Christian Schneider

Page 33 of 82

A Blueprint for a New Wisconsin Drunk Driving Law

May 7, 2008 / Christian / 4 Comments

Lawmakers in Wisconsin now appear serious about getting tough on drunk driving in Wisconsin, following the death of 39 year-old Jennifer Bukosky, her unborn child and 10-year old daughter at the hands of three-time convicted drunk driver Mark Benson. Even Governor Jim Doyle has proposed making a third drunk driving offense a felony. Other lawmakers have proposed confiscating offenders\’ cars after a third offense, as well as sending drunk drivers directly to prison (Benson killed Bukosky and her children during a period before he was supposed to report to jail after his third conviction.)

When crafting a tougher new law, the sensible thing for legislators to do is to see what other states have done to crack down on drunk driving. The National Conference of State Legislatures has provided a chart that details every state\’s criminal drunk driving statute. When you look over the list, Wisconsin stands out in how light we are on drunk driving offenders. In the overwhelming majority of states, first non-accident offenses are at least a misdemeanor (although, admittedly, \”misdemeanor\” means different things in different states.) Exceptions from first-time misdemeanors include New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Louisiana, and New Hampshire – although subsequent offenses usually ratchet up the penalties in those states.

Generally, it is the third, fourth, and fifth offense (usually within a period of a few years) that moves the offense up to a felony in most states. Yet in Wisconsin, the first non-injury offense is a civil conviction. Injury-related DUI offenses constitute either a Class D or Class F felony. Second through fourth offenses are criminal misdemeanors that carry time in the county jail, with a fifth offense moving up to the felony level. (And, as we hear about at least once a year in Wisconsin, if you lose your license, you can always drive your tractor to the liquor store.)

For a full list of Wisconsin\’s criminal drunk driving penalties, click here.

(In addition to being a civil conviction, Wisconsin law is even lighter on drivers with blood alcohol content between .08 and .1. For a summary of the .08 law, click here.)

While higher criminal penalties are one way other states go after repeat drunk drivers, they aren\’t necessarily the only option.

25 states have opted for mandatory ignition interlock systems for some drunk drivers. Wisconsin is one of 20 states that allows ignition interlock devices to be installed \”at judicial discretion,\” which is weaker than some states that make the interlock devices mandatory in some or all cases. Several studies show drunk driving recidivism rates drop between 50 and 95 percent when ignition interlock devices are utilized. While some fear that these devices are too easy to circumvent (such as by having someone else blow into the tube for them), newer technology is arriving that makes that more difficult. For instance, some new devices include breath pulse codes, hum-tone recognition, and \”blow-and-suck patterns.\”

From the NCSL report on ignition interlock systems:

Four states have taken the lead on ignition interlocks by making them mandatory for all convicted drunk drivers, even first-time offenders. New Mexico was the first state, with a law passed in 2005, to require ignition interlocks for all offenders. The state has seen a 28 percent decline in alcohol-related fatalities since the new law went into effect.

Since then, three more states-Arizona, Illinois and Louisiana-have passed similar laws that mandate an ignition interlock for every convicted drunk driver. Oregon and Washington require ignition interlocks for all offenders who want to have their driving privileges reinstated. Colorado, Kansas and New Hampshire make them mandatory for repeat offenders and those convicted of so-called \”high BAC\” offenses. Sixteen states require them in some circumstances, while 20 states and the District of Columbia allow interlocks at the discretion of the courts.

Five states at some point have employed either special license plates for drunk drivers, or required a sticker be affixed to their license plate. The effectiveness of these programs seems to be mixed, as Oregon let their pilot program lapse without reauthorizing it, and Iowa repealed the law altogether. According to NCSL, five states considered new license plate laws in their 2008 sessions.

27 states have passed laws creating enhanced penalties for driving drunk with children in the car. (In 2003, one Louisiana woman was found passed out in her car with five children, ages 4 to 9, in the car with her.) 16 states have increased the penalties for refusing chemical blood alcohol tests.

A new Wisconsin law could employ any number of these strategies. But it must be done right, and it has to pass the common sense test to which it will undoubtedly be subjected to by the public.

Round Up the Males; Lying for Sex Now a Felony?

May 6, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

Quite often, well-intentioned legislation goes bad. Such a case exists in Massachusetts, where a well-meaning law meant to broaden the standard for rape has now turned into a national punchline.

Under the new legislation, it would be a felony to have sex with someone under false pretenses. In other words, you could go to jail for lying to someone in order to get them to have sex with you.

The bill states:

Whoever has sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse with a person having obtained that person\’s consent by the use of fraud, concealment or artifice, and who thereby intentionally deceived such person so that a reasonable person would not have consented but for the deception, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life or any term of years. As used in this statute, \’fraud\’ or \’artifice\’ shall not be construed to mean a promise of future consideration.

The bill was meant to correct legitimate instances of deception such as the time a sleepy Massachusetts woman had sex with her boyfriend\’s brother, thinking it was actually her boyfriend. In another case, a medical technician pretending to be a doctor conducted a full pelvic exam on a woman after telling her he was licensed to give the exam. (Perhaps the fact that the \”doctor\” was eating a ham sandwich during the exam might have been a tip-off.)

But think about how broad this language actually is. Lying for sex? Is there really any other way? If women really knew what we were like, there\’d be no chance any male would get any action. Every guy has some bogus story about what a good job we have, how we spent time on a Greenpeace boat, how this is our real hair, or some such nonsense. Every man pads the resume a little, hoping to cash in before reality sets in. (Although saying the words \”I\’m a blogger\” might be the most effective birth control known to man.)

Even if there\’s not overt lying going on, there are implied lies. Suppose your girlfriend cheats on you with Roger Clemens. And suppose, had you known about the affair, you never would have slept with her again. But she doesn\’t tell you about the affair, and you continue to have your monthly sexual encounter. Your girlfriend could actually be guilty of rape, since she concealed information that would have kept you from having sex with her.

The list goes on. Tell a girl you will always love her? Get an orange jumpsuit. Cougar looking to score a younger guy at the bar tonight? Better be honest about your age, or you\’ll be making license plates soon, sweetie. Telling a man he\’s a great lover to keep the love train going? (Never a problem in my case, incidentally.) Get ready for the big house. Tell a girl you work with she looks like Pam from \”The Office?\” Well, no worries there, since she\’ll probably opt not to talk to you ever again.

(As long as we\’re handing out sentences, the words \”I can\’t wait to see the \’Sex and the City Movie\’ out of any guy\’s mouth should be punishable by death.)

In 1975, a man named Marty Evans was sued by a woman claiming he lied to get her in the sack, and it went all the way to the New York Supreme Court. In his decision in People v. Evans, Justice Edward Greenfield said:

“So bachelors, and other men on the make, fear not. It is still not illegal to feed a girl a line, to continue the attempt [to obtain sex], not to take no for a final answer, at least not the first time. . . . [A] male [will] make promises that will not be kept, . . . indulge in exaggeration and hyperbole, or to assure any trusting female that, as in the ancient fairy tale, the ugly frog is really the handsome prince.Every man is free under the law, to be a gentleman or a cad.\”

Of course, should this bill actually become law, there are fiscal implications, as well. For instance, it might be expensive to turn the State of Montana into a prison big enough to house the entire male population of the United States. Then again, the entire human race may be eradicated within a decade due to the end of procreation.

(Via the Volokh Conspiracy.)

The Marital Order of Succession

May 6, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

Think about the thing you care for the most. Now forget about your new HDTV and think about the thing you care about the second most. That’s right – your family. In the event something went terribly wrong, wouldn’t you like to have \”family insurance,\” just like you have homeowners insurance on your flat screen? Of course you would. Read on to find out how your government can help.

With a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage on the statewide ballot in 2006, the issue of state government’s role in the institution of marriage was at front and center in Wisconsin. Some questioned why government has a role at all in marriage, which they argued is solely a religious institution.

The bottom line is that government does have its greasy fingers in your marriage. State law dictates how marriages are formed, how those marriages may be dissolved, and how the whole mess is sorted out when things go bad. In fact, Wisconsin state law even prevents someone who is divorced from being remarried within 6 months of their divorce, presumably to protect people from the horrors of marrying you.
Yet, there’s one area where government doesn’t help marriages nearly enough, which is why I’d like to propose a new law strengthening our households. Think about what we do to insure ourselves against catastrophic events when they happen to individuals we love: We have a backup plan. The President has a Vice President. The Packers have assistant coaches. Ronald McDonald has Grimace. That is why I am proposing the groundbreaking “Vice Wife” law.

In the event something horrible happens to your spouse, wouldn’t it make perfect sense to have a backup at the ready to assume those duties? If your wife were to be pummeled to death by a kangaroo at the zoo, would she really want you to suffer, alone and miserable, while having to take care of the rest of your family duties? I know your wife, and I think not. Who would take care of the kids while you spent all your time in court suing the kangaroo? The law would work like this: A husband could direct one single woman to be his Vice Wife, eligible to take over marital duties should his “primary” wife die horribly and unexpectedly.

The rules are as follows:

The Vice Wife has to be single; in the event the Vice Wife gets married to someone else, the standard sequence of the U.S. Constitution kicks in and the husband must marry Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

The Vice Wife has to agree to serve in this capacity – obviously, the husband can’t just pick anyone, regardless of how appealing that might be. (I’d love to see Katherine Heigl’s face when she gets the call explaining she has to make me pancakes every morning.)

The husband may not have any physical contact with the VW while his primary wife is still alive. Any funny business with the Vice Wife is punishable by having to serve as the Brewers’ closer for the remainder of the season.

For taking part in the Vice Wife program, the VW gets to pay her taxes on May 15th instead of April 15th. She also gets one small free Wendy’s Frosty per month.

If you actually cause the death of your wife, you forfeit the ability to take part in the program. (Chances are, your Vice Wife will be assigned to you by the Wisconsin penal system.) If your Vice Wife is significantly hotter than your regular wife (as determined by me), you are presumed guilty in any and all circumstances where your wife dies of unnatural causes.

Now, I realize the Legislature is out of session until next January. But once lawmakers read this proposal, chances are they’re going to want to call a special session and bring everyone back into town to get this done. I imagine there will be a lot of lights on in the Capitol late into the night finalizing the legal language on this groundbreaking new law. Of course, the only people that would oppose such a law are “pro-wife” groups, but they’re always nagging us to do things and we’ve all tuned them out anyway. They can usually be dismissed with a wave and a grunt. After all, this proposal is meant to strengthen the family by restoring order in a time of crisis. Who would oppose such a thing? Selfish, unreasonable wives, that’s who.
Of course, this program could work for women, too. Certainly my wife will need a warm body to hold the couch down to the floor and make sure all the oatmeal cream pies get eaten in the (now extremely likely) event of my demise.

So here’s the plan of action, fatty: put down that gyro, print this column out, rush home, and explain the new plan to your wife. It is likely she will immediately recognize that this proposal is what’s best for keeping your family strong in a time of crisis. However, just in case she is too excited about this plan, you might want to make sure you have a sturdy protective cover over your lower abdomen and are wearing a football helmet.

Public Libraries – No Longer Just for the Literate

May 5, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

Throughout history, government has recognized several important classes of individuals who need help. As American citizens, we approve of a portion of our tax dollars going to help the truly needy. Currently, these groups can be broken up into the following categories:

1. The Poor;
2. The Disabled;
3. The Elderly;
4. People who haven’t seen “Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle.”

Yes, your tax dollars are going to help those poor souls who are dangerously under-entertained, by subsidizing your neighborhood Free Blockbuster, commonly known as the public library.

Public libraries were formed due to a recognition that in order to have an educated populace, the public should have access to literature. Rather than people with low incomes having to go purchase books, they could have free access to them at the library. This ensures a baseline of access to literature for those of modest means, and provides valuable research opportunities for individuals who may not want to buy all their source material.

According to author William James Sidis, the public library as we know it originated in Boston in 1836. In 1731, Benjamin Franklin founded the Library Company of Philadelphia, which allowed members to buy a subscription, and the pooled money went to buy books (the company actually still exists). Rumor has it that Ben Franklin’s first checkout was “Knocked Up.”

Recently, public libraries have begun to change their missions altogether. Libraries are now equipped with full multimedia capabilities, and serve less as educational opportunities and more as neighborhood entertainment centers. Library patrons have expanded from those who need no-cost materials to free-riding wealthy people looking for some free entertainment. Get a library card and now you have full access to a wide variety of music CDs, DVD movies, video games, and internet access, all for free, and all at taxpayer expense.

In fact, video stores around Wisconsin are shutting down now because they can’t compete with internet-based companies like Netflix, which charges one monthly fee and mails DVDs to the customer. But public libraries actually had this system in place well before Netflix ever appeared. For years, library patrons have been able to go online, request virtually any DVD or music CD they want, and have it delivered to their local library for pickup. In this respect, local libraries had Netflix’ technology beat by years. And for free, to boot.

In the 2008 Milwaukee City budget, Mayor Tom Barrett began to recognize the absurdity of public libraries serving as clearinghouses for free DVDs and CDs. His budget eliminated the ability of library patrons to put digital media on hold, thereby making it more difficult to freeload off the taxpayers.

According to the Legislative Fiscal Bureau, public libraries cost us $220 million per year. Of those funds, 81.5% are provided by local governments through property tax revenues. 6.5%, or $14.2 million, of the total system budget is provided by the state, and the remaining 10% is provided by gifts, endowments and the late fees I paid for “27 Dresses.”

When we look at the broader scope of government, do we really need to consider free entertainment as a basic public service? Wouldn’t the public be better served by people who can afford it going to a video store and paying for their DVDs? Wouldn’t that create jobs and economic activity? Are there homeless people without health care laying on the street, curled up in blankets, clutching a DVD copy of “Meet the Fockers?” Is this really a public funding priority? Has anybody ever answered a citizen survey listing being able to rent “Superbad” for free as a top 10 government priority?

Library apologists would point out that much of written literature is popular entertainment and that it would be impossible to draw a line between what is valuable and what is not. If those people can’t tell the difference between adultery in “The Scarlet Letter” and a character humping hot pastry in the movie “American Pie,” then they have been standing too near the book de-magnitizers for too long. If the DVD you are checking out makes Rob Lowe’s home video collection look like “Touched by an Angel,” it probably doesn’t deserve a place in a public library.

With local and state governments facing significant budget challenges, it might be time to take a closer look at the non-essential services they are providing. Nobody is facing imminent death because they haven’t seen season one of “Who’s the Boss?” on DVD. Yet local libraries might be soaking the taxpayers to make watching Alyssa Milano’s pre-teen years a reality.

-May 5, 2008

Hey Derrick, Wanna Come Back? No Hard Feelings, Right?

May 5, 2008 / Dr. Emil Shuffhausen / 0 Comments

I\’ve had several hours to settle down since Eric GaHGHne* blew his FIFTH save this season, but I\’m still steamin\’. School isn\’t even out yet and the guy we\’re paying $10 MILLION A YEAR to throw one inning of shut-out ball once every three days is a disaster. Our man Derrick Turnbow is probably sitting at home right now organizing his sock drawer mumbling to himself, \”I could be losing all those games for you guys at a third the price.\”

Anyway, Eric Gagne must pay for for his crime of attempted homicide of the Brewers\’ playoff hopes. In the spirit of the punishment fitting the crime, I submit that Eric Gagne:

a.) be mauled by a bear, but not fatally mauled.
b.) be trapped in an elevator for 41 hours.
c.) be forced to compose a handwritten letter of apology to one random Brewer fan for each save he blows. Enclosed in each letter will be a check for $1 million dollars. (At this rate, he\’s broke before the All-Star break.)
d.) give his healthy ACL to Yovani Gallardo. Gagne\’s removed ACL will be replaced with a discarded noodle found outside an Olive Garden.

Please vote or add your own idea. It\’ll make you feel better.

*(\”GaHGHne\”: copyrighted May 2008, Shuffhausen Industries)

Single Sex Classrooms: What’s Old Is New Again

May 4, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

The Wisconsin State Journal reports Sunday on Marshall Middle School in Janesville, which has taken a portion of their classes and separated the students out by sex. According to the article, Marshall is one of six public schools in Wisconsin that have begun to sort students by gender.

While same-sex classes aren’t necessarily a new idea (in the old days, “same sex” education meant “girls don’t get to learn to read”), this would indicate that more and more schools are actually getting serious about their students’ education. While same sex education might not be a panacea (studies on the efficacy of such programs in Wisconsin haven’t been completed), enough anecdotal evidence exists to make the program worth continuing. From the article:

Jennifer Williams is one of the eighth-grade teachers whose interest in single-gender classes sparked the experiment at Marshall. She ‘s pleased by the changes she sees in classes and said bluntly, “I wouldn ‘t go back to coed. ”

William ‘s (sic) last-period science class is 28 girls who were also not shy about offering their take on being on the single-gender team. The majority of their comments were positive, especially when it came to academics.

“If you ‘re in a boys and girls class if you want to say an answer, they might make fun of you, ” said Evita Deupree.

“I think it ‘s easier to work because you aren ‘t distracted, ” added Chelsie Hardenstine. “I pay more attention than I did last year. “

Naturally, among the boys, opinions are mixed:

“They ‘ll make fun of me for being in here or call it the gay team, ‘ ” said Tyler Kraus. But he liked that class “is more laid back, you can express yourself ” and guessed it ‘s “probably helped my grades a little. ” Vaughn Garza agreed that “it is more academic because when you have girls around you tend to show off. ” But Thomas Murphy preferred a co-ed class, saying it hadn ‘t helped him: “I like the other way better.”

Somewhere, noted “girl enthusiast” Thomas Murphy’s parents are cringing. Note to the Murphys – it’s time to have “the talk” about where babies come from with little Thomas.

Of course, single sex classes are opposed by the ACLU, who view such arrangements as tantamount to “separate but equal” segregation-era classrooms. From an AP article in 2007:

“Too many schools feel they can carry out a social experiment with students’ education with really the flimsiest of theories,” said Emily Martin, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s Women’s Rights Project.

Single-sex schools are an “illusionary silver bullet,” said Lisa Maatz, director of public policy and government relations for the American Association of University Women. They distract from real problems and do not offer proven solutions such as lower class sizes and sufficient funding, she said.

In November of 2006, the U.S. Department of Education made a change to allow such classes to exist:

Previously, single-sex classes had been allowed in only limited cases, such as gym classes and sex education classes. But the new rules allow same-sex education any time schools think it will improve achievement, expand the diversity of courses or meet students’ individual needs. Enrollment must be voluntary and any children excluded from the class must get a “substantially equal” coed class in the same subject, if not a separate single-sex class.

Furthermore, in 2005, State Representative Scott Jensen introduced a bill allowing single-sex public and charter schools in Wisconsin. The bill was signed into law by Governor Doyle in April of 2006.

As a result, look for more public schools in Wisconsin to make the move toward single gender classrooms – something private school parents have know benefited their children for decades.

Working Overtime in Robbing Taxpayers

May 4, 2008 / Christian / 2 Comments

It often seems like the editorial boards at Wisconsin newspapers and their news divisions are inextricably linked. You see a news article one day, then coincidentally see an editorial the next day arguing for whatever point of view you were supposed to glean from the news article.

But on rare occasions, it seems like editorial and news divisions within the same paper exist on different planets. Take, for example, the outstanding Milwaukee Journal Sentinel story by Patrick Marley that showed up on Sunday which exposed the abuse of overtime by state correctional officers. Time and time again, the Journal Sentinel editorial board attempts to convince us how higher taxes are necessary as a means to a better quality of life. Yet, as Marley explains, the only quality of life being served by taxpayers in this overtime scam is that of the workers themselves.

From the article:

On every day he was scheduled to be off that month, he came in for an overtime shift. On two of those days, he worked double shifts.

But within days of each of those extra shifts, the sergeant called in sick. In all, he claimed four sick days that month. That meant he got hefty paychecks because of overtime, but still had time off.

That month wasn\’t unusual for the sergeant, who often volunteered for extra shifts. On 17 occasions in 2006 he called in sick shortly after working on days that he otherwise would have had off. He used almost four weeks of sick leave that year and cleared $117,764 with overtime, making him the state\’s fourth-highest-paid officer in 2006.

The scam is easy to explain – you merely use your sick time on days you weren\’t scheduled to work, and which qualify for overtime. That way, you get paid time and a half for hours you never worked. And taxpayers pick up the tab.

Of course, this heist was explained by this delicious quote:

Officers say there isn\’t widespread abuse of the system and note they work stressful jobs in institutions that are understaffed. They blame state officials for adopting laws that put more inmates behind bars without providing the funding necessary to hire enough officers.

Right… it\’s the state\’s fault for making them earn time and a half for hours they don\’t work. And it\’s outstanding that they use understaffing as an excuse for not showing up for work. Wouldn\’t it make more sense for them to be complaining about understaffing if they were actually required to show up to make their time and a half? Instead, their actions seem to argue that the Department of Corrections has too much money, if they can swindle taxpayers that easily.

This report comes on the heels of a Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance report that shows Wisconsin pays their public school teachers 50% more than the national average in benefits. It continues to be clear that throughout government in Wisconsin, taxpayers are footing the bill for things that don\’t educate a single child or keep criminals behind bars.

Not a Real Post

May 2, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

I\’ve been busy with a lot of work writing lately, so I haven\’t really had time to post anything here. Instead, I\’ll cheat and just post a couple videos.

Here\’s \”Born Under a Bad Sign\” by Richard Hawley, whose albums \”Cole\’s Corner\” and \”Lady\’s Bridge\” have completely taken over my life in the past few weeks. I cannot possibly give them a stronger recommendation.

Here\’s Hawley\’s \”Tonight the Streets are Ours:\”

And via Nick Schweitzer, the inevitable \”what if our real lives were like Facebook?\”

Family Safari in the Dells

April 30, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

Last weekend, the fam and I did what any self-respecting family does when they want an exotic vacation in Wisconsin. We hit the Kalahari indoor water park in Wisconsin Dells.

At first, I was apprehensive about the trip, having never been before. If you don\’t like being places where there are a lot of people, it isn\’t exactly an upgrade to go places where there are a lot of people without shirts on. Add to that the fact that I realized I would actually have to be in a public place without a shirt on, which I\’m pretty sure I hadn\’t done since birth. (When shortly thereafter, my dad slapped a \”Baby for Sale\” t-shirt on me.)

After checking in, my kids immediately wanted to hit the water park. Right away, I noticed that there was a channel on the resort TV station that allowed you to watch the water park live from your room. Basically, a channel for lazy parents and perverts. Me being the former, I tried to beg out of going down to the park, but my wife exercised her substantial veto power (still constitutional, FYI) and made me go.

And I have to admit, I was glad she did. It really was a lot of fun. I decided to suck it up (or in, as the case may be) and go shirtless. I just tried not to look down at myself and to stand as close as I could to people fatter than me to make myself look slim by comparison.

Of course, finding large people in there wasn\’t exactly like finding a polar bear in the Serengeti. The Kalahari water park is a sea of pale, cellulosic, heavily tattooed flesh that should never see the light of day. Obese people with swim trunks clinging on for dear life. Teenage girls with tattoos that might as well say \”UNEMPLOYABLE.\” We actually saw some 12 and 13-year old girls with press-on tattoos on their lower backs. Starter tramp stamps, if you will.

Then again, I count myself among those that could probably stand to lose a few. It\’s pretty clear that the reason most of the people there can afford the hefty water park fee is because they haven\’t wasted their money on Jenny Craig.

In any event, my daughter demanded to go on all the scariest water rides. At four years old, she is fearless. When I screamed all the way through one of the rides, she lectured me on how I shouldn\’t be such a sissy.

My son greatly enjoyed stepping on the little fountains that spray out of the ground. My sister-in-law\’s boyfriend explained to me that when he was a lifeguard, it was common for kids to actually sit down on those fountains, unknowingly giving themselves an enema. They would then proceed to poop in the pool, as they couldn\’t control their bowels. Honest to God – he said they had to close the pool at least once a week when this happened.

I was able to sneak off occasionally to catch the Packers\’ draft – fortunately, I was able to see enough to recognize that the Packers are now set at the quarterback and wide receiver positions for the next 263 years.

My favorite ride had to be the one we affectionately called the \”toilet bowl,\” where you shoot directly down into this giant bowl and spin around a few times before it dumps you head first into the water 10 feet below. It\’s kind of like experiencing birth all over again.

At night, we toured the inside of the resort a little bit. I can say that the Kalahari isn\’t exactly the place you want to go if you\’re looking for decorative nuance. Every inch of that place is covered with paintings of elephants, cheetahs, giant tusks, and so on. The only thing missing is the malaria.

For some reason my son is absolutely enthralled by elevators, and the glass elevator there was his favorite yet. He loves pressing the buttons and getting in and out. So for him, the whole trip was going to visit the elevator, and there just happened to be a water park attached.

The biggest kick of the weekend that I got was in our hotel bathroom, where a small sign on the wall lectures you to re-use your towel, in order to conserve water and save the environment. This from a resort that cranks out hundreds of millions of gallons of chlorinated water for people\’s amusement, using up enough electricity to power Waukesha. That place\’s carbon footprint is probably the size of Nebraska. So pardon me if I would like a fresh towel. Thank you.

All in all, a successful trip. Got to spend my birthday with the whole family and have a good time doing so. Naturally, at times it seemed like my family was playing the \”who wants to be strangled first by daddy\” game, but fortunately nobody won.

Madison – the Apple of Jessica\’s Eye

April 30, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

As the state\’s leading Albatomist, I have to pass on a story about my girl that actually has a local angle.

On Jessica Alba\’s only moderately legible blog, she confesses to being a big fan of the \”Apples to Apples\” board game. She was able to quit reading my blog just long enough to type the following with her perfect little fingers:

\”Been playing a lot of board games lately…apples to apples is a new favorite of mine. I know super cool right J\”

(As long as she teaches our child how to write a complete sentence, I think I might be able to put up with her assassination attempt of the English language.)

As many may know, Apples to Apples is the creation of Wisconsin-based Out of the Box Publishing, currently headquartered in Dodgeville. When you think about it, this is way bigger news than dopey Johnny Depp showing up in Wisconsin for 36 hours.

Consequently, I am offering to referee any kind of Apples to Apples worldwide competition, as long as my girl agrees to be there. Plus, there will be plenty of room on my futon in case she needs a place to crash. Unfortunately, I won\’t be able to join her, as my wife will be busy burying my dismembered body in the backyard after she finds out I made the offer.

The Great Campaign Finance Debate

April 29, 2008 / Christian / 1 Comment

For the last couple of days, I\’ve been selling out arenas nationwide on the Pro-Corruption World Tour. Last night\’s stop included the Humanities building on the UW-Madison campus, where Common Cause held a debate on the merits of campaign finance reform. I debated Senators Mike Ellis and Jon Erpenbach, along with poor Gail Shea, who wasn\’t able to get a word in edgewise with all of our hot air taking up the time.

Here\’s how it went down:

Ellis and Sen. Jon Erpenbach, D-Middleton, said they hope to pass legislation that would limit the amount of money interest groups are allowed to spend on political campaigns. The bill would require disclosure by advertising groups on how much they are spending and where the funds come from.

Heck said legislation on campaign finance reform could easily pass, except legislative leaders are “philosophically opposed” to the idea and would not bring the issue to light.

But according to panelist Christian Schneider, a fellow at the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute, there is strong ground for opposition to Ellis and Erpenbach’s campaign finance reform because of the right to freedom of expression.

“If the First Amendment is meant for anything, it is to protect unpopular political opinions,” Schneider said. “It is condescending to voters to say, ‘You’re not smart enough to see through negative television advertisements.’”

Schneider added negative advertisements can bring harsh truths to light and often increase voter turnout by making voters more interested and invested in campaign issues.

However, Erpenbach and Ellis were quick to defend their campaign finance reform legislation from Schneider’s attacks.

“I do believe firmly in the First Amendment,” Erpenbach said. “I think everybody has the right to free speech — but you can’t go into a crowded theater and yell ‘fire.’”

Erpenbach added huge contributions collected by special interest groups can mute individual opposition voices.

But Ken Mayer, UW political science professor, questioned Erpenbach’s idea of campaign finance reform as a shield to defend the individual opposition voices.

“I’m a little uncomfortable with this idea of using government power to redistribute funds,” Mayer said. “There is no reason to punish those with more money.”

The Wispolitics.com account is here.

And despite my disagreements with virtually everyone in the room on this issue (except Mayer, apparently,) everyone was extremely welcoming and pleasant. In fact, they were so interested in what I had to say, they asked me every question during the crowd Q&A period.

From what I understand, video of the event will be available on WisconsinEye at some point. I\’ll post it when it goes up so you can see me spar with Ellis and Erpenbach.

SIDE NOTE: Ken Mayer as written some excellent pieces about campaign finance reform. See \”\”Political Realities and Unintended Consequences: Why Campaign Finance Reform is Too Important to be Left to the Lawyers.\”

And:\”Do Public Funding Programs Enhance Electoral Competition?\”

I also have plenty to say as a follow-up to some of the details discussed at the forum. I\’ll be posting those in the near future.

The Good ‘ol Days of Mudslinging

April 24, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

Coming off another statewide campaign in which candidates and their supporters criticized each other bitterly, the usual calls for reforming our campaign finance system are underway. These “negative” attacks are so disturbing to editorial boards, the state’s two largest papers have actually proposed doing away with Supreme Court elections altogether. Apparently, the best way to protect the peoples’ interest is to make sure they have no say in who governs them.

Yet for all the people that think these races are too “negative,” it is instructive to go back and take a historical look at negativity in campaigning. In David Mark’s excellent book “Going Dirty: The Art of Negative Campaigning,” he details some of the most important races in American History, and the level of animus and dirty campaigning in each.

In the “good old” days, much of the campaigning was done by third parties, in the form of partisan newspapers. These are the very third parties campaign finance reformers now seek to shut out of the political discussion come election time, believing the only people allowed to have discussions about elections are the candidates themselves. Here’s a look at some of the campaign rhetoric in presidential races that actually determined the course of our nation:

Adams vs. Jefferson (1796)

The Federalists, led by John Adams, attacked Thomas Jefferson as an “Atheist,” “anarchist,” “demagogue,” “coward,” and “trickster,” and said that Jefferson’s followers were “cut-throats who walk in rags and sleep amid filth and vermin.”

Adams vs. Jefferson (1800)

Jefferson, who was Vice President (because at the time, the person who came in 2nd in the previous election earned the VP job) took Adams on again. Jefferson’s supporters tried to link Adams to George III, even starting a rumor that Adams intended to marry his son off to the daughter of George III and create an American dynasty under British rule. Adams’ supporters ripped Jefferson, calling him (the guy who wrote the Declaration of Independence, incidentally) “a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw, sired by a Virginia mulatto father… raised wholly on hoe-cake made of coarse-ground Southern corn, bacon and hominy, with an occasional change of frecassed bullfrog.”

Andrew Jackson vs. John Quincy Adams (1828)

The two had run against each other in 1824, with Jackson winning the popular vote; yet three other candidates, including Adams, fractured the electoral votes to the point where deciding the election had to go to Congress. Adams then convinced Speaker of the House Henry Clay to engineer a vote to give him the presidency; three days later, Clay was given the secretary of state job in the Adams administration.

Incensed, Jackson spent the entire next four years attacking Adams. Jackson’s supporters called Adams “The Pimp,” based on a rumor about Adams coercing a young woman to have sex with a Russian Czar a decade earlier. Adams’ supporters countered with a cartoon of Jackson hanging a man in a noose, a reference to Jackson’s time spent executing Seminole Indian sympathizers. The cartoon’s caption read, “Jackson is to be president and you will be HANGED.”

The campaign also saw each candidate attack each others’ wives. Jackson’s supporters claimed that Louisa Adams was an illegitimate child that had been having sex with Adams before marriage. Adams’ supporters pointed out that Rachel Jackson married Andrew before her previous marriage had legally ended. After growing increasingly depressed, Rachel Jackson died several days after Jackson won the campaign, and Andrew never stopped blaming Adams for her death.

James Blaine vs. Grover Cleveland, 1884

Republican Blaine suffered attacks when he refused to distance himself from a Protestant minister’s anti-Catholic slurs, including that the Democrats were the party of “Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion.”

Cleveland was attacked for having hired a substitute to fight for him in the Civil war, a common practice for wealthy Northern men. Cleveland also faced attacks that he had fathered an illegitimate child, leaving to Blaine’s campaign slogan, “Ma, ma, where’s my pa?” Cleveland admitted that the child may be his, and paid child support until the boy was adopted by wealthy parents.

Keep in mind that in each of these examples, the Union was still in its infancy – so unlike the hyperbole in today’s campaigns, the future of the country truly was at stake. And yet, with all of this mudslinging and “misinformation,” voters made choices that crafted our fledgling democracy into the world’s gold standard for individual freedom. Compare that to the recent Wisconsin State Supreme Court race, where the suggestion that one candidate “tends to side with criminals” was covered as if it were an alien invasion, leading the news media to advocate shutting down elections altogether.

Interestingly, Mark points out that one of our founding documents is essentially an issue ad against British Royalty. While everyone remembers the towering rhetoric about all men being created equal and the promises of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the Declaration of Independence is essentially a negative document that savages King George III of England as “unfit to be the ruler of free people.” According to the Declaration of Independence, “He (George) has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.” Basically, our nation was founded by a hit piece.

Campaign finance reformers will continue to harken back to the “good ‘ol days” where everyone got along and campaigns were run with dignity. Yet these days never existed, and never will. We have to continue to trust the voters to make choices that have built us into the world’s foremost democracy – and that includes trusting our citizens with the right to free political speech.

From My Keyboard to God’s Ears

April 23, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court held arguments on the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment” section of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. The provision in question limits how much a candidate can spend on their own campaign, presumably to prevent them from being corrupted by… their own money.

During oral arguments, Justice Scalia ridiculed the notion that laws can somehow “level the playing field” for campaigns. Scalia sarcastically suggested we should next require that the more eloquent candidate talk with pebbles in his mouth, in order to guarantee more egalitarian elections.

If that sounds familiar, it’s because I made a very similar point in a column early this year. To wit:

For instance, we need to eliminate Barack Obama’s good looks from the equation. From now on, Obama should be forced to wear a ridiculous, bushy fake mustache when he gives speeches. We’ll see if women voters are as enthusiastic about his message of hope when he looks like Borat. (Although, admittedly, he might earn my vote if he did so.)

Next, we need to equalize the market for celebrity endorsements. When Chuck Norris endorses Mike Huckabee, every other candidate in the field will be assigned a taxpayer-financed washed-up action star to serve as their campaign spokesman. Jean-Claude Van Damme, we need your cell phone number – looks like John Edwards is cratering!

Under my plan, candidates will be barred from playing instruments while on the campaign trail. Everyone remembers Bill Clinton’s thrust in popularity after he played the saxophone on late night television. Mike Huckabee recently showed up on Jay Leno playing the bass guitar. (Less memorable was Steve Forbes’ performance of Black Sabbath’s “Paranoid” on the triangle.) Whether a candidate can play a few notes on an instrument doesn’t tell me what I need to know about their position on CAFTA.

Finally, we need to get rid of all these troublesome catchwords that seem to be getting people so excited. Obama should be limited to two uses of the word “hope” per speech. Huckabee should only be allowed to refer to God as “the man who lives in the clouds,” and will be limited to using the following joke, written by my four year-old daughter:

Q: “What did the fish say to the seaweed?”

A: “Fish can’t talk!”

All of these important reforms will give real people a chance to run for office. Real ugly, dull, uninformed people.

So since I don’t expect anyone else to toot my horn, I will take this opportunity to do it myself. Or, at least before Wisconsin amends its Constitution to ban tooting your own horn.

Why the closer is the most overrated player in baseball

April 23, 2008 / Dr. Emil Shuffhausen / 0 Comments

As much fun as it is to be right, it stinks to be proven correct when you predict a disaster for your favorite baseball team. Like most Crew fans, I cringed when GM Doug Melvin announced the Brewers would be paying washed-up, HGH scandal-tinged Eric Gagne the princely sum of $10 MILLION DOLLARS to be the team\’s closer this year.

Taking a step back, I cheered Melvin when he didn\’t cave into Francisco Cordero\’s ludicrous demand for a four-year $40 million+ contract. For a while there it looked like Melvin was going to wisely go against conventional wisdom and field a team without a highly-paid save specialist. Then he picks up Gagne (bad) for $10 million (worse) for only one year (thank God). But while it\’s obvious Gagne\’s signing was a bad idea, I hereby submit that paying any closer anything more than a poverty wage is a mistake.
$\"\"$
Without further ado, here are the reasons why the closer is the most-overrated man on the roster.

1. People wrongly assume the closer is important because he\’s the only player who enters a game to his own theme music like a pro wrestler. MLB needs to make a rule that if the home team\’s closer stalks out of the bullpen with \”Welcome to the Jungle\” or something similarly awesome heralding his arrival, he must endure a head-hanging walk to the dugout after a blown save while the sound guy plays something quiet and sad by a Lilith Fair artist.

$\"\"$

2. With apologies to Rollie Fingers and his mustache, the save is sort of a made-up statistic that wasn\’t even officially recorded until 1969. Look at all the ways a closer can \”earn\” a save. Sometimes a closer can throw one pitch and he\’ll show up in the box score next to the winning pitcher with an equally-important looking stat.

3. Starting pitchers and position players are way more important than closers. If a starting pitcher gives a team 7 quality innings in 30 games, that\’s about 200 innings of service. Closers typically pitch one inning per appearance. How many innings does the average closer pitch in each season? 70 innings in 70 games? By my calculation, your closer is about one-third the importance as one of your starting pitchers. And while a starting hurler can win for you every five games, a position player can win games for you every game. I will vomit with rage the day Prince or Braun leaves the Brewers for the Yankees saying, \”I woulda re-signed with Milwaukee but Doug Melvin gave my $10 million to a guy who doesn\’t even figure into the equation in half the games.\”

4. There is nothing so special about the ninth inning that you need to have one specific guy to pitch that inning. While the game may be \”on the line\” in a close game in the 9th, the game can also be \”on the line\” in the sixth inning of a 2-2 game if the bases are loaded with nobody out. It\’s easy to remember the closer\’s strike out that ends the game, but the other 26 outs recorded that game were important too.

$\"\"$

5. I\’ll take a reliever who offers a change of pace from the starter over some flame thrower. I don\’t remember what the Brewer paid Doug Jones when we had him at the end of his career, but he, his 70 mph fastball and his mustache saved 36 games in 1997. A closer is just another relief pitcher. Relief pitchers just need to chew up innings and throw strikes. Doug Jones threw strikes.

Thanks for sticking with me. That went longer than I expected. If you only take two things away from this post, remember this: 1.) closers are the most overrated players in baseball, but 2.) the most effective Brewer closers have sported outstanding mustaches.

Memo to Gagne and Turnbow, get in touch with these guys immediately!

Brewin\’ Up a Melting Pot

April 21, 2008 / Christian / 0 Comments

So I know I\’m not supposed to be happy that the Brewers have four American-born African Americans on their roster. I\’m supposed to be color blind and root for them no matter what their heritage. But I have to admit, it is pretty cool. After all, the lack of home-grown black players in baseball seems to be a big deal to a lot of people, so anything that makes the Brewers notable in a good way is fine with me. And if it interests more African Americans in Brewer baseball, then better yet.

As it turns out, black players aren\’t the only multicultural selling point the Brewers have. Last year, Ryan Braun became the most notable Jewish player in baseball when he won the Rookie of the Year award. This year, he\’s joined by Gabe Kapler, who also happens to be a devout Jew. In $\"\"$ fact, according to Kapler\’s Wikipedia page, he has a Star of David tattooed on one leg, with the inscription \”Strong Willed, Strong Minded\” in Hebrew, and the post-Holocaust motto \”Never Again\” with a flame and the dates of the Holocaust on the other.

(Apparently, the \”record\” for most Jewish players on the field at one time is four, in 1941. Kapler joined two other Jewish Boston Red Sox on the field in 2005. Apparently, someone keeps track of this.)

So, basically, it\’s pretty cool that the Brewers keep making strides in areas important to a lot of people. It\’s unknown whether the Crew has any gay players, but Eric Gagne spoke only French until he got to junior college, so that\’s probably close enough. And regardless of actual sexual preference, Kapler seems to be a big hit on gay sports sites, as pointed out by HeatherRadish.

In fact, speaking of ethnic identities and the Brewers, check out this question Tom Haudricourt received during his Brewer Mailbag today:

Q: Maurice of Milwaukee – Hi i\’m a african American who is a big Brewers fan? So here my question With six picks in the first two rouds what positions/Pitchers you think they will look at ?

A: Brewers Mailbag – Wow, it\’s way to early to project that stuff right now. They don\’t even get their first pick until No. 16, I believe. The draft board doesn\’t firm up until the final days before the draft. Check back then.

What in the hell does his question have to do with the fact that he\’s African-American? From now on, people in the Mailbag should identify themselves by race before asking Haudricourt a question:

Q: Hi, I\’m Saul, a Jew from Milwaukee. Why is Fielder batting fourth?

Other Brewers notes:

There\’s no doubt Ned Yost is doing an excellent job, given the team is 11-7 and still not hitting a lick. And I was one of the people ready to burn him at the stake after \”beanballgate\” last year.

Now, I concede that fans always tend towards being in favor of playing \”smallball.\” It gives them a chance to prove how much more they know about strategy than their manager. But it still seems like the Brewers botch an inordinate amount of chances to score runs in tight games. Of course, there are plenty of variables that we as fans don\’t know.

For instance, J.J. Hardy gets a leadoff single in the 9th yesterday in a 1-1 game. Ryan Braun is up. Maybe Braun is a terrible bunter – but it seems that would be a good time to move the runner over. (As it is, Braun walked, and Fielder hit into a double play behind him, and Corey Hart grounded out.) The same thing happened in the 10th inning – and the Brewers would have wasted a couple of runners had Edwin Encarnacion not booted a tailor made double play. It just seems like the people who advocate for a more station to station approach seem to be winning over Yost at this point.

***

It seems like Bill Hall would be a great guy to play with. And I\’m not saying that just because he\’s coming off a productive series. He\’s always encouraging his teammates, giving hi-fives, and never complained about being shuffled around on defense. Seems like the kind of guy you\’d want around.

***

I noticed that at one of the upcoming games, the Brewers are offering free prostate exams before the game. Come in, get checked, and get two free tickets. There are several problems with this:

First, once you realize what a prostate exam is, it sounds a lot less like a good idea. It ain\’t like getting your ears checked, folks. Although if I had the choice between having the doctor\’s arm halfway up my rectum or ever watching Derrick Turnbow pitch again, grab the rubber glove.

Secondly, what happens if you get checked and the doctor there actually finds something? One would think that the people getting free prostate exams at a Brewer game are the same people that might not have health insurance. So Bernie Brewer gives you an exam, tells you you have cancer, and gives you two free tickets. Off you go now. Enjoy the game.

***

Last year during a FOX game, Geoff Jenkins mentioned that Craig Counsell\’s nickname was \”The Grumpy Rooster.\” I demand that the announcers mention this every time Counsell steps to the plate.

***

Speaking of announcers, I think Bill Schroeder and Brian Anderson are outstanding. They are as good as the Bucks\’ Paschke and McGlocklin are unbearable. And that\’s saying a lot. I mean, seriously – if you were starting a franchise tomorrow, are Paschke and McGlocklin the two guys you\’re hiring from scratch? Of course not. But because of their history with the team, they lumber on from year to year to year, making watching games even more unbearable.

***

Except for the obvious exception (Gagne), the bullpen has been outstanding this year. Torres, Mota, and Riske have all been good. They\’re a big reason the team is 11-7. But that makes last year\’s season all the more hard to take. Because the team hit lights out last year, but still ended up fumbling away the season. Had the bullpen been merely bad, instead of execrable, the Brewers would have won the NL Central by 6 games. And yes, the fact that I\’m still sore about last year means I need some kind of counseling.

***

One camera shot into the dugout this weekend showed Ben Sheets hi-fiving some players after scoring a run. The Crew should hire a coach whose sole responsibility it is to make sure no other players come within 5 feet of sheets at any time. In the bathroom, there shouldn\’t be anyone within three stalls of him.

***

Two years ago, any team in baseball would have been envious of the Brewers\’ young crop of talent. Hardy, Weeks, Hall, and Fielder all looked like they had enormous potential. As it turns out, it looks like Hardy and Weeks may not turn into the stars we had once thought. They may certainly turn into decent players, but appears both might be headed for light-hitting middle infielder roles. If that\’s the case, Hardy\’s first half of the season last year may turn into one of the greatest statistical anomalies in Brewers history. (Slightly ahead of the year John Jaha played in 148 games, hit 34 home runs, and was only arrested for drunk driving three times.)

***

Gallardo\’s going to be an All-Star this year. Bank it.

POST MONDAY NIGHT UPDATE:

TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TU
RNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW! TURNBOW!

(That would be the Brewer reliever carrying an artery-clogging 9 ERA. You know, the one who complained last week about being relegated to \”mop up\” duty? The one who Yost had to go to tonight despite carrying an unheard of 14 pitchers on his roster? Fortunately, Turnbow is now back to his regular role as Designated Game Blower. The world is right again.)

Author, Columnist