spur lawmakers to finish their job.

[...]

And what about other taxpayers? Because of the budget delay, school districts will get nearly $80 million less in state aid than they expected, forcing them to make deep cuts or raise taxes; thousands of university students are without financial aid grants for the fall semester; and all university students face the prospect of a tuition surcharge in the spring.

None of which, incidentally, happened.

Readers of the Wisconsin State Journal were treated to this article on Sunday, October 7th:

Gop Accused Of Blocking Budget: Doyle’s Spokesman Says Republicans And Their Supporters Are Working Together To Delay Passage.

Republicans and their supporters are working together to delay passage of a new state budget, Gov. Jim Doyle’s spokesman said Friday.

“You have what appears to be a coordinated strategy to delay this budget,” said Matt Canter, spokesman for the Democratic governor.

The blame went on and on, with few articles recognizing that budget negotiations are accomplished by two parties.  Not surprisingly, now that the budget is complete, we’re getting an entirely different story.

In a press conference following passage of the budget, Doyle actually credited Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch with continuing to negotiate all along:

Doyle also tipped his hat to Huebsch, R-West Salem, for not letting budget negotiations wither.

“When the public rhetoric was flying around and everybody was calling everybody names, he was quietly and patiently continuing to talk,” Doyle said.

Incidentally, much of that “public rhetoric” and “name calling” was done by Doyle himself (see above).  But Doyle knew full well media outlets would buy his version of events, which we now know to be untrue.

Shortly after passage of the budget, Senate Democrats removed their leader, Senator Judy Robson.  New Majority Leader Russ Decker said his coup was due in large part by Robson’s refusal to hold out longer:

Decker also said that he would “hopefully” have gotten a better deal for Democrats had he been leader, as well, adding he would have held out longer for the hospital assessment, oil assessment and combined reporting.

In a blistering television interview given after her removal, Robson confirms that Decker was urging negotiations to drag on, in hopes of forcing a government shut down.  Clearly, Decker knew that the longer the budget dragged on, the worse it looked for Republicans – in large part, because of the media rush to blame the GOP for the lack of movement.  Decker knew that Democrats would never be on the hook for a late budget, and that any perceived damage to the state would be pinned on Republicans.  Clearly, he was right.

In sum:  Huebsch kept negotiating (see Doyle quote), Decker was elected because he wanted to hold out longer (see Decker quote), and the media targeted conservatives (Rep. Steve Nass, etc.) as the bad guys, despite the strident right making themselves completely irrelevant to the budget process before the budget even began.  Republicans were consistently being portrayed as being pulled by the “extreme” wing of the party; yet, by signing a “no tax increase” pledge, those conservatives essentially excused themselves from budget participation before the process even started.  But it’s a lot simpler and easier to villify the GOP as caving in to their extremists.

Yet nobody in the state would get that this is what was going on, as few questioned the template: Republicans are refusing to negotiate because they want to cut programs and force a government shutdown.  Of course, the fact that Senate Democrats included an unprecedented $15.2 billion universal health care plan in their budget with one day’s notice couldn’t possibly have held up negotiations, since it doesn’t fit the pre-existing blueprint for how budget negotiations are covered.  

Fortunately, now that the budget’s done, everyone can sit back and have a good laugh about how inaccurately the process was covered.  As long as it makes the right side look bad, who cares, right?

One of the things I love most about the History Channel is the fact that they’ve covered Hitler’s life so completely, they’re now left reporting on some really arcane aspects of his life.

For instance, in a documentary called “High Hitler,” it was revealed that Hitler suffered from extreme constipation, and therefore, uncontrollable flatulence.

From the documentary description:

But the Fuhrer himself was an appalling hypochondriac who abused laxatives and suffered for much of his life from stomach cramps and embarrassing flatulence. And that was simply the start.

It looks like this has been reported elsewhere. In fact, one website reports:

A rabid hypochondriac, he would also examine his own feces on a regular basis and administer himself camomile enemas.

I’ll spare you all the obvious “Hitler” and “gas” jokes. There certainly isn’t anything funny about the Fuhrer.

However, this does set a troubling precedent. If someone does a documentary about me after I’m dead, how do I make sure details like this stay out? Sure, I have the benefit of not slaughtering millions in attempting to create a master race, but some of my post-burrito stories are pretty funny.

I’m a stickler for spelling and punctuation myself, so I got a kick out of the “Blog” of “Unnecessary” Quotation Marks. Funny stuff.

Big win by the Pack last night. Also, an outstanding performance by Mark Tauscher in introducing Brett Favre as “Vinny Testaverde’s dad.” More importantly, it keeps up the eerie pattern of following my Madden 2008 season - winning 6 of the first 7 games, with the only loss against the Bears.

The bad news is, my faux Packers went down to the Chiefs on the road next week. Might not want to watch. Although a Packer loss won’t be nearly as difficult on the eyes as the photos from this Packer-themed wedding. In keeping with the theme, I demand this couple eventually have a Packer-themed divorce.

It’s true, I have been lax in updating “The Trousers” here. But it’s not like I’ve been asleep. I have two fairly long budget-related pieces over at WPRI here and here. Plus, I can barely get out of bed with Virginia Tech’s collapse against Boston College last night.

More importantly, while the so-called “mainstream media” has been keeping itself amused with its “Number of Days Budget is Overdue” countdown, a much more important countdown has gone virtually unreported.

That countdown, of course, is the “How Many Days Until Mr. Brownstone Makes Its Triumphant Return To Madison” Countdown. And the answer is now: one. Come on out on Saturday night to the High Noon Saloon to get the full-on Guns n’ Roses tribute experience.

As of Monday afternoon, details of the Wisconsin budget compromise were still being made available.  Yet legislators will be asked to vote up or down on the entire document on Tuesday.  There’s a reason for that.

From Martin Luther to Thomas Jefferson, the great political minds recognized that governments derive their power from the consent of the governed.  That, of course, assumes that people know what they are consenting to.  Sure, you’ll hear all the big numbers from the press – but let’s dig a little deeper to see the items to which you, as a taxpayer, have consented:

Sales Tax Exemptions Related to Wind, Solar, and Gas from Digestion of Anaerobic Waste - p. 121

Yes, you read that correctly – cow dung is now tax-deductible.  Just feed your cow a serving of “Moons Over My Hammy” from Denny’s, lay back, and prepare to cash your checks.  There’s an ATM where you least expect it.

Sales and Use Tax Exemption for Clay Pigeons – p. 124

The clay pigeon lobby was out in force for this one, responding to the troublesome dearth of clay pigeons in our everyday lives.  Apparently the real pigeon lobby couldn’t “scratch” up enough cash.

Sales Tax Exemption for Catalogs – $600,000 – p. 120

This one is for those people who just don’t think they get enough junk mail.  I am desperately in need of more opportunities to buy J. Crew turtlenecks, and am thankful state government is there to make that happen.

Short Course to Introduce Chinese Students to the Wisconsin Idea – p. 85

According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau Summary, this new class “would introduce Chinese political, business, and academic leaders and practitioners to the Wisconsin Idea, especially as it relates to China’s environmental issues.”  In a show of support, the University of Beijing will be offering a class on the “Chinese Idea” – namely, crushing America with its bare hands.  Vegas has the Chinese military favored over the Badgers by 7.5 points.

Actually, I’d rather the money be spent on helping Yi Jianlian develop a spin move.

The Film Production Tax Credit – $1,000,000 – p. 113

Authors of this tax credit believe throwing a few bucks at film crews is going to make Wisconsin the Hollywood of the upper Midwest.  If it gets Natalie Portman to a barbeque at my house, I may just pay the whole thing myself.

Buy Local, Buy Wisconsin Program – $600,000 – p. 432

From the summary: “Create a buy local grant program whereby DATCP would award grants to individuals and organizations to fund projects designed to increase the local sales of agricultural products grown within the state. Grants under the program would be permitted for the creation, promotion and support of regional food and cultural tourism trails, and for promoting the development of regional food systems.”

Yeah, I don’t know what it does, either.

Sales and Use Tax For Nonprofit Cemeteries – p. 122

Little late for a tax break, don’t you think?  

Three-Tier Liquor Distribution System – p. 126

For some reason, Senate Democrats inserted an extremely complicated change to the state’s liquor distribution system.  The summary is 10 pages long, and it has nothing to do with actual state finances.  I challenge any Senator to begin to explain what it does.

Brewpub Permits – p. 136

Apparently, small brewpubs are getting a little too successful at brewing and selling delicious beer in one location.  Thus, they must be stopped from doing so through state regulation.  This new license would impose new rules on brew pubs, thereby creating a barrier to entry for new businesses.  This provision came out of thin air in conference committee – it wasn’t a part of either house’s initial budget plan.

The Grazing Lands Initiative – $800,000 – p. 433

From the summary: “Provide $400,000 SEG annually from the agrichemical management (ACM) fund for a grant to the Wisconsin Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (WGLCI) for technical education and research.”

“Education?” How much does it cost to teach livestock to eat the green stuff growing out of the ground?

Grant to the Allied Painters Union – $250,000 –  p. 447

“Require Commerce to make grants of $125,000 from the Wisconsin Development Fund in 2007-08 and 2008-09 to the Painters and Allied Trades District Council 7 of the AFL-CIO for training.”

Just straight taxpayer cash to the AFL-CIO for “training.”  A good one to keep in mind next time you hear that state government is cut to the bone.

Regulation of Elevator Mechanics - p. 450

Again, another licensure requirement that has nothing to do with the budget.  This is typical “fence me in” legislation, whereby an organization will push the Legislature to create a new permit with requirements only they meet.  Thus, their competition either can’t meet the requirements or has to spend a great deal of money to do so.

Diesel Truck Idling Reduction Grant Program – $2,000,000 – p. 453

This program provides grants to companies with diesel trucks to aid them in purchasing “idling reduction units.”

Karner Blue Butterfly Habitat – $20,000 – p. 487

Those lazy butterflies have been mooching off the taxpayers long enough.  Maybe we can get them jobs with the painter’s union.

These, of course, are merely the tip of the iceberg.  There are dozens of local pork projects packed in, costing millions.  It should also be noted that the projects above are bipartisan – many were inserted by the Republican-controlled Assembly, and more were proposed by the Democrat-controlled Senate.

The thing they all have in common is that none of them will be mentioned in any way either in the debate or news coverage of the budget.  (That’s not to fault the media – they obviously need to hit the big themes in the one day before the budget goes to the floor.)Yet this is the budget process to which we provide our consent. 

Last night, the Republican presidential candidates debated in Florida. Finally, the debates are starting to heat up a little bit with candidates sniping at each other.

I am still completely undecided as to which candidate I’ll support. By the time the Wisconsin primary rolls around, it’ll probably be decided for me, anyway. From my perspective, the debate between the candidates is over. The only debate that matters now is the argument each GOP voter will have within themselves to decide how much they can tolerate in each candidate.

That being said, here are my thoughts on the candidates last night:

Mitt Romney: Mitt Romney wants to be president, and he’s willing to say the words “Ronald Reagan” as many times as it takes to make that happen. Watching Romney’s calculated and rehearsed schtick actually makes my skin crawl – I’m 100% convinced that if I vote for him, I’ll get a free set of steak knives in the mail.

Obviously, his big downside is his consistent support for Democratic positions while running for office in Massachusetts. Now he claims he has had an epiphany and recants all of his previous positions. During the debate, he consistently blames all of his lefty positions on having a Democratic legislature. Fortunately, if elected president, he will still be able to blame Ted Kennedy when he signs a bunch of crappy lefty bills.

Fred Thompson’s Skeleton: Thompson is asked whether he’s too lazy to be president. The problem is, he has to be woken up to hear the question. He ticks off a list of his accomplishments, to prove that he’s not lazy. He then collapses from fatigue after going through the whole list. I figure this will be a good strategy the next time my wife accuses me of being lazy – I’ll list all of my lifetime accomplishments starting with the ribbon I received in 3rd grade soccer.

John McCain: It really is a shame McCain has become such a retread. He has a sharp mind and a quick wit, and he is clearly an American military hero. He wins the “line of the night” contest with several pre-rehearsed zingers. Unfortunately, his positions on campaign finance reform and other measures have euthanized his appeal with Republicans. Nobody trusts him – plus, I think a lot of people secretly think he’s too old and in too ill health to serve out a term.

Ron Paul: Time to go make a sandwich.

Duncan Hunter: Answers a question about terrorism in Turkey with an explanation of lasers and missiles in Alaska – which I am 90% sure is the plot of an old “Battlestar Galactica” episode.

Mike Huckabee: Everyone’s favorite Vice Presidential candidate. I really like him – he looks relaxed and confident, and throws in the occasional joke to lighten things up. I would LOVE to support him if he can establish himself as a first-tier candidate, which is a terrible thing to say. It would be like a girl in high school saying she would want to date me if only I were just a little more popular. But I only get one vote.

Tom Tancredo: Ironically, during one of his anti-immigration rants, four Mexicans slipped into the country hiding under his toupee.

Rudy Giuliani: Here’s the tough one for me. How much of his lefty positions am I willing to put up with in order to have someone who can clearly beat Hillary Clinton? (Incidentally, I’m a little uncomfortable with all the GOP derisively referring to her as “Hillary” during the debates – she is, after all, a U.S. Senator, and deserves a modicum of respect, as hard as that may be.)

Abortion is a big one with me. Gay rights, not a big deal. But is Giuliani’s perceived strength in law enforcement and terrorism enough to counterbalance his positions with which I disagree? I think he has great answers about the importance of school choice. He clearly believes strongly in fiscal responsibility and free markets. But am I willing to sacrifice the balance of the Supreme Court for these other principles? I tend to think the Bush presidency has been successful solely because of the Roberts and Alito nominations. I really am torn.

I don’t necessarily buy that Giuliani is the only candidate that can beat Hillary Clinton, but I think he has the best shot. Of course, my opinion and $1.25 will get you a bus ride downtown.

The downturn in the housing market and the credit crunch instigated by poor lending practices have warned of a recession for months now. Some market analysts are now predicting a decrease in real incomes including UW-Madison’s very own Dr. Don Nichols. Recession means that people’s incomes and national production decrease after taking inflation into account. Government budgets are meant to act as natural economic stimuli in times of recession. Unemployment insurance and welfare payments generally increase during recessions while government tax revenues generally decrease across the board. Basically, we see budget deficits in time of recession so that the economy doesn’t stumble too much.

The fact that Wisconsin doesn’t have a budget as of yet could place the state in even more of a fiscal crunch if a recession does occur and the legislature rushes to pass a budget that is fiscally irresponsible. By not passing a budget, the state continues to spend as usual, but does not take into account higher price levels than years past. This prevents Wisconsin from growing. For example, the UW System will not be able to expand and develop their programs since their budgets remain the same even as costs increase. However, this scenario is probably better than a larger budget that requires higher taxes at a time when tax revenues and consumer incomes could possibly fall. What ensues is a large budget deficit, something most Wisconsinites don’t want to see.

So it is my contention that, in the face of possible recession, it is time for Wisconsin to be especially careful with the passing of a fiscally sound budget. If all this extra time results in a more responsible budget, then so be it.

Great news in the Overblown Political Theater department:

Rep. Nelson: Begins sit-in to protest budget impasse
10/18/2007

Contact: Rep. Nelson
608-266-2418 (office)
920-475-6221 (cell)

Democratic Assemblyman to remain in Assembly chambers, ready to work, 24 hours a day 7 days a week until budget passes

MADISON – Rep. Tom Nelson (D-Kaukauna) will begin a sit-in today at 9 a.m. in the Wisconsin State Assembly chambers.

Nelson will remain at his desk, ready to work, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week until a budget proposal is brought to the Assembly and passes both the Assembly and Senate.

The budget is 109 days past due and Wisconsin remains the only state to not have passed a budget.

And this is supposed to speed up the budget?  Who wouldn’t want to see this train wreck evolve for the next month?  I demand full-time coverage on WisconsinEye.  After three weeks, he’ll look like Ron Burgundy after his crash (complete with “milk was a bad choice” moment.)

Next time the Assembly is on the floor, look for introduction of a joint resolution memorializing Tom Nelson to put his shoes back on.  “Mr. Speaker, unanimous consent to have Representative Nelson remove his Doritos from my desk.”

Incidentally, while Nelson plays out this malodorous charade at his desk, he will continue to receive his state paycheck.  Why, you may ask?  Well, because state government is still spending the same amount of money it spent last year.

So, in a show of solidarity, I vow to ridicule Tom Nelson for 24 hours a day until the budget is passed.

I headed down to the Capitol today for the Americans for Prosperity “No Tax Hike” rally. I had read there was going to be a union counter-rally at the same time, so I figured I’d go check it out in case someone got beaten to death with a Hayek book or something.

I got there about 15 minutes before both the rally and counter-rally were scheduled to start. It really felt like a big event, with all the TV cameras and elected officials milling about. There were hundreds of people there – the anti-taxers on the sidewalk in front of the East Wing, with the union demonstrators held back by police tape. Hundreds of union folks were all decked out in their green t-shirts, identifying them as AFSCME members. Union members flooded the Capitol square in their pickup trucks, driving around the loop honking their horns and blowing air horns in order to drown out the speakers (I fully expect the ACLU to intervene to protect AFP’s free speech rights.) Apparently the joke going around the Capitol before the demonstrations started was “looks like the government shutdown started already.”

In fact, most of the union crowd was from local government – firefighters, cops, etc. All decked out in their work uniforms, of course. Let’s just say it would be a bad day to be a kitten in a tree in Greendale today – Buttons better pack a lunch. As a side note, most of their state funding comes from the shared revenue program – which Governor Doyle froze in his most recent “compromise” budget. I eagerly anticipate the union anti-Doyle rally forthcoming. I think that’s scheduled on the same day that Michael Vick is elected president of PETA.

I walked around both sides of the crowd, just people watching. I spotted a news reporter of whom I had been critical in a WPRI post last week, and I felt kind of bad. (Would I have felt bad if she was a man? See the end of this post for the answer!)

I spotted some friends of mine and stopped to chat. Of course, these guys were all wearing ties. As you may know, wearing a tie at a union rally is like wearing a Boy Scout uniform at Neverland Ranch. You’re immediately a target. So these guys had some insults hurled their way, since everyone assumed them to be Republicans.

When the speakers started, I wedged my way up to the front left part of the stage, outside the ropes. It looked too cramped in the anti-tax crowd, so I just laid back in pro-union territory. A woman came up to me and said “can I make this real for you?” I was hoping she had drugs, but I wasn’t that lucky. She started in on her medical problems, how Wisconsin Republicans are trying to repeal the Family and Medical Leave Act, and on and on. Never mind that FMLA is a federal law – what really mattered was that this lumpy guy in the sweater vest was going to hear her damn story, whether he liked it or not.

It wasn’t until Owen Robinson started speaking that the union-led “BULLSHIT” chant really got going. And you wonder how stereotypes get started. I guarantee that at no point anyone thought to chant “we beg to differ!” or “your facts are in dispute!” No, they had to go low. As P.J. O’Rourke once said, “freedom of speech is their own punishment.”

The most puzzling chant I heard from the pro-tax crowd was “DO YOUR JOB!” Naturally, this was in reference to lawmakers having to pass a budget. Yet none of the speakers on stage was a legislator. They started chanting it when Reince Priebus, chair of the state Republican Party, was speaking. Actually, I’m pretty sure Reince was doing exactly what his job entails at that very point. So it’s good that he took their advice.

Someone walked by me with the sign: “BUSH AND HUEBSCH: GASSHOLES.” (Brian Fraley has a picture here.) You are free to come to your own conclusion about how such a sign was formulated, and the self-gratification felt when it was finally completed. Probably much like when Louis Pasteur invented the first rabies vaccine.

The speakers were difficult to hear, but I stuck around to hear Vicki McKenna – knowing she would be unnecessarily provocative. Sure enough, she started out by firing directly at the union crowd – suggesting that they should be thanking the taxpayers for paying them to protest today. Sure, her facts may have been a little “loose,” but she achieved her intended effect, which was to jab a fork in the eye of the counter-protestors. As noted Gasshole George Bush said, “Mission Accomplished.”

After the rally ended and the cameras left, protestors of both sides were left to mill around. Some union folks climbed up on to the stage to have a smoke – which left the ironic image of green-shirted union activists standing in front of a 10-foot high sign that said “NO NEW TAXES.”

(Note that many of the messages in this summary are in all caps – needless to say, protests aren’t necessarily warm to nuance.)

As I was leaving, I noticed one of my friends having a discussion with a female union member. The two women were discussing whether an unflattering picture had been taken of her by my buddy. The union woman was discussing the need to be civil and fair. Oh, and she was wearing a button with a picture of Mike Huebsch that said “AND YOU THOUGHT JOHN GARD WAS AN ASSHOLE.”

Upon reflection, I really thought it was a great event. I’m a big fan of political theater, and there was plenty of it. Despite some of the questionable tactics of the union folks to shout down the speakers, I really don’t mind bare-knuckle politics. I enjoy a good fight – and there it was, for everyone to see. Naturally, the people whose paychecks are dependent on increased taxation were vocal, as they think their jobs are on the line. They will always be more strident than taxpayers, who are more diluted as a group. But this was an old-fashioned confrontation – something I’d like to see more of in the future.

Answer: No.

A groundbreaking new dental procedure:

Embattled Calif. Dentist Says Breast Rubs Necessary

WOODLAND, Calif. — A dentist accused of fondling the breasts of 27 female patients is trying to keep his dental license by arguing that chest massages are an appropriate procedure in certain cases. Mark Anderson’s lawyer says dental journals discuss the need to massage the pectoral muscles to treat a common jaw problem.

Police say Anderson said during recorded phone calls that he routinely massaged patients’ chests to treat temporo-mandibular joint disorder, or TMJ, which causes neck and head pain. Attorney Robert Zaro told administrative law judge Jonathan Lew at a hearing Thursday that he should let Anderson keep his dental license while disciplinary appeals proceed. Anderson would be supervised by two assistants and would no longer do the chest rubs, Zaro said.

[...]

Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Phillips gave Lew three new complaints, including one from a 31-year-old woman who said Anderson fondled her at least six times over two years.

She took to wearing tight shirts with high necklines, “and Anderson would still get in under her shirt and bra,” according to a police report.

I would love to see the dental school textbook that prescribes a little under-the-shirt action as a cure for TMJ.

Furthermore, this woman says she was fondled six times over two years? After you go to the dentist once and he puts his hand up your shirt and starts groping you, wouldn’t that maybe be a red flag that something might be awry? So on the sixth time, she said “you know, maybe my dentist should be wearing pants?”

And where were these 26 other women while this was all going on? Apparently, he got away with this for quite a while.

I’d hate to see how he gives fillings.

Ever since the digital revolution started more than a decade ago, Milwaukee has not grown nearly as fast as other cities in the country. Some people thought it was a problem with Wisconsin. However, Madison and other cities like Eau Claire have grown substantially faster than Milwaukee. Specifically, Madison’s biotechnology industry has fueled its expansion in recent years while Milwaukee’s once powerful manufacturing industry dwindled and became a liability. Although Milwaukee is slowly making a comeback, Madison is still chugging along at growth rates that are, at times, three times the size of Milwaukee’s. So is it safe to say that Madison’s economy, now grown to 40% the size of Milwaukee’s, could be the economic leader of Wisconsin in the future?

Madison does have the tools in place to be a contender, primarily a great educational infrastructure. Milwaukee is only now realizing the importance of education in maintaining economic clout and is now starting to push support behind its universities. However its public school system, MPS, does not provide Milwaukee’s universities with an abundance of good students which limits the synergies and benefits that would arise from a private sector / university partnership. Madison has this partnership and is a big reason for its relatively huge success in recent years.

So is Milwaukee finished as Wisconsin’s powerhouse? Should we start looking to Madison for guidance and hope? Not quite yet. But if Milwaukee’s schools don’t shape up, Madison may be the front-runner sooner than we expect.

As the state budget drags along over 100 days past due, you’ll hear all kinds of rhetoric about how much damage the late budget is doing to the state.  In fact, the most damaging consequence the late budget has wrought upon our state is terrible political commentary.

Take this editorial by Neil Heinen of Madison’s Channel 3.  In bemoaning the late budget, Heinen says:

The Wisconsin State Legislature has become dysfunctional, ineffectual, and counter-productive. It is an embarrassment and it is harming the state’s reputation and image. And the few good public servants in its ranks can do nothing. It is time for fundamental change.

The most important change will only come with reform of the redistricting process and the way campaigns are financed. Currently, government is pretty much run by rabidly partisan legislative staff members whose jobs are basically to cater to special interest money and keep it flowing. There is no longer even a façade of caring for the interests of the citizens of this state or responsible public policy. Cash and reelection are all that matter.

However, those changes are a ways off yet. In the meantime, there must be limits placed on the ineptitude we allow during the biennial budget process. The system has to change. The best idea we’ve heard is from University of Wisconsin professor John Sharpless who suggests giving the Legislature 90 days to pass a budget. If it fails, dissolve the Legislature and hold new elections. Would that we could to that today.

So he hits all the usual lefty talking points – the budget is being held up because of fundraising, legislators are too partisan, and on and on.  (I attempted to debunk the whole “fundraising is holding up the budget” talking point here.)  It’s funny that he says legislators have given up on caring for the people – I would think that Assembly Republicans believe strongly that dodging $1 billion in new taxes helps regular people quite a bit.  Conversely, Democrats likely thought their universal health care plan (which held the budget up for months) helps people with no health insurance a great deal.

The real kicker here is his solution to the whole budget impasse.  Sure, let’s just throw the Legislature out 90 days after a budget is due.  You don’t think Judy Robson (the Senate Democratic Majority Leader) wouldn’t want a new election right now?  The Assembly is barely in Republican control, and would likely flip to the Democrats.  So if one party were in control of one house and wanted to take a shot at gaining a majority in the other house, delaying a budget would be the most sensible thing to do.

Furthermore, he actually thinks holding an election during a budget is going to lessen the influence of money on the political process?  If anything, fundraising influence would explode during a mid-budget election.  So let’s recap – campaigns are bad, so in order to clean up the budget process, we need to have more of them.  Maybe in order to stop sex predators, we should just let them babysit more often.

I realize giving this half-baked plan even a minute’s worth of thought is a waste of time.  But asking our media to think through what they say shouldn’t really be too much to ask.  Instead, we get obnoxious coverage by people incapable of stringing together a coherent point.

According to this New York Times article, African-American women are having trouble deciding which meaningless characteristic means more to them in a presidential candidate: race or sex.

When reading the article, one expects interviews with black women who can’t decide whether Barack Obama’s race or Hillary Clinton’s sex makes more of a difference when deciding which candidate to support.  In fact, hairdresser Clara Vereen, the star of the article, actually gives reasons why not to support each:

Part of being real, said Ms. Vereen, whom everyone calls Miss Clara, is worrying that a black president would not be safe.

“I fear that they just would kill him, that he wouldn’t even have a chance,” she said as she styled a customer’s hair with a curling iron. One way to protect him, she suggested, would be not to vote for him.

I wouldn’t even begin to try to explain the African-American community’s feelings toward Obama – but this seems bizarre.  The best way to protect his life would be to refuse to vote for him?  In a way, this is ridiculous – but on the other hand, it unmasks the deep distrust of whites that still boils below the surface in the South.  How is Obama supposed to pick up traction if blacks either don’t believe white Americans will vote for an African-American, or that they will kill him if he’s elected? 

Clara says about Hillary Clinton:

“We always love Hillary because we love her husband,” Ms. Vereen said. Then she paused. Much of the chitchat in her shop is about whether a woman could or should be president.

“A man is supposed to be the head,” she said. “I feel like the Lord has put man first, and I believe in the Bible.”

So rather than being an article about how the positive aspects of sex and race might pull black female voters in certain directions, it actually exposes the fact that gender and color might actually work against both candidates in some aspects.  It was probably a surprise to the New York Times that many of the women to whom they spoke didn’t fall into a neat category, as the headline suggested.

The underlying theme of the article, I think, is the unexpected complexity voters have in their attitudes towards candidates.  It’s not a case of “I’m voting for Obama because he’s black” or “I’m voting for Hillary because she’s a woman.”  There are reasons – no matter how unrealistic – that people support candidates, and they don’t necessarily conform to traditional views of identity politics.