I'll let you in on a little secret... Fox News is NOT a reliable "news" source for "facts".

Apparently, Patch isn't either...

...'satire' and lies are almost as good.

Maybe I do...but the articles I post on the Patch always contain a mix of fiction and facts. It is your job to figure out which is which. I am not your teacher or your babysitter, but I have played both roles before.

"Since when do you cut something to make it solvent?"- Scott Walker claims to have saved public ed in WI by cutting $1 billion from it over 2 years...

As for Medicare - If you would have read the actual post you would be able to answer your own question: The cuts come from wasteful spending within Medicare, thus leaving more $ for actual recipients. Paul Ryan's plan cuts $ AND services, then leaves it to be defunded by 2016.

@ Women's Glasses
Walker cut money out of the teacher's benefits, quite a difference. I guess, since you feed off the public trough and are not man enough to work like the rest of us, you really have a lot vested in your wife's benefits don't you?

You are transparent as heck and we all see it.

OMG, Jason admits there is waste in a federal program!!!

But wait a minute, lets see if those bullet points really deal with waste:

1) Phasing down payments to Medicare Advantage plans - (sounds like a cut in benefits)

2) Reducing updates in payment levels to hospitals and other providers, and increasing premiums to be paid by higher-income beneficiaries - (isn't this increasing cost to retirees?)

3) Closing the coverage gap in the Part D prescription drug “doughnut hole” (Great for retirees, but not really cutting spending OR waste)

4) Including incentives to reduce preventable hospital readmissions and establish accountable care organizations (ACOs) (NOW that's a plan, if it ever gets implimented)

5) Establishes new sources of revenue dedicated to the Medicare program, including an additional payroll tax on earnings of higher-income workers and a fee on the manufacturers and importers of branded drugs. (Soooo raising taxes will cut waste???)

Jason apparently doesn't know which way the spin train is headed.

its conservative in the minds of Kool Aid drinking lefties like Jasie.

If you call asking meaningful questions to Jeff Stone and the Village Clerk harassing, then yes, I am guilty as charged. The only questions you ask day is to your wife, "Honey, did you bring home the paycheck this week, because I still have no job?"

I am blogging less lately because my WORK schedule changed - you on the other hand have a LOT more time than I to lurk the internet because well, you have NO job, isn't that right "JB" who does not even use his real name!

@Jason
Your response only exemplifies my point that you are guided by hate. I have in the past defended your families decisions and how and your wife have chosen your careers. Nor have I ever attacked you personally.

As for your harassment of local politicians; I was not speaking of Mr. Stone. Rather, I was talking about your calls into Dan Sebring.

My name on Patch is known by any one who knows me. It is a nickname. I have in the past said that If I meet you in person I would introduce myself. However, with the current political environment I refuse to put my family in a position where they could be attacked for our views.

Denise - Do you support a free home rape kit?

@Denise Lockwood
As Jason's blogs have become increasingly vile, the threads within those blogs have followed suit. While I don't support any comments you have removed; if you wish keep patch clean from speech of a certain nature it might be wise to take a top down approach starting with the bloggers of this nature. Garbage in garbage out.

wow Denise: It's amazing what you journalists will go to the wall(and even jail) for in the name of 1st Amendment freedom, yet you have no problem playing the role of propaganda minister when the conversation becomes a tad bit politically incorrect. Hypocrisy and incomptence remain alive and well in the main stream media.

Actually my comment did. Jason, having a young family with what I assume is a woman should be more concerned with women's heath such as pap smears than his propaganda concerning the benefits of the elderly.

Quit hiding behind the loose interpretations of this site's silly TOS. You come off as an activist Dane County editor.

Denise why don't you show some journalistic integrity and delete Jason's entire blog? The title offends me as it should offend you.

In conclusion Denise and Heather, both Patch staffers support a home rape kit. Do you two have personal experience with one?

Budget, a word your buddy Obama knows nothing of.

Bren - according to Jason..."but the articles I post on the Patch always contain a mix of fiction and facts. It is your job to figure out which is which."

Um, which did you like? Was his post fiction or fact?

Our future is indeed bleak with the likes of Mr. Patzfahl writing this drivel and you think it is great!

Do you receive more from the federal government than you pay in? If not, you are not part of the 47%.
You are correct, it is embarrassing that such a high percentage is dependent. And every day Obama's policies make even more dependent.

If you pay only social security and medicare yes you are one of the moochers. Am I surprised no, you are an Obama, Barrett, Baldwin voter.

What 'facts' have you actually presented? The whole article seems to echo what Politifact has named as their 'Lie of the Year for 2011'.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2011/dec/20/lie-year-democrats-claims-republicans-voted-end-me/

Who is the real liar here, Jason?

Cow, you aren't calling Jason a liar, are you? After all, he admitted about 20 threads up his musing "...always contain a mix of fiction and facts."

He just never tells us his content is a one-percenter when it comes to fact. Meaning he is 99% title appropriate.

I think that 'full of crap' might be the better way to describe Jason...

The 'Pot of Poop' at the end of Jason's rainbow

Dear "Doug" I said that Walker cut $1.2 billion from public education and is claiming that he is "saving" education by doing so. And you are absolutely right - That is crazy!

Jason is using Liberal math again. Somehow he increased Governor Walkers cuts to waste by half. IT WAS 800 MILLION HE CUT. AND, he did it by effective spending cuts, like letting local governments cut real waste (WEA insurance).

Perhaps the Patch editors should be working harder to keep the blog section as free from tasteless slurs as the comments section. Your hatred just breeds more hatred, Jason.

@Brian Dey....You're a fine one to talk about lying since you told that whopper about my wife. For you information, I have not dropped it and I am currently in discussion with my attorneys.

Lyle, sorry but others have posted it in the past. So do what you will Lyle, but you have not denied the fact that she is a public worker. And if you want to get into things ablut lying, you have been misinformed with a lot of things you have stated about me. Go there if you must, but I will in turn have to do the same.

Lyle running to lawyers? Mighty Shorewood elitist.

@Brian Dey...I never denied that my wife wasn't a public employee working for the state. In fact I posted such on the boards many times. But, you came out and stated she was a union official and in fact a section president. I called you out on that you have yet to retract your statement or claim. Some people try to erase the evidence but there are already copies. Just sayin!

@Nuitari...Elitist, how do you figure?

@Lyle -

"Brian Dey
6:04 pm on Thursday, September 13, 2012

I will take your word that she is not a union leader as it was a third party source that I relied on. Tell me she is not a public worker covered under contract and I will gladly take it back, but the substance is that you receive a benefit from your wife that is or could be affected by Act 10."

http://mountpleasant.patch.com/blog_posts/chicago-teachers-union-proves-why-what-walker-did-was-good-for-wisconsin

Sure does look to me like Brian Dey retracted the part about your wife being a union official.

Is Hoffa missing something here, or are Lyle's files on people just not updated very well?

Lyle, you might have missed it but Mr. Hoffa posted the link that clearly shows that I did retract it and even claimed it as a third party source and if I can find it, it was from someone who blogs here, and I might have missed if you denied it. Case closed.

@JRH....C'mon, a conditional statement is not a retraction. The burden of proof is on Brian to prove what he said is true. I don't have to prove anything. For the record, since she is a state employee the recent ruling in Dane County doesn't affect her status at all. She has not been under a collective bargaining agreement since 01/01/11. She remains a union member so that if she needs legal representation in the workplace it is available to her. She never took any job action, did not go to Madison to protest, but did sign recall petitions away from work.

His statements were clearly designed to defame her and her character. This was also done with the possible hope of discrediting me because of the claims about my spouse. The law doesn't care if he got it from a third party source. He was the one who placed it in the public. You as a trained attorney should know the law well enough to understand what I am saying is true.

@Brian Dey...A conditional statement is not a retraction. It would have been fine if you hadn't placed the condition on the retraction. Your legal counsel could probably affirm my statement. As long as you publicly retract without the conditional statement, then the case is closed.

Oh, but Lyle, I DO know the law and since it was in print from a third party and was not contested (if the alleged defamed person had knowledge and opportunity to correct such statement, third party or othrewise) than it can not be considered deliberate which is the key to any defamation case.

Just to remind you Lyle, WEAC tried to claim the same thing as you and I didn't back down from them and won. This is your answer Lyle, that it is okay for you to mislead people on my background or my occupation, yet when the heat is on you, you run like a little crybaby to an attorney. Bring it on...

http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/042506bmcwpss.pdf
http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/011006bmcwpss.pdf
http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/022806bmcwpss.pdf
http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/012406bmcwpss.pdf
http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/092705bmcwpss.pdf
http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/092705bmcwpss.pdf
http://local2748.org/dept/bmcw/state/092705bmcwpss.pdf

At least in 2005 and 2006, she was a member representing the union in Labor Management meetings, as well as at least being named once as a steward in the minutes of those meetings. Also, the third party source was published first, prior to mine, but indeed, she was a union official, at least accorsing to the AFSCME 2748 website.

"according"

One more thing Lyle. The "it" is in reference that you have a vested interest in the outcome of any legal or legislative actions for which you indirectly receive benefits. I clearly stated that I accepted your word that she was not a union leader, but have reached the logical conclussion that she had some sort of leadership role as a stewart and in the Labor Management meetings in 2005 and 2006.

@Brian Dey... She held the job as union steward for her unit for two years, ending in 2006. She resigned as steward and become just a union member, which she still is. As you well know being a steward is not the same thing as being a public union sector president. Your assumption and logic, as to her status was entirely incorrect. Now, I don't know who the third party source is that first posted such a lie. Please direct me to that post so that I can for myself.

I am not WEAC and I have no vested interest in your business or what you do. As far as I'm concerned, it is OK to challenge my credibility, but when you unjustly defame one of my family members, who has not been engaged in anyway, that is taking it too far.

Now, after all is said and done are you going to retract your statement about my wife?

Lyle- It was on a recent post on the patch and I am still looking for it. I thought I made it clear that I took your word for it. Indeed, she is not a union president, however, the conclussion is that she was a union leader; i.e. steward and was a representative of th union at Labor Management meetings between 2005-2006. I hope that clears up any misunderstanding.

@Lyle, am I missing something? I know this isn't my fight, but why are you threatening people with lawyers because your feelings are hurt? Kinda silly. Had the same thing happen to me from another Shorewood pantywaist.

@Lyle & @Brian -

We've all seen some pretty stupid and silly flame wars between Patch commentators, but if either of you is actually going to an attorney over this matter - well, that's just insane in Hoffa's personal opinion! You're taking this forum way too seriously!

Lyle, as I read Brian Dey's comment, the retraction forwarded by Mr. Dey was not conditional, as you're claiming it to be. If you consider the totality of the comments leading up to the retraction, and the wording of the condition itself, it becomes clear that the condition expressed by Mr. Dey was clearly in regards to his point about you potentially having a personal vested hatred of Act 10, because your wife, as a public sector union member, may have had her total compensation package provided by her public employer significantly reduced due to the implementation of the Act, thus effectively impacting your family's financial bottom line, and thus exposing a potential personal bias against the Act, those who caused its implementation, and those who support it and its creators.

Also, the newly revealed information that at one time your wife did serve her union and its membership in an elected official capacity, as a steward, really muddies the factual support concerning the element of 'a false statement.'

And, as Brian has correctly stated, in order to succeed on a claim of defamation, you must be able to prove the requisite intent. Frankly, Hoffa just doesn't see any maliciousness from Brian here. While his claims may be somewhat tasteless and unnecessary, he was clearly intending to expose a potential deeply rooted personal bias in an ideological conversation.

Hoffa also doesn't see how being falsely accused of being a union official is somehow defamatory. Most people would love to be falsely thought of being in a higher position than they actually are. Especially in your case, being the pro-union advocate that you've proven yourself to be through your blogs and comments here on Patch. Standing in your shoes, you should be proud that Mr. Dey considers your wife as being fully capable of holding a high level union position - not outraged.

Hoffa knows that both of you guys are good people and considers both of you to be friends. Hoffa also suspects that although the two of you have clearly differing ideologies, that you also personally respect each other.

Please, just apologize to each other, drop this foolishness, and let's move on to a discussion of substance and merit!

@Brian Dey....Thank you, it's over.

@Nuitari...As far as I'm concerned, I'm fair game. This involved a family member that is not a part of my participation on the Patch. I think that there should be some limits and attacking people's families is off limits as far as I'm concerned.

@Lyle: Your emotion seems to be driven by the reader understanding that your position on this blog reflects an economic benefit derived from a public sector union association [your wife] and her historical leadership position with the public sector union. Many would have already concluded that your positions taken on this blog reflect that association.

As far as lawyers are concerned, I am laughing because your argument to protect your wife's reputation on this LITTLE blog is beyond rediculous. I for one would provide Brian Dey with $1,000 toward his legal defense fund knowing that complainant would need to cough up same in order to move the matter forward. Now, it is probably best for all to settle down and get back to this little blog for whatever personal entertainment, expression or whatever else brings the few of us here.

@Lyle -

Hoffa concurs, family is off limits.

However, in all fairness, you can't honestly believe that Brian was attacking your wife. He was merely trying to expose a potential personal bias that you may hold because of your wife's position in relation to the effects of Act 10. And in the context of an ideological debate/conversation, that's an extremely valid point. Being the political commentator that you are, you know this to be true.

He never said anything personally insultive or derogatory about your wife, did he?

While Hoffa greatly admires your defense of your wife, she was never really under attack by Mr. Dey. Hoffa sincerely hopes that you can see this reality.

Point well taken Lyle.

Although I disagree with most of you who are right of center, but I respect your positions and your willingness to defend them. I usually attempt to lay off and resist becoming overly personal. I will continue to edit myself and if I step over the line I know you will let me know.

I don't know which is sillier tonite, Lyle and Brian's very public spat over perceived insults or the whole string re: Nicolet. Anybody notice the world is blowing up ?

Same could be said about liberals:
1) persoanl attacks
2) Claims of ALEC and Fox News
3) Default to its Bush's fault

And the polls also concluded that Walker would be recalled ... NOT

Sorry, Colonel Sanders. Here is the HuffPost article from back then, showing every poll in Walker's favor (or 1 in a dead heat, but none with Walker down):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/05/wisconsin-recall-polls-scott-walker-tom-barrett-margin_n_1570869.html

But it doesn't matter. It would take an act of God to change anything enough to overturn an 82+% likelihood prediction from Nate Silver. His calculations are scary accurate. Far better than looking at polls, which is why I always look at Silver's reporting before accepting the validity of any polling.

Actually, Walker was behind on the PPP polls, i seem to recall.

PPP gets a lot of criticism for left leaning results. Even if I may personally lean that way myself, I usually try to stick to very centrist polls, just so I don't end up with any nasty surprises. And like I said above, even then I check those results (when I can) against Nate Silver.