Christian Schneider

Author, Columnist

Month: June 2008 (page 2 of 2)

Never Underestimate the Heart of a Champion

\"\"\"\"

Monday was an epic day for golf, as two events took place that will forever change the course of golf history. In one event, a golfer was crowned champion after years of dedication and hard work, earning the praise and adulation he so richly deserves, and forever altering the way children and their parents think about the sport. In the other event, Tiger Woods won the U.S. Open. (Yawn.)

In case you haven\’t yet seen highlights on ESPN, yours truly netted the lowest score in the Monona Municipal Golf Course men\’s Monday night league this week. This is about as likely as John Daly being named \”Sexiest Man Alive.\” Sure, Tiger won one of the most exciting major tournaments in history, and sure, he gets a big trophy and millions of dollars for his efforts. But I feel I have won the coveted \”trophy within.\”

My golfing history is a long and sordid one. I actually played a lot as a kid, even making my high school golf team. (Thus, I can say I played \”three sports\” and sound as legitimate as all the guys who played football, baseball, and basketball. I played golf, baseball and basketball.) At some point after high school though, I put down the clubs for a decade. I just couldn\’t handle the stress of the game and suffered a David Duval-style meltdown. Those who have played with me will tell you that my language on the course has probably earned me a full years\’ worth of rosaries when I finally get around to going to confession. At one point, I threw three of my clubs up in a tree at the Mee-Kwon golf course north of Milwaukee. But that\’s another story for another time.

What\’s important now is that my game is starting to come around. Nobody is happier to see this than the golf courses themselves. In my golfing career, I have probably single-handedly undone most of Gaylord Nelson\’s environmental achievements with the damage my golf game has wrought on Wisconsin\’s sensitive habitats.

Of course, nobody\’s going to confuse me for Tiger Woods just yet. But in a strange way, I think watching as much of the U.S. Open as I did actually helped me. I realized that even the best players in the world don\’t hit perfect shots every time, and that helped me relax. Of course, my ample handicap helped, too – but every stroke of that was earned, given how poorly I had played in the past couple of weeks.

There\’s so many people to thank for this achievement, but I would be remiss if I didn\’t first credit myself for all my hard work, dedication, and willingness to starve my children so I have more money for greens fees. Imagine how hard it is on me when my starving little children come up to me, begging for bread crumbs. It just breaks my heart when I have to push them away and say \”maybe next week.\”

And if I may, I\’d like to offer some words of encouragement to the other golfers in my league – keep practicing, and maybe one day, you will get to touch the trophy. Until then, I plan on being insufferable. (I told my wife I beat a bunch of scratch golfers, and she said I should fit right in, since I scratch myself all the time.)

Mini-Brewers Rant

With the possible exception of those who root for the Washington Generals, does any other team\’s fans get their hearts broken harder and more frequently than Brewer fans?

Like the most naive Obama supporter – and that\’s really saying something – I am full of hope every spring. But 2008 was going to be the year for change. HOPE: Brewers finally have it all coming together in 2008. Solid pitching. Explosive offense. CHANGE: This is the year the Brewers finally make the playoffs. Yes we can.

But every year, disasters both expected and unexpected come together to tube the season. And tonight\’s game had plenty of that.

Rewind a couple hours. Brewers up 3-1. Now its 3-2. Now its tied at 3. Now we\’re down 4-3 in 9th. Stomach queasy. Cubs won already today. Brewers can\’t afford to fall further behind in the division. Slow dread of watching another lead slip away as what should be a great hitting Brewer team can\’t score runs again. Compounding the indignity is watching Twins fans acting like they own Miller Park.

Bottom of the ninth. Two outs. Russell the Muscle Branyan comes in to pinch hit. It\’s the scenario you fantasize about as a kid ever since you take your first cut in a t-ball game. Tape-measure blast. Home run. Crowd goes wild. Tie game. Extra innings.

After escaping in the top half of the frame, its now the bottom of the tenth. Prince Fielder connects to center and deep. His follow-through is a high, one-handed flourish that you\’ve seen dozens of times. Will this game-winning homer be the turning point of the season? Will this homer rank with now-third base coach Dale Sveum\’s Easter Sunday 1987 walk-off dinger that still gives me goose bumps just talking about it? Get up, get up, get…one #@%*ing inch away from outta here.
\"\"

Prince \”Veggies\” Fielder missed the glorious game-winning home run by a McNugget. I will go to my grave convinced that a shake of Baco\’s on the salad he ate for lunch today would have given him the extra protein oomph needed to get that ball over the fence. This was the chance to win it and I don\’t need to belabor what happens next.

In a patented move, Yost sticks with a tiring reliever too long and the Brewers are now down two runs. (Upon further review, this is unfair. Yost barely had anyone left in the bullpen and he couldn\’t know how long he\’d need to stretch it in a tied game.) Anyway, whatever. Twins tack on a few more and win 9-4.

All I want is to live to see one Brewers World Series victory – but I\’d be almost as thrilled with a back-in-on-the-last-day-and-then-get-swept wild card bid. The Packers could never win another game, but I\’ll always have Super Bowl XXXI. 1996 might as well have been last week the way I remember that season. Will there ever be such a season for the Crew?

Brewers, you\’re breaking my heart. Watching you is not good for my health. I have officially sworn you off until 1 pm tomorrow.

Behind Enemy Lines

So I figure if my position as \”citizen journalist\” means anything, I should be willing to experience things to which no man would ever willingly subject himself, then report on it. Which is why on Friday night I agreed to watch \”27 Dresses\” with my wife. Almost as if I was embedding myself with the female gender, like a war correspondent.

First of all, the Brewers were getting hammered, so it\’s not like I was giving up a lot. Plus, you could do a lot worse than watching Katherine Heigl for an hour and a half. And as busy as she is cleaning up after me and the kids, my wife doesn\’t get a whole lot of chances to do \”girly\” stuff. So I agreed to suck it up and go along – which I kind of had to do, since I picked the last movie, \”I Want Someone to Eat Cheese With.\”

\"\"The first thing you need to know about this movie is that it\’s pure science fiction. It\’s one of these flicks where Katherine Heigl somehow manages to get into her 30s without having a single meaningful relationship – which is preposterous, because Kate is other-worldy hot. This movie makes \”Kung Fu Panda\” look like a Ken Burns documentary.

It\’s also one of these movies where everyone is either a newspaper columnist about love issues (seriously, there have to be maybe three of these people in America), or works at a high-powered ad agency. And for effect, they throw in that it\’s an \”eco-friendly\” ad agency, at that. Barf. At one point, Heigl\’s character\’s sister really hits rock bottom and has to go get a job designing hand bags. It\’s absolutely true.

Anyway, eventually she falls for some marriage columnist, who – gasp! – actually has some misgivings about marriage. Of course, this guy doesn\’t make a single humorous or insightful comment throughout the entire movie – yet, somehow, he is the guy that this woman finally falls in love with. That\’s what\’s frustrating about movies in general – people don\’t really talk the way they do in real life. Think about it – those are the times when you laugh the most. When you\’re with friends discussing things that come completely out of the blue. But, sadly, your regular conversations don\’t serve the purpose of moving the plot along. Anyway, all this guy has going for him is that he\’s (I guess) good looking, although he has a weird haircut that clearly is meant to draw attention away from his big ears.

So Heigl\’s character\’s sister falls in love with Heigl\’s boss by pretending she\’s a vegetarian and into the outdoors and animals and stuff. But Heigl is secretly in love with her boss (the columnist comes later), so she sets out to ruin her sister\’s engagement by telling her boss the truth about her sister. So at the rehearsal dinner, to \”out\” her sister, she shows a slide show that shows a picture of her sister eating ribs and being afraid of a dog that it appears is attacking her. Naturally, despite being engaged for what seems like months, the boss immediately calls the engagement off, given the horror of seeing an old picture of his future wife eating meat. I can only imagine what my wife would have said if she had seen me attacking the pan of Rice Krispie treats she made this week.

The rest of the movie is pretty irrelevant. Trust me, you know where the whole thing is going 5 minutes in. Heigl\’s acting is somewhat hit or miss, but I was actually surprised in some spots where she was kind of funny. (Oh, and did I mention she was hot?)

So I don\’t have any grading system, but whatever it is, this movie gets two of them.

And as long as I\’m on movies, here are my grades for some I\’ve seen recently:

I Want Someone to Eat Cheese With – B plus. A cute, funny movie that\’s almost like a chick flick for fat guys in their \’30s.

The Assassination of Jesse James By the Coward Robert Ford
– A. Really slow moving, and certainly not for everyone. But I loved how it unfolded, and the last third is really thought-provoking. And I didn\’t even know Brad Pitt was in it until I started watching it.

Michael Clayton – B minus. Entertaining, but a goofy lefty anti-big business fantasy. Certainly the cops wouldn\’t be smart enough to figure it out when all the attorneys working on a case relating to this chemical company start dying. I\’m still waiting for the big Hollywood movie where some poor woman gets breast cancer, then gets the treatment she needs and beats it because of the insurance benefits provided by her employer. I imagine that happens ten thousand times more often than the scenario in this movie, where some chemical kills over 200 people. (Incidentally, if a company made a chemical that killed two people, it would go under. If someone found a rat head in a Wendy\’s frosty, they\’d have to spend millions of dollars to stay afloat – much less killing hundreds of people.)

Before the Devil Knows You\’re Dead
– B minus. Begins with a completely superfluous sex scene with Marisa Tomei, who is naked through the entire movie. That\’s worth a whole letter grade. But there are three major movie cliches in this film that must be addressed:

1. In movies, whenever someone pours themself a drink, it\’s always scotch, straight up. You never see someone mix their whiskey or scotch with anything. How many people do you actually know that drink this way?

2. In movies, whenever someone is watching television, they are always watching something that no reasonable human would watch. They\’re always watching Looney Tunes or some kung fu movie or something.

3. In movies, when someone points a gun at someone else, the victim always either gives a long speech, or says \”just go ahead and do it.\” As if, somehow, they have spent their lives perfecting the speech they\’re going to give when someone finally sticks a gun in their face. Needless to say, if someone pointed a gun at me, they would hear a lot of crying and pleading for my life. I would not go out like a man. If they shot me, they\’d have to shoot a whimpering, sad little man.

Lars and the Real Girl: B. This one really divides people – but I tend to be on the more favorable side. Plus, any movie that brings mustaches back is welcome in my book.

Educator of the Year

Teacher Banned for Classroom Strip

supply teacher was asked to leave a secondary school after removing his shirt in front of a class of 13 and 14-year-old pupils, education authority officials said today.

The incident at Sudbury Upper School in Sudbury, Suffolk, in April was filmed by a pupil on a mobile phone and footage broadcast on internet website YouTube.

Education authority Suffolk County Council said the man was asked to leave the school and the agency which supplied him informed.

\”It is not the case that children were put at any risk,\” said a council spokesman. \”But the school felt his behaviour inappropriate.\”

In the 40-second YouTube footage the teacher is seen to remove his shirt and point to his left bicep – as girls and boys giggle and scream – before getting dressed again.

Wisconsin’s Third Party Animals

On the evening of November 5, 2002, the election results began to roll in. A rainy election day had come to wash away the grime from an often-brutal gubernatorial race in Wisconsin, which had seen the candidates refer to each other as “crooked” and “absolutely disreputable.” Incumbent Republican Governor Scott McCallum, who had been in office scarcely two years, faced a strong challenge from long-time Democratic Attorney General Jim Doyle. The race was a crucial turning point for Wisconsin, as it represented the first time in sixteen years iconic Governor Tommy Thompson was not on the ballot.

Merely a year earlier, Republican officials could only have dreamed about Doyle pulling a paltry 45% of the vote on election night. McCallum had suffered in Thompson’s shadow after Tommy had left to be Secretary of Health and Human Services in the Bush Administration. McCallum, saddled with a large budget deficit, sought to cut spending to local governments to make up the difference. Naturally, local officials, many of them Republicans, appeared all too willing to defenestrate McCallum in favor of the Democrat.

Yet on election night, Doyle’s poor showing did little to cheer up the GOP faithful. While the Democrat had fallen well short of the magic 50% mark, McCallum had pulled in a woeful 41%, losing to Doyle by nearly 66,000 votes. For the first time in sixteen years, Wisconsin would be led by a Democrat – and a long time bitter Thompson foe, at that.

The reason both major candidates together could only muster 86% of the total vote could be found in bucolic Tomah, Wisconsin (pop. 8,400). Former boxer, professional card player, tavern owner, and Tomah Mayor Ed Thompson had decided a year earlier to run for Governor in 2002. Thompson, a short, stout man with glasses so thick they looked like they could plausibly protect him from a bullet, had signed on with the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin in order to make his third party charge toward the state’s highest office. His sole qualification for the office of governor appeared to be that he once emerged from the same womb as his brother, Governor Tommy Thompson.

Thompson’s 2002 run for governor represented a perfect storm for a third party candidacy in Wisconsin. The Legislature was in the midst of a scandal that eventually led to leaders of both houses being convicted of felonies for crimes such as extortion, bribery, and using state offices for fundraising. The economic downturn of 2001 left voters skeptical of either party’s ability to deal with their financial troubles. By September 2002, 45 percent of Wisconsin residents felt the state was on the wrong track, up from 20 percent only three years earlier. Seventy-five percent of citizens believed lobbyists had more say in how the government spent money than voters did.

Of course, Thompson’s last name didn’t hurt either. As the brother of the state’s most beloved political figure, Ed Thompson had immediate name recognition throughout the state. Plus, it’s not entirely impossible that some voters may have actually confused Ed Thompson with his famous brother. Confusion over names at the polls isn’t exactly unprecedented—it is believed by some historians that Wisconsin’s first African-American legislator, Lucien Palmer, was elected in 1906 because voters confused him with another political Palmer, who was white. Lucien Palmer only lasted one two-year term, which may have been just enough time for voters to figure out their “mistake.”

Perhaps the most famous example of mistaken identity in Wisconsin politics occurred in 1970, when a Sheboygan gas station attendant Robert A. Zimmerman ran as a Democrat for the position of secretary of state. At the time, the incumbent secretary of state happened to be a popular Republican, Robert C. Zimmerman. Robert A. Zimmerman, who wasn’t allowed to speak during the campaign by his mentor Edmond Hou-Seye, won the Democratic primary against up-and-comer Tom Fox, presumably because voters confused him with the incumbent secretary. (Fox went on to become commissioner of insurance in Wisconsin.) Zimmerman, the mute gas station attendant, went on to lose to Zimmerman the secretary of state. Hou-Seye went on to run several ill-fated races for statewide office himself, coining the phrase “journalism is the science of distortion” along the way.

Wisconsin historically has been a sanctuary for third parties. It was in Wisconsin where Robert M. LaFollette, Jr. split the Progressive Party off from the GOP in 1934. That year, the Progressives won a landslide of state offices, including Philip LaFollette winning the governor’s office for the first time as a Progressive candidate. Milwaukee famously elected three Socialist mayors in the first half of the twentieth century, the only major city in the U.S. to have done so.

In recent years, third parties in Wisconsin have continued to affect statewide elections. In 2000, Vice President Al Gore defeated Texas Governor George W. Bush by 5,708 votes in Wisconsin. Gore’s margin of victory was actually less than the 6,640 Wisconsin votes cast for Libertarian Harry Browne for president in that same election. In the 2000 election, third party presidential votes numbered 116,445 in Wisconsin—nearly 20 times the size of Gore’s margin of victory. Everyone remembers the vote count debacle and subsequent court action in Florida following that presidential election, yet that charade would not have occurred had a small fraction of third party voters in Wisconsin shifted their votes to George W. Bush.

Strong third party voting in Wisconsin held true to form in 2004, when Senator John Kerry beat Bush by 11,384 votes. In that election, Wisconsin saw 26,397 votes cast for third party candidates. While well below the 2000 third party vote (due mostly to a drastically diminished Ralph Nader effort), the third party total still greatly exceeded the final margin of victory for Kerry.

Naturally, Ed Thompson wasn’t the only third party candidate in the field in 2002. Thompson was joined by 34-year-old Aneb Jah Rasta Sensas-Utcha Nefer-I, who insisted that he was already governor of Wisconsin. “I was born to rule, because God’s judgment will judge all unrighteousness,” said Sensas-Utcha, a native of Milwaukee. “I’m the damn governor of the State of Wisconsin.” To back up this claim, Sensas-Utcha pointed to several bills regarding E Coli that he had passed earlier. Unfortunately, he was unable to describe the details of this important legislation, claiming the press might be able to use it against him. Despite his previous hypothetical electoral success, Sensas-Utcha was only able to muster 929 votes statewide in November.

Thompson was also joined as a third party gubernatorial candidate by Mike Mangan, who campaigned wearing a gorilla suit. Mangan, a self-employed energy consultant from Waukesha, waged what he called a “guerilla attack against state spending.” Mangan criticized the state’s “King Kong deficit,” which is quite a coincidence since he happened to own a gorilla mask. (Fortunately for Mangan, the deficit wasn’t the size of a turtle, as he would have had to scramble for a new costume.) Mangan was actually a fan of Ed Thompson’s run, seeing it as a breakthrough for third parties in future races, saying, “I think he’s opening doors.”

These independent candidates represent only a small sliver of the colorful history of third party politicians in Wisconsin. In 1974, flamboyant West Milwaukee used car dealer James Groh legally changed his name to “Crazy Jim” to run for governor as an independent. Crazy Jim was a staunch advocate of legalized gambling, and frequently spun a tale of how he once played cards with Frank Sinatra in Las Vegas. At the time, the concept of legal gambling in Wisconsin seemed to be far-fetched—yet Crazy Jim turned out to be a visionary, as Wisconsin adopted a state lottery and welcomed almost unlimited Indian casino gambling by the 1990s. Crazy Jim lost to incumbent Patrick Lucey 629,000 votes to 12,100; but his family said he took solace throughout his life in the fact that he carried Waushara County. (Although he did not—records show he only garnered 47 votes in Waushara County, which placed him a distant fifth.) Crazy Jim died in 2002 of a heart attack.

In Madison, self-described “futurist” Richard H. Anderson has run for numerous offices, including state assembly, mayor, and city council. Anderson routinely ran on an “anti-mind control” platform, believing the government had planted a cybernetic chip in his brain. A self-described bisexual, Anderson fought for better treatment of minorities and, as a surprise to exactly no one, for legalized marijuana. “Just because I’m a pot head doesn’t mean I’m not qualified to hold office,” he once said. Unfortunately, the government rarely used mind control to direct voters to vote for him, as he once mustered a scant six votes in a race for the state Assembly against now-Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin. Naturally, the Progressive Capital Times newspaper said Anderson had “made a good impression.”

(One has to wonder what a debate between a “pro-mind control” and “anti-mind control” candidate is like. Presumably, the “anti” candidate would get up to speak, the “pro” candidate would glare and point his finger at them, and the “anti” candidate would sheepishly sit back down without saying a word.)

Yet the candidacy of Ed Thompson in 2002 represented a breakthrough for independent candidates, who had previously been relegated to the scrap heap of oddities, curiosities, and also-rans. In early 2001, Thompson was a man without a party. Without the backing of a more established third party, a Thompson candidacy could have been viewed as a fringe endeavor and may have lost traction quickly.

Early that year, Thompson met with notorious independent Governor Jesse “The Body” Ventura of Minnesota, who had been carried by his nationwide wrestling fame to victory in 1998. (Thompson would later joke that he should be called Ed “The Belly.”) The meeting was arranged by Bob Collison, leader of the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin. Soon thereafter, Thompson signed on as the official Libertarian candidate for governor of Wisconsin. It was a symbiotic relationship—the Libertarian tag gave Thompson the legitimacy his campaign needed, while Thompson gave the Libertarians a big enough name to finally make a splash in state politics.

Yet there remained an internecine struggle within the party between Libertarians who fundamentally subscribed to the Libertarian principles of limited government and those looking for statewide legitimacy in the electoral process. Clearly, Ed Thompson wasn’t a dyed-in-the-wool Libertarian, although he espoused many of the dangers of government police powers. In the late 1990s, Thompson’s Tee Pee supper club was raided by authorities and four nickel slot machines were confiscated. He refused to cut a deal and plead guilty, and the charges were dropped when the county district attorney was voted out of office over the raid. Thompson said that one of his motivations for running for governor was to beat then-Attorney General Jim Doyle, whom he believes had ordered the raid on the Tee Pee.

However, this desire for deregulated gambling alone wasn’t enough to make him a Libertarian. As mayor of Tomah, Thompson governed as if he were any mayor of any small town in Wisconsin. His gubernatorial platform included more environmental regulation to preserve Wisconsin’s natural spaces and more money for the University of Wisconsin system. Thompson’s supporters bred more distrust among philosophical libertarians when they bitterly complained about Thompson not receiving enough public tax money to run his campaign—a concept anathema to those truly interested in restricting government spending.

Furthermore, as his running mate, Thompson signed up retiring Democratic Assembly Representative and former Ladysmith Mayor Marty Reynolds. While Reynolds described himself as socially liberal and fiscally conservative, throughout his twelve years as a representative he represented a reliable vote for Assembly Democrats when they sought to expand taxes and spending. Yet, as is required of Northern Democrats in Wisconsin, Reynolds was staunchly in favor of individual rights with regard to firearms and property. Before picking him as his running mate, Thompson said he had never actually met Reynolds—he had only read an editorial the representative had written decrying the “corruption” at the State Capitol. Thompson praised Reynolds’ experience as a legislator, saying he would be an “active participant” in his administration, instead of “playing basketball all the time”—a thinly veiled shot at McCallum, who was known for his hard court wizardry during his brother’s administration.

On November 15, 2001, at the State Capitol, Thompson officially announced his candidacy for governor of Wisconsin. He posited himself as the everyman candidate, saying:

I am no big time Charlie. I’m just a common hard-working man who is dedicated to serving the hard-working people of Wisconsin. I’m a fighter. I’ve been in the ring many times as a boxer and there is nothing I like better than a good fight. This is the biggest fight of my life, and I plan on winning it.

Having announced he was running, it was time for Thompson to mobilize his supporters. This included Libertarian Party of Wisconsin President Bob Collison, who had introduced Thompson to Jesse Ventura. Collison had recently garnered press attention for his opposition to the U.S. Census, believing the questions asked on their survey were too personal. (Collison would later leave the Libertarian Party to make an unsuccessful run for the Wisconsin State Assembly.)

Also in the mix was Wisconsin Libertarian Vice Chair Rolf Lindgren, who in November 2003 was accused of stealing $50 out of a bar apron at the Irish Waters Tavern in Madison. After being accused of stealing the cash, Lindgren was arrested for his fourth drunk driving violation. At his trial, he pleaded insanity, testifying that the stress caused by the police accusations related to the Irish Waters incident caused him to blow a .23 on the breathalyzer (11 times the legal limit for someone with three prior drunk driving arrests).

Lindgren also said he was feeling anxiety over appearing in a documentary about Ed Thompson’s life the next morning, and suggested that his arrest was retribution for his attempt to recall Jim Doyle from the governor’s office. Said Lindgren, “it doesn’t really matter why they [filed charges]. What really matters is that they did do it. If I were a black person, I’d be charging racism. What are they saying, all white people look alike?”

The charge against Lindgren for stealing the $50 from the tavern was dropped, as the Dane County District Attorney said the prosecuting attorney needed more time to prosecute the drunk driving charge. In 2006, a jury rejected Lindgren’s insanity plea and he was sentenced to five months in jail for driving while intoxicated.

With his campaign team mobilized, Thompson hit the road in his beat-up, 20-year-old motor home. In the week following his campaign announcement, he visited Waukesha, Wausau, Superior, Eau Claire, and Sparta. On the trail, Thompson’s policy agenda began to round into shape. He espoused the benefits of lower taxes and more local government control. He pushed for legalization of marijuana and for the release of nonviolent felons from prison. He argued for term limits that would limit governors and legislators to eight years in office.

However, Thompson most often used what he thought was his most powerful talking point—that government was corrupt and it was time for a third party candidate to change it. Eventually, discussion of policy issues merely faded into the background in favor of his corruption speech. When Thompson launched his first radio ads in April 2002, they focused on the ongoing criminal investigation of the Legislature. “Our state government is being tarnished by corruption,” Thompson boomed in the ad. “Enough is enough. It’s time to put the people’s interests above special interests. We need common sense and accountability in government,” he said.

At one point in May 2002, students at a campaign appearance at Rice Lake High School asked Thompson what a Libertarian was. “It means you have the right to live your life as you want, as long as you don’t physically hurt someone and no one physically hurts you,” he said. “It takes the business attitude of the Republican Party and the social attitude of the Democratic Party and improves them,” he added.

Later that day, at Bob’s Grill in Rice Lake, an 81-year-old patron asked Thompson what life was like in Washington D.C. “No, that’s my brother,” Ed Thompson politely replied. He then mentioned that he’s three years younger but ten years smarter than Tommy, and definitely better looking.

As the campaign wound into the oppressive Wisconsin summer months, Thompson was able to set himself apart from the other candidates in one regard: his yard and highway campaign signs seemed to outnumber his opponents’ by a fifty-to-one ratio. By September, Thompson had 850 large highway signs and 9,000 yard signs out the door. Thompson’s close ties to the Wisconsin Tavern League virtually guaranteed a black and yellow Ed Thompson sign would be in front of every bar in the state. In rural Wisconsin, those bars are often the centers of civic debate. Tommy Thompson’s exploits in local bars are often credited with catapulting him to statewide recognition. It seemed his little brother may be able to capture a little of the same plainspoken magic.

Meanwhile, the race between the major party candidates raged ahead. McCallum ran a television ad that accused Attorney General Doyle of being “crooked” for not aggressively pursuing corruption in the Legislature. Doyle volunteers held a “bingo party” at a Kenosha home for the developmentally disabled where there also conveniently happened to be absentee ballots available for residents to fill out on site.

As election day grew nearer, Thompson was finding it harder and harder to take his “common man” message to the voters. For one, he was having difficulty working his way into debates, which required a candidate to earn six percent of the total vote in the primary. Since Thompson ran unopposed in the Libertarian primary, he didn’t garner enough votes. He argued, accurately, that rather than waste their vote on him, his supporters likely voted in the contested primaries between the major candidates.

Eventually, Thompson filed a complaint with the State Elections Board, arguing his exclusion amounted to an illegal campaign contribution to the major candidates. He lost the complaint, but went on to take part in minor debates throughout October. Finally, on October 29th, he participated in a debate broadcast statewide. But by that point, the race between Doyle and McCallum had turned bitter and personal, and Thompson was left without much time to speak between the bickering.

When the dust settled on election night a week later, Thompson had received 10.5% of the vote. While it wasn’t nearly enough to win, it was the largest percentage any third party candidate for governor had received in sixty years. Watching the results at the Tee Pee, Thompson seemed upbeat. “We changed the face of politics in Wisconsin,” he beamed, adding, “We’ve made the third party viable.” Furthermore, reaching the 10% vote level meant that the Libertarian Party would be validated by having an official representative on the State Elections Board.

Thompson’s supporters, however, were confused as to why their candidate didn’t fare better. Following the election, Rolf Lindgren wrote an editorial claiming that Ed Thompson hadn’t been beaten by the voters; he had instead been beaten by the polls. In the column (in which he listed his credential as “1986 UW-Madison Mathematics Graduate,”) Lindgren expressed disbelief that Thompson only received 10.5% of the vote, when a poll prior to the election had Thompson’s approval rating at 39%. Since a candidate merely had to receive 34% to win the three-way election, Lindgren was confused as to why Thompson wasn’t able to garner enough support to emerge victorious. Apparently, he was unaware that approval ratings measure a candidate’s popularity against only themselves, while actual elections pit candidates against each other.

Lindgren went on to argue, as only a 1986 mathematics graduate could, that polls published during the campaign that showed Thompson with single digit support actually depressed his popularity. Lindgren believed the polls showing (accurately, as it turned out) Thompson with little support drove away individuals that normally would have been supporters. “In hindsight, if he had done a few more polls at key moments, and put out a few more polls-related press releases, he might have won the election,” said Lindgren.

The debate still rages in Wisconsin about whether Ed Thompson handed the state over to Jim Doyle by stealing votes from McCallum. Conventional wisdom tells us that since Libertarians are further to the right, they steal votes from Republicans. Thus, the GOP immediately groused that Thompson’s 10.5% vote total may have swung the race to the incumbent Governor had “Fightin’ Ed” not run.

The numbers seem to indicate that, even had Thompson not run, a McCallum victory would have been a long shot. When Thompson’s 185,000 votes are divided up, McCallum would have had to win 67.7% of them to overcome Doyle’s 66,000-vote margin. While it is true that Thompson did extremely well in GOP-dominated counties like his home Monroe County (Thompson 45%, McCallum 27%, Doyle 26%), Thompson also pulled substantial votes out of the city of Madison, likely due to his support for legalized marijuana. (It is estimated Thompson received 100% of the vote from the much sought-after “dudes who make late night trips to Taco Bell” demographic.)

Additionally, rather than merely being a Libertarian, Ed Thompson was a once-in-a-generation cult of personality. There’s no evidence that his votes were from people who lean Libertarian. It’s possible his votes were comprised of voters sick of the two parties generally and who recognized his family name as a safe haven for their vote. His addition of Marty Reynolds to the ticket may have made it even easier for Democrats to vote for him.

On the other hand, it is possible that Thompson pulled more votes from Republicans than Democrats. Aside from the votes on election day, Thompson’s entry into the race drew other types of resources away from the major candidates—he was able to raise and spend over $400,000, which may have favored McCallum, had Thompson not been able to get his hands on it. Furthermore, the curiosity of Thompson’s campaign took up media time that may have changed the face of the race had he not been in it (although given the press McCallum was getting at the time, it might have been better for him to get less coverage throughout the campaign).

Whether Ed Thompson gift-wrapped the 2002 election for Democrat Jim Doyle, we can never really know (although Doyle did defeat a strong Republican challenger, Republican Congressman Mark Green, in 2006). What we do know is that third parties in Wisconsin are a force to be reckoned with. While many regard third parties as a motley group of political nutballs, they have what the major candidates need—votes.

Given the proclivity of Wisconsin voters to cast their ballots for a third party, the 2008 presidential election could hinge on how well candidates relate to these third party voters. With Wisconsin’s traditional razor-thin margins of victory, the major candidate who appeals most to third party voters could be the one who emerges victorious. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama need to tap into the wealth of Wisconsin votes that could easily stray into third party territory. With big names like Former Congressman (and star of “Borat”) Bob Barr running as a Libertarian, Former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney seeking the Green Party nomination, and Ralph Nader doing whatever it is he does, independent voters could very well decide Wisconsin, and therefore the presidency.

In 2005, three years after his gubernatorial run, Ed Thompson was elected to the city council back in Tomah. The problem was, he didn’t know he was running. Thompson had benefited from a write-in vote effort of which he was unaware. After receiving 31 of 34 votes, he begrudgingly took office. In 2007, Thompson flirted with the idea of running for president himself after aligning himself with a group of “9/11 Truthers” who believe the U.S. government had a role in the September 11, 2001, attacks. In 2008, he was once again sworn in as Mayor of Tomah, assuming the comfortable position he had left to run for governor. It appears he is now content to be an important footnote in Wisconsin’s political history—one that major candidates should not soon forget.

Jim Doyle’s Got 99 Problems (but GM Ain’t One)

A friend told me about this, and I honestly didn’t believe him.

Last week in Janesville, Jim Doyle stood at the podium before hundreds of General Motors workers who had just found out that the plant will be closing in 2010. The pain in the room was evident, as the workers flanking Doyle onstage openly wore their disgust on their faces.

Doyle began his speech expressing outrage at General Motors, and threatening “revenge” against the company. He continually praised the workers, who had done nothing to deserve their fate. (We’ll set aside, for a moment, the fact that Doyle’s plan to raise gas taxes by 7 cents per gallon could have hastened the demise of the plant.) Then, to fully ameliorate the pain being felt in the room, he pulled out a quote from one of our great philosophers: Rapper Jay-Z.

In an attempt to say the workers had been “flicked aside,” Doyle tried to use The Jigga Man’s “Dirt Off Your Shoulder” as an excuse to make the now-famous gesture. He immediately tried to catch himself, understanding what an absurd statement he just made. But this is why I fear public speaking so much – I’m afraid I’m going to say something this stupid in front of an open mike. And in doing so, Doyle may have inadvertently set race relations in Wisconsin back 30 years.  Father Michael Pfleger’s references to black culture were actually more comfortable than this.

To see the video, click here and fast forward to the 25 minute mark. I’d pull the clip off and put it on YouTube to make it instantly viewable, but WisconsinEye’s warnings have sufficiently spooked me into thinking they’re going to sue me for a hundred million dollars if I do so. (Then they’ll team up with INTERPOL to come get the backup copies of my DVDs.)

If one asks how in the hell Doyle knows that Jay-Z song, remember that Barack Obama used the same gesture to respond to attacks by Hillary Clinton. Except there were two stark differences: Obama actually used it in the correct context, and Obama looked like a smooth mother doing it. (Shut yo mouth!)

Since the readership of this blog likely doesn’t even know who Jay-Z is, here’s the video for “Dirt Off Your Shoulder.” Warning – there’s explicit language, but it’s necessary, as it exposes how ridiculous it was for Doyle to use it in such a somber context.

And here’s a video of Obama’s “Dirt off Your Shoulder” reference that’s good for a chuckle:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

Jim Doyle\’s Got 99 Problems (but GM Ain\’t One)

A friend told me about this, and I honestly didn\’t believe him.

Last week in Janesville, Jim Doyle stood at the podium before hundreds of General Motors workers who had just found out that the plant will be closing in 2010. The pain in the room was evident, as the workers flanking Doyle onstage openly wore their disgust on their faces.

Doyle began his speech expressing outrage at General Motors, and threatening \”revenge\” against the company. He continually praised the workers, who had done nothing to deserve their fate. (We\’ll set aside, for a moment, the fact that Doyle\’s plan to raise gas taxes by 7 cents per gallon could have hastened the demise of the plant.) Then, to fully ameliorate the pain being felt in the room, he pulled out a quote from one of our great philosophers: Rapper Jay-Z.

In an attempt to say the workers had been \”flicked aside,\” Doyle tried to use The Jigga Man\’s \”Dirt Off Your Shoulder\” as an excuse to make the now-famous gesture. He immediately tried to catch himself, understanding what an absurd statement he just made. But this is why I fear public speaking so much – I\’m afraid I\’m going to say something this stupid in front of an open mike. And in doing so, Doyle may have inadvertently set race relations in Wisconsin back 30 years.  Father Michael Pfleger\’s references to black culture were actually more comfortable than this.

To see the video, click here and fast forward to the 25 minute mark. I\’d pull the clip off and put it on YouTube to make it instantly viewable, but WisconsinEye\’s warnings have sufficiently spooked me into thinking they\’re going to sue me for a hundred million dollars if I do so. (Then they\’ll team up with INTERPOL to come get the backup copies of my DVDs.)

If one asks how in the hell Doyle knows that Jay-Z song, remember that Barack Obama used the same gesture to respond to attacks by Hillary Clinton. Except there were two stark differences: Obama actually used it in the correct context, and Obama looked like a smooth mother doing it. (Shut yo mouth!)

Since the readership of this blog likely doesn\’t even know who Jay-Z is, here\’s the video for \”Dirt Off Your Shoulder.\” Warning – there\’s explicit language, but it\’s necessary, as it exposes how ridiculous it was for Doyle to use it in such a somber context.

And here\’s a video of Obama\’s \”Dirt off Your Shoulder\” reference that\’s good for a chuckle:

You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this YouTube video

How Jim Doyle Can Save Wisconsin’s Republican Party

With the state weary from a long, drawn-out war overseas, one of Wisconsin’s political parties was taking a beating at the polls. The party’s national elected officials had gone to war seven years previously, and voters were demonstrating their displeasure at the ballot box. The party, which had strayed significantly from its traditional values, was a mere afterthought in Wisconsin government, and appeared to be sinking even lower.

Then Jim Doyle showed up to save it. Not the current governor, the other one.

The year was 1948, and Democrats in Wisconsin were foundering. German voters, who had traditionally been Democrats, had fled the party due in large part to Woodrow Wilson’s declaration of war on Germany in 1918. (At the time, many of Wisconsin’s Germans were still foreign born, and had ties to the homeland.) While German Americans in Wisconsin were very much in favor of U.S. involvement in World War II, the war reinforced their desire to stay away from the Democratic Party. The Progressive Party in Wisconsin was nearly extinct, and many of its members were returning to the Republican Party, from whence they came in 1934.

By 1948, it had been sixteen years since a Democrat had won the Wisconsin governorship (former Madison Mayor Alfred Schmedeman, who served only one two-year term). Even worse, Democrats won only three Wisconsin gubernatorial elections in the previous 73 years and had been in the minority in the State Senate and Assembly since 1893. For four straight legislative sessions (1923-1929), there were no Democrats in the Senate. The 1925 Assembly featured 92 Republicans, one Democrat, and seven Socialist Party members.

In May of 1948, several upstarts within the Democratic Party met in Fond du Lac to chart a course for a new, revitalized party. Among the attendees were Jim Doyle Sr., Ruth Doyle, Horace Wilkie, and Gaylord Nelson. The “Young Turks,” as they were called, formed the Democratic Organizing Committee (DOC), with the intent of circumventing the traditional, more conservative (and largely ineffective) Democratic Party leadership. In doing so, they began planting the seeds for future Democratic success in Wisconsin. Their dream came to fruition in 1957, when Bill Proxmire won the U.S. Senate seat previously held by Joseph McCarthy prior to his death. A year later, Gaylord Nelson won the Wisconsin governorship.

It was the plan formulated in the nascent years of the DOC that precipitated Wisconsin eventually becoming a state where Democrats could once again succeed. Doyle, Nelson, Patrick Lucey, and others worked tirelessly to organize county parties and recruit members, which was a tough task for a party that had been struggling so mightily for so long. As Doyle famously once said, “There are places around the state where it takes courage to be a Democrat. The few professed Democrats are like the early Christians. They feel as though they should hold their meetings in the catacombs.”

It is now 2008, and another of Wisconsin’s major political parties in on the ropes. Wisconsin Republicans are still feeling the backlash from a long war, just as Democrats had in 1948. The party has largely lost its identity, with voters unable to differentiate its platform on taxes and spending from that of the Democrats.

If there’s any good news, it is that Wisconsin Republicans aren’t in anywhere near as bad shape as the Democrats were in 1948. While the war is still unpopular, it doesn’t offend the national pride of any voting bloc in Wisconsin politics. (This type of mass defection is unlikely to happen to the Republicans unless John McCain declares war on the Green Bay Packers.) The Assembly is still Republican, but by a shrinking margin. Republicans in the Senate only need to pick up two seats to retake the majority that they lost in stunning fashion in 2006.

Yet even if Republicans were able to buck the odds and regain majorities in both houses, nobody really expects any shift towards fiscal conservatism. Wisconsin citizens will see that the Republican Party is currently propped up on a rotting foundation, set adrift with few principles, and no platform on which to stand.

What Wisconsin Republicans need to do now is to follow the DOC blueprint for revitalizing the party. If that means a group of talented insiders get together and plot the overthrow of the current leadership, then so be it. It won’t be easy work, and certainly the national GOP zeitgeist will affect the amount of change that can be felt at the state level. The reason Democrats in Wisconsin are such a formidable foe is because of the efforts of a handful of individuals determined to breathe life into their party’s corpse. So it can be done, and the future of the Republican Party in Wisconsin depends on it.

When the new GOP braintrust gets together, here are some suggestions for a blueprint back into the majority:

BUILD AND BREAK CONSTITUENCIES

When Democrats built themselves into a majority in the late ‘50s and early ‘60s, they did so by consolidating existing constituencies and building new ones. Labor unions banded together within the Democratic Party, and former Progressives found the party much more to their liking. Perhaps most importantly, they recognized what effect the expansion of government dependency would have on their base. Democrats recognized the fact that when more individuals received a check from the government, those individuals would become Democratic voters. They would continue to support the party that would keep the checks rolling in. As government grows and grows, so do the fortunes of those chained to a government check – so the built-in constituency will always be there to lobby for Democrats.

Republicans don’t have to stand on the sidelines in building constituencies for their programs, and constituencies don’t have to be built solely on government handouts. Getting people hooked on tax incentives and less government regulation can resonate.

For instance, the GOP needs more people to become dependent on programs that employ free market principles, to make sure voters know such programs can succeed. Last week, the Wisconsin State Journal highlighted a charter school set up to teach Native American children their traditional Ojibway language and culture. Charter schools are a perfect example of how educational choice can empower parents to direct how they want their children to be educated. Just because a program is conservative, it doesn’t have to benefit fat, cigar-chomping white guys.

Additionally, Milwaukee shouldn’t have a monopoly on school choice – it should be a topic statewide for two reasons: First, so out-state school districts and parents don’t see it as the enemy of their kids’ schools and cheer for its demise. Second, because as it becomes a state issue, more momentum statewide will grow, laying the groundwork for more educational choice in areas other than just Milwaukee. School choice is one of Wisconsin’s crown jewels, and should be discussed by Republicans statewide.

However, school choice is only one area where the GOP can create a new statewide constituency. Health Savings Accounts have been around as an issue for a decade, but Republicans seem content to allow HSAs to twist in the wind as a merely theoretical issue. The longer that happens, the more skepticism people will have that they can actually work. Where’s the Republican plan to give all state employees HSAs instead of the traditional budget-busting health coverage? Why aren’t they telling everyone who will listen that the best way to show that HSAs work is to build a market with the 70,000 state employees? That would be a pretty good start – and for the naysayers that think the unions would never let that happen, ask the unions what they think of the Qualified Economic Offer (QEO), which restricts teacher salaries. It can happen.

LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION

Building a permanent GOP majority means going where the voters are and locking them down as Republican voters. For the GOP in Wisconsin, that means heading west.

For the political nerds living in the Milwaukee-Madison corridor, the picture of Wisconsin is clear; Madison is liberal, Waukesha is conservative. For the most part, those two counties should cancel each other out. That leaves the rest of the state to offset liberal Milwaukee. Green Bay and the Fox Valley help Republicans, while areas like Stevens Point and Wausau favor Democrats.

This analysis ignores a sleeping giant in Western Wisconsin that should be fertile ground for the GOP in the years to come. St. Croix County is the fastest growing county in the state, and is solidly Republican. It’s difficult for people to picture, but one day St, Croix will be the Waukesha County of the west. It is a Twin Cities suburb in the same way Washington and Ozaukee Counties are Milwaukee suburbs. It would be a huge mistake for the state GOP to ignore the growth potential in that area of the state. Lock down the growth areas, and that means more GOP voters statewide in the years to come.

Furthermore, more attention need be paid to Southwestern Wisconsin. This is an area that was once solidly Republican; yet lackluster leadership and disinterested elected officials have now handed the lower half of the 3rd Congressional District over to the Democrats. While their GOP state senators and representatives may have been able to do enough constituent service to keep them in office, those days are long gone as the population continues to slip out of their grasp. The area needs a dynamic Republican representative who is actually interested in selling the statewide GOP message, rather than merely pushing parochial bills to stay in office. There’s no better indicator that people are willing to vote for a Republican than the fact that they actually used to.

TRIM THE WEEDS

A concerted effort should be made to cut the dead weight out of Wisconsin’s contingent of GOP elected officials. A senator or representative who sits in a solidly Republican district and does nothing with it is an albatross around the neck of the state party.

In this respect, primaries can be an invaluable tool in the quest for a more vibrant GOP statewide. In fact, “Fighting Bob” LaFollette championed primaries primarily because he knew he could wrest control of the Republican party away from the conservatives in the 1890’s. Through LaFollette’s liberal (and often vindictive) use of primaries, he was able to shape the GOP in the Progressive image throughout the early 1900s. And it can be primaries once again that should be used to trim the noxious weeds from the ranks of the GOP elected officials.

This doesn’t necessarily mean a district needs the most conservative representative. Certainly, an elected official needs to fit the district in order to ensure election in the November general election. It doesn’t make sense to run a conservative against a moderate if it means that seat is going to go Democrat in the general. But a moderate Republican willing to be active in promoting the statewide GOP message is infinitely more valuable to the effort than one who introduces one bill per session, and who might get around to doing a press release if someone noteworthy in their district dies.

The party cannot sit idly by with do-nothing Republicans hogging seats in areas where a vibrant newcomer could freshen the party’s image. These seats have to be viewed not as what they are, but as what they could be. Plus, they are a farm system for major state offices in the future. (For instance, the 1950 Legislature had four future governors in its ranks, as well as two future U.S. Senators and the mother of a future governor.) Representatives who sleepwalk through their jobs in these valuable seats are clogging the arteries of the future GOP circulatory system.

REPUBLICAN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Fair or not, voters pick candidates they are comfortable with. More and more, these voters are growing increasingly uncomfortable with white males. The minorities that currently vote Republican do so primarily because they don’t like other minorities, not necessarily because they trust white guys to do the right thing.

There are minorities out there that share the GOP message of limited government, low taxes, and family values. And women have been dropping quickly in the ranks of Republican elected officials. An effort should be made to recruit them to run for office, and they should quickly move to the front of the line in GOP leadership. And if they get better committee assignments or party support than a deserving white legislator who’s been in office for a decade, so be it. Get over it, whitey.

Think about it – in order to become a majority party once again, the GOP needs new voters. And where is the growth in new voters going to come? It’s going to come in the minority groups that are growing more quickly. If Republicans stick with caucasians to pull the freight, the party will be infinitely disappointed as their base shrinks. And the best way to convince minority voters that the GOP is a safe place for their vote is to prove it through their slate of candidates.

Furthermore, we have seen recently how much attention minority candidates can draw. Set aside the media love affair with Barack Obama. Look at Bobby Jindal in Louisiana – the guy gets elected as governor ten minutes ago, and before my hot pocket cools off, he’s already mentioned as a serious Vice Presidential candidate. This isn’t because Jindal is necessarily a political genius – it is because he represents the changing face of politics. A change the GOP desperately needs if it seeks to grow its base.

(As a side note, women and minorities deserve to be elected for reasons other that just making Republicans look better. Thought that should be mentioned.)

MORE SPREADSHEETS

Exactly what is the Republican message in the upcoming state and national elections?

Anyone?

Can any Wisconsin resident name a single accomplishment of the GOP in the past two years?

Naturally, Republicans are at a disadvantage when taking credit for certain governmental “achievements” (which may actually be an oxymoron.) It is easy for Democrats to say they “funded drugs for seniors” or “supported expansion of the Stewardship program.” Simple and direct. Republicans have to explain what governmental initiatives they blocked, and why we’ll all be better off because of something they have denied us. Of course, a detailed explanation of the role of market economics and how free trade makes our lives better is usually out of the question. Personally, I would much prefer eating a burrito right now over a conservative telling me how Milton Friedman’s theories enable me to one day have the freedom to purchase my own burrito. Dude, I’m hungry.

Yet, as George Will has recently said, conservatives have one thing going for them. Market-based conservatism is the truth. And, as difficult as that may be, that truth has to be made understandable. The longer people are allowed to be told that gas prices are going to fall if Barack Obama doesn’t accept money from oil companies, the longer the GOP will flounder with voters. The basic fact is this: students aren’t being taught economics in school. State and local Republican parties have to break down the door with a message of financial literacy.

Furthermore, Republicans should be the party willing to talk to voters like grown-ups. We can handle it. Being against bogus campaign finance reform proposals doesn’t make you look like you’re pro-corruption. It makes you look like you value free speech. Cowering from the inevitable critics of allowing private Social Security accounts doesn’t gain you any votes – it makes you look like a spineless coward.

Wisconsin Republican Congressman Paul Ryan has led the way in this regard, with his recent plan to pull the U.S. out of fiscal insolvency by recognizing the entitlement disaster heading our way. The longer the state is willing to fix its budget woes with gimmicks and deferred obligations, and as long as Republicans are willing to accede to such nonsense, the party has no ground on which to stand when the fiscal apocalypse comes.

Of course, getting Republicans statewide to coalesce around any one message is like stapling Jell-O to a wall. But having more willing carriers of the message (See point 3) will help immeasurably.

LEGALIZE MARIJUANA

Do this, and the state goes GOP overnight. Instead of being motivated to go to the polls, half of the City of Madison will be motivated to watch I Love Lucy reruns, eat Peanut Butter Cap’n Crunch, and nap.

***

None of the Young Turk Democrats in 1948 thought their party’s turnaround was going to be immediate. Young Democrats like Jim Doyle, Sr. drove from county to county to rebuild the party from scratch. (A feat that would be a lot less possible if his son’s proposal to raise the gas tax by seven cents had been in effect in 1948.) They had to patience to plant the seeds, and put in the hard work that eventually made them a force in Wisconsin politics. The GOP should thank Doyle for his blueprint.

-June 9, 2008

Helpful historical sources for this commentary include “Wisconsin Votes,” by Robert Booth Fowler, and “The Man from Clear Lake: Earth Day Founder Gaylord Nelson,” by Bill Christofferson.

Someone Get This Party Started

Over at the main WPRI site, I have posted my treatise on what Wisconsin Republicans can do to turn the party around.  The blueprint for political success was written by someone that may surprise the GOP.

Read it here.

Teach the Children Well

When I submit my application for 2008 Parent of the Year, this story will be at the top:

On Friday morning, I walked into my 4 1/2 year old daughter\’s room to wake her lazy bones up for school. I started to shake her gently until she opened her eyes, rubbed them with the back of her hand, and said:

\”Daddy, Ben Sheets is pitching today.\”

When you\’re a male and your first child is a girl, there is always an unspoken worry that you might miss out on the days of bonding with your hypothetical son over sports. Of course, girls can enjoy sports too, but you always know the father-daughter sports dynamic is going to be different. Even in the toughest days of my relationship with my dad, we could always talk about the Brewers or Packers. The most quality time I ever spent with him was in our front yard, playing catch. (One time, we were tossing around a Ben Oglivie ground rule double I had caught, and it went in the sewer.) To this day, when I call him, that\’s primarily the focus of our talks, and likely will be until the day one of us dies. (Ironically, my death will most likely be caused by the Packers or Brewers.)

\"\"But, as it turns out, my daughter is way more into sports than I was as a 4 year old. Most of this is because of her day care.

At some point, a parent has to realize that your kids are going to learn things at school of which you may not approve. That\’s the balance you strike when you pay someone to take your kids off your hands for a few days a week. (It has often been said that one of the great joys of parenting is spending time away from your children.)

As it turns out, one of my daughter\’s day care teachers is a HUGE Packers/Brewers/Badgers fan. (Rumor has it there\’s also a pro basketball team in Wisconsin, but I haven\’t been able to find any evidence of it on the internet.) And this teacher is passing on her love of all things Wisconsin sports to my daughter and all the other kids in her class. Some days they even have \”wear your Brewer gear to school\” day. (My girl proudly wears her Prince Fielder t-shirt, as she still has questions about Ryan Braun\’s ability to hit the change-up.)

Naturally, I approve of this. In fact, if my daughter learns to love the Brewers and Packers in place of learning math or science, I might be okay with that. Love of sports will last her a lifetime. She\’s got plenty of time to learn to read. In fact, if I can push off her being able to read this blog for an extra couple years, that might be a good deal.

But consider the flip side of this whole sports indoctrination process. What if I was a Cub fan and my daughter was being taught to be a Brewer fan at school? What if I was living in Chicago and the day care teachers were holding \”wear your Brian Urlacher jersey to school\” day? (I don\’t have to worry about offending Cubs or Bears fans, as they are unlikely to be able to read this post.) I seriously might complain to the school. I think an immediate parent/teacher conference would be in order.

This might be sacrilege to say, but I think I would actually be more offended if my daughter was being taught to be a Viking fan than if her school was inculcating her with Hinduism or something. At some point, my kids are going to be going to Madison public schools and be subjected to preposterously liberal classrooms. I can handle that – but I couldn\’t possibly handle my child wearing a Fukudome jersey. Never. Ever. Never.

In the meantime, I am psyched about taking her to her first Brewer game. I believe my first one was in 1980, against the Yankees. I also went to the game in 1982 when Rickey Henderson tied the all-time steals record against the Brew Crew. Hopefully, when she walks into Miller Park, she won\’t have to wait until she\’s married with kids to witness a playoff berth.

Rooted in Socialism

If you go to enough conservative events, eventually you\’re going to hear the \”S\” word bandied about. Inevitably, someone will warn of the impending doom if the \”socialist\” Democrats take over. While I\’m certainly sympathetic to the cause, I generally to bristle at these attempts to tie modern Democrats to the murderous regimes of Lenin and Stalin. Nancy Pelosi\’s reconstructed visage may break my HDTV, but I\’m guessing she\’s not going to steal and murder my children.

In any event, if any state has a history of being friendly to socialism, it is Wisconsin. Milwaukee famously elected three Socialist mayors in the first half of the 20th Century – a feat unique to large American cities. The State Senate and Assembly often housed members of the Socialist Party in the \’20s and \’30s – in some years, there were more Socialists than Democrats. Yet while they were socialist in name, rarely did they govern as Socialists in practice. (Much of this is detailed in Robert Booth Fowler\’s excellent new book \”Wisconsin Votes.\”)

It\’s even more interesting when one examines the modern Democratic agenda and its roots within the Socialist movement of the early 1900\’s. For instance, look at many of the current Democratic talking points: We have to tax excessive oil profits. We have to tax hospital profits. Insurance companies are charging us too much, so we should have government take over health care and tax business to pay for it.

If these sound familiar, it\’s because these attempts to \”tax the profiteers\” have been around for the entirety of Wisconsin\’s history. And predominantly from the Socialist Party.

Check out this campaign flier from Socialist Party candidate for U.S. Senate Candidate Victor L. Berger, in which he vows to \”Tax the Profiteers.\” (Photo courtesy of the Wisconsin Historical Society\’s Online Collection)

\"\"

Again, this doesn\’t mean modern Democrats and the vile European Socialist Regimes are married to one another. But at the very least, they are pen pals.

SIDE NOTE: Berger, who was one of the founding members of the Socialist Party in Wisconsin, had a phenomenal public career. From his Historical Society biography:

Berger was elected the first Socialist member of Congress and served from 1911 to 1913. He was reelected in 1918 and 1919. Congress excluded his seat on grounds of sedition, a charge for which he was sentenced to a 20-year prison term. The U.S. Supreme Court reversed this decision in 1921. He was allowed to take his seat when reelected in 1922.

Me, Environmentalist

So I was in the public library today. (Yes, they still allow me to check books out there, even though this column put me on the Dewey Decimal Mafia hit list.) As I approached the checkout desk (wearing a disguise*), I noticed a sign that said the library was \”going green\” by not printing out receipts if the patron requests it. So I proudly announced my environmentalism by declaring that I didn\’t want a receipt. Coincidentally, the book I was checking out was \”The Story of My Boyhood and Youth\” by John Muir, which meant the universe was briefly completely in order.

I have long thought that receipts are the great environmental issue of our era. I was at Panera the other day getting a single sandwich, and they printed out three receipts, two of which I got to keep. Go buy a CD at Best Buy (as if anyone does that anymore). Do I really need a three foot long receipt? And no, I don\’t want to go to your damn website and fill out your damn online questionnaire and get a dollar off my next purchase. Basically, I just want something that proves that I bought the CD there, and lets me return it for store credit after I burn it to my hard drive. Can I get an Amen?

Hopefully, my anti-receipt position has bought me enough carbon credits to continue swearing at the people who bike to work in front of me. Next up, I will take on the excessive use of bagging small items.

*My disguise was frowning excessively.

Newer posts »