You took the words right out of my mouth Brian...right on!!!

Patch posts their propaganda in the "opinion" section

Actually, @Steve - this is a Local Voices blog authored by and posted by folks with United Wisconsin. This is not a news story and Patch editors had nothing to do with getting in on our sites. Local Voices is a free blogging platform of which you could also take advantage.

Exactly what I said. Patch is hosting and allowing it to be uploaded. I said nothing about editors or claimed it was news.

Obama and United Wisconsin - "Gunning For your Wealth!"

http://racine.craigslist.org/pol/3615010759.html

And the GOP does no good for conservatives.

There's a chasm of difference between conservatives and right-wing extremism. A lot of cash brought the fringe into the limelight and...that maneuver lost the GOP the 2012 presidential election. Most folks aren't extremists, that's why. Let's see what happens.

Most folks aren't extremists, yet they elected one in the presidential election.

The majority of people I've met at TEA Party events are by no means extreme. They are conservatives that have lost faith with the Beltway Republicans. I guess I kind of need a definition of what policies are considered extreme.

It seems that pretty much anyone that disagrees with any of the policies of the far left is labeled as a right wing extremist...

Brian, I suggest remarks such as “We are up against a strategy that is taking place by liberals, progressives, Democrats, whatever they call themselves nowadays, Socialists, Marxists” to be extreme. Mendacious. And offensive. Not part of a civil discourse. The true conservatives of my acquaintance (and I largely consider myself among them) do not "conserve" on civility, honest and/or common sense. Quite the opposite.

Of the Tea Party folks I've met (and in disclosure only a few), none could parse their talking points, all believed that they were part of a grassroots movement but could only point to astroturf organizations for talking points, signage, etc., and in general are--let's call it "naive" in political matters.

Greg, I don't see Obama as an extremist. I see George W. Bush as more of a radical, particularly in the adaptation of a "whack the beehive" approach to foreign relations. Prior to that, the U.S. approach was to protect U.S. interests. In some areas this created foreign relations issues, true; but a great deal of carnage occurred under GWB's watch. I'm not thrilled with the concept of unmanned drones myself, but this action is far more in keeping with prior U.S. policies.

I donno, taking over 1/6 of the private economy is pretty extreme

Actually, I believe that not saving the U.S. economy would have been more extreme.

Increasing the minimum wage by 20 percent isn't likely the save the US Economy - just to pick out one of the more obvious brainfarts trotted out last night.

We are one quarter away from another recession. Socialists have a funny way of defining "saving" when attached to the economy.

Actually, TeaPublicans are so out of touch with the desires of the population (the point of Democracy – self governance), that the only way to win elections is to gerrymander districts, suppress voting and change election laws to weigh more heavily on the gerrymandered districts. The reflection of this is the most recent election. Nationally, the country rejected the extreme, partisan and uncompromising Republican ticket. Statewide, Democrats won a majority of votes, yet Republicans won more seats. That isn’t Democracy. That’s propagating the very fears espoused on a daily basis.

Hypocritical. Low. Downright wrong.

Hey NoThoughtTroy,

The US is a republic, not a democracy. Not sure who educated you, but I believe you should sue them for educational malpractice.

Jack

@Jack....You're the one who needs to sue those who educated you. Technically we are a republican democracy rather than a direct democracy.

You have your terms mixed up old man. Maybe too early for the geritol? The United States was founded as a Republic, and has evolved to be a Democratic Republic via amendment changes such as the 17th amendment.

So by your own admission, the United States is – today – a Democratic Republic. The founders knew and understood changing times and the need for its people to change its laws and update/amend the Constitution.

It is far past time you do the same.

Besides, whether we are a Republic or a Democratic Republic does not change my point. We are a country to be governed by the majority. The present Republicans in office is doing everything they can to usurp that.

@Jack....Ah Jack, my unlearned friend. As usual you are a walking encyclopedia of misinformation, misdefinition and misdirection, relying on incomplete understanding and at times, pure fantasies and myths. In actuality, a republic is a form and structure of government that is not headed by an unelected monarch and representatives are elected or appointed to represent the citizens of a sovereign political and geographical entity. In fact, the US Constitution in the 4th Article guarantees each sovereign state a republican form of government. As such, each sovereign state elects its representatives to the state legislature and office of chief executive, who in turn elect, initially the senators and electors to the electoral college. Members of the House of Representatives were always directly elected by the state's eligible citizens. The only thing the 17th amendment did was to allow direct election of senators and allowed appointment of senators to finish terms of senators who are unable to finish their terms, by state governors. I would strongly recommend that you enroll and take some political science courses and history courses.

Lyle ... I'm kinda busy, and you seem to be in the mood ... so, being fair and balanced could you address FreeThought Troy regarding his various postings of ... well, as you would say ... "misinformation, misdefinition and misdirection, relying on incomplete understanding and at times, pure fantasies and myths"?

Thanks, I appreciate your effort!

I suppose my Colonial ancestors didn't bathe as often as most 21st Century Americans but they were definitely Progressives in the "modern" sense. Of my primary, famous ancestors, each were successful businessmen. They blamed their "ills" on a repressive, tyrannical, offshore system of governance that inhibited trade and siphoned overlarge shares of profit. Each did their part to create a system of government never before seen in the world, a beacon to repressed people everywhere. Personally I think they did a good job, and we all benefit from their vision and labor today.

The only truly "marxist" society of which I am aware pre-dated Karl Marx by a few centuries. Roanoke colony. Didn't work too well between 1588-1590. Marxism is about as practical as Objectivism, in my book.

@Bren... I agree we should all eschew the name calling labels. To avoid the name calling, yet communicate our purpose we must then all use NUMBERS.

So I ask you Bren, as an non-name calling identifier(number), what percent level of the total USA GDP should all government spending be set to run at ?

Bren, don't you see the irony of your own statement? Your famous ancestors would be just as appaled by the "repressive, tyrannical, ONSHORE system of governance that inhibited trade and siphoned overlarge shares of profit."

Jay, sorry but I'm not quite following you. 1588-1590 are dates.

Gear, I did indeed appreciate the irony of my words. Remember that some of the earliest legislation enacted by the nascent U.S. government was the introduction of tariffs on foreign goods (not unlike what the Donald proposed). The Revolutionary War created a glut of merchandise on the British side. After the war the rising manufacturing base of the U.S. was facing an onslaught of competition from the surplus of cheaply made foreign goods.

I think those ancestors would be concerned about the potential instability that offshoring could create in terms of domestic economic security. Following the evolving situations between China/Japan and North/South Korea for example, what if that region erupted into war and flow of products from those countries stopped? Yes there are satellite access points in other regions, but imagine the possibilities.

This is the area where the lines between unfettered capitalism and national security begin to coalesce. This is what the ancestors were concerned about--not simply the loss of profit due to foreign competition, but the dependency. The level of dependency has the capacity to change who and what we are as a country. At some point that has to be the central discussion. The situation of our "jobless" recovery makes the need for that discussion topical and immediate.

jbw, do you consider insurance policies in general to be socialist constructs? Christ taught that where three or more are gathered, there too was he. Is that a socialist concept?

It's important to understand what you believe Socialism and/or Marxism is to be able to respond to your comments. From my point of reference you have limited understanding of either government system, and so does Ron Johnson.

I think "liberals" and the occasional independent moderate actually espouse the concept of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." To me this means the freedom to pursue my interests and goals in a country that is safe from terrorism (domestic, international, and economic) and among people who love their country as much as I do.

The ability/need concept might work very well for a national healthcare program, to which people would make income-based contributions. That could create a situation where millions of people who are financially exhausted after paying hundreds and hundreds of dollars in premiums each month could actually afford to go to the doctor.

There's quite a difference between a regime (socialism, marxism, ism) and our democratic republic. We have the power to change our Constitution. Since we are paying Ron Johnson (aka Mr. Jane Curler) to represent our state, I'm willing to spend a few of my tax dollars to buy him an online civics course or textbook.

No, I don't consider insurance policies in general to be socialist constructs. A private company evaluates insurance applications and charges premiums proportional to risk for a promise of future claims payment against some unlikely event. If they manage the risk appropriately and invest cash wisely they make a profit. If they don't then they may go out of business.

I don't consider modern health insurance to be insurance, either, since it has been largely decoupled from risk assesments (e.g. insure people with expsensive known conditions at less than the claims will cost) and seeks to cover all medical expenses (not just unlikely ones like a broken bone), knowing that in nearly all cases this will result in sizable claims over the lifetime of the insured.

If I understand correctly, a more socialist concept would be something along the lines of our Medicare system, which had been proposed as a model to extend to all citizens. This model has nothing to do with a private business or investing money. Instead the government determines centrally the amount and type of benefits it plans to provide and extracts the funds required to meet its plans from whatever resources (e.g. taxpayers) are available. It may spend in an unsustainable way but would not fail quickly as a result like a private insurance company would.

To add a touch of Marxism to the concept, let's say that we determine that oil companies have the money we need to pay for our expanded Medicare program. So we pass legislation that declares that all oil resources in our country are exclusively the property of the people, to be managed by a government-appointed administration, which will allow oil companies to operate them in exchange for all proceeds beyond basic operating expenses going to the sovereign wealth fund. The fund can be used to pay for government programs that make sure the needs of the people are met, regardless of their previous ability to support themselves.

jbw, that's unlikely to happening in this country anytime soon because we are a democratic republic. The countries which identify as "communist" are actually Socialist. In the U.S., corporations and their paid lobbyists have more influence on politicians than ordinary citizens in most cases. That isn't nationalist socialism, that's a corrupted political process that needs to be fixed by voters. We can do that because we're a democratic republic.

Okay, I agree with you. I have heard a lot of talk about finding ways to redistribute outsized corporate profits to those in need, though; and I think we could see some true Socialist policies put in place with voter support if conservatives lost enough ground politically at this point. I also still think that many of the liberal talking points I've heard are based on the ideals of state socialism advanced by Karl Marx. The government could implement some of them without us becoming a communist state the same way we now have some government regulation of business combined with some free market capitalism. China is increasingly a hybrid of various political and economic models as well. I don't think that makes the Marxist ideas any less Marxist.

They will the minute Americans for Prosperity apologize for Jim Sensenbrenner

I can understand what you are feeling, Lee. There is only a very small group of Free Thinking Progressives in a majority of far right leaning voices. We do what we can with facts, but that is easily outshouted by Fox News/Tea Party rhetoric.

Are you serious, Troy? There are more righty voices in this thread because of hte subject matter. A lefty group is playing politics by making the unreasonable demand that a judge condemn statements made by a republican senator.

I can see your point, CowDung. I would counter with this. Of all the righty voices on this thread, there are other threads that have accused Ed Fallone as a lefty bowing, socialist, Marxist…. yadda yadda, etc. etc.

I believe the purpose of the United Wisconsin release is to point out that not only is Pat Roggensack an all out conservative in the pocket of TeaParty extremism, she is fund raising with one of their poster children! If judges are supposed to be unbiased, what is she doing at an event with Ron Johnson, and why doesn’t she denounce his partisan – and extreme – rhetoric?

That's because you're the demographic they're shooting for, Troy. You're assuming that because United Wisconsin is making an issue of it, it deserves to be an issue.

Have you done an exhaustive search to see of any of the other State SC justices ever attended a dinner or other gathering of this nature? Were things said that Republicans or Democrats wouldn't agree with at those dinners? If so, should those justices renounce those statements?

She was invited to the event as a speaker--she wasn't fundraising for her campaign.

She's a sitting judge--her record on the bench should be what matters, and anything that Johnson said in her presence should be of no consequence to her. Demanding that she denounce Johnson for his remarks is like demanding that Ruth Bader Ginsberg criticize Obama for some lefty comment he made in the State of the Union address, or criticize Harry Reid for one of the extremists comments he made.

Bob – though I disagree with the accusation I am the demographic Unitied Wisconsin is shooting for as I would care about the issue no matter how I discovered it…

I will agree on your other point. SC Justices, or its candidates, should disavow any inflammatory statement made at an event of their participation. Liberal or Conservative. They should.

Then if this is truly an issue for you and not just you taking bait laid out for you, I again encourage you to do exhaustive research into the subject and come forward with all other instances of SC justices attending similar events where statements that could be construed by either side of the fence as inflammatory were made. And then call for them to denounce said statements.

Otherwise, Troy, it does indeed look like you've been played.

Troy:

Look at how the supreme court justices are supposed to sit quietly during the state of the union addresses. They are not supposed to make comments or show approval or disapproval of what is being said no matter how inflammatory it is. Shouldn't the same standard apply here?

Bob – typically when I hear a conservative tell me to do exhaustive research, the discussion of reliable sources arises (remember Hoffa?). Fox News, Breitbart and Red State are not sources. The fact they even call themselves journalists is an insult to the profession. Just for you (no snark here, I promise), I will also disclude MSNBC. They seem to take the most flack for bias… yes, Ed Schultz deserves it. I love him, but do not/will not trust him for unbiased information.

CowDung – you are right about the justices in a public speech. I do recall the uproar when that Supreme Court Justice made that public display when President Obama blasted Citizens United in the State of the Union Address. Did he ever apologize for that

I don't believe that Obama ever apologized for his mischaracterization of the Citizen's United ruling in his speech.

CowDung – I obviously referring to the Justice for his break in decorum – as well has his flat out wrongness (is that a word…?) in the Citizens United case. This past election cycle proved that. All the outside money that was not regulated… both sides, now. Both sides used it. Conservatives outraised and outspend Progressives on a huge scale. The President didn’t mis-characterize CU. He hit the nail on the head. The SC was wrong in their decision. They are wrong now and that Judge was wrong at the State of the Union.

Other than the breakdown in decorum, what was the justice actually wrong about? Alito mouthed the words 'not true' at the SOTU speech. Politifact rated Obama's statement at the SOTU to be 'mostly false'.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/jan/27/barack-obama/obama-says-supreme-court-ruling-allows-foreign-com/

...and the fact that you don't like a decision made by the SC doesn't make it 'wrong'. They need to rule according to the constitution, not according to what they feel would be the effects on election spending.

Troy,

I honestly don't care what sources you use. If it's something that actually happened, it should be pretty easy to verify across multiple sources. As in: Justice So and So was at a function where Speaker So and So said "such and such", which could be construed as an inflammatory remark. The ability to identify situations such as that doesn't rely on sources as much as it does your own personal ability to identify what may be an inflammatory remark from a non-partisan standpoint.

If that's too much work for you, then I guess I'm satisfied that your expressed concern over situations like these is pretty much limited to those put forth as such by partisan organizations like UW.

Bob – it is not too much work for me to do. I am happy (indeed, obligated) to do this work. What will keep us from tyranny isn’t gun control or the like, it is an engaged electorate to keep our elected officials in line with what we want for the county.

I do appreciate your candor (no snark here, I promise). Yes, I have concerns about UW. Though I have defended them in prior posts, I will admit the situation probably had at least as much to do with fundraising as it did information. As both sides of the spectrum involve themselves in this practice (notice on their emails, they ALL have a “contribute here” link, I will concur 100% with your point we need to use our reason and logic when it comes to these emails, press releases, etc.

Obama never accused anyone of being a Marxist, Communist… etc. Obama’s comments ARE less inflammatory. Johnson’s are more.

Who gives a fyling f what he says .. it is what he does. Maybe you never heard this but actions speak louder than words

Obama scolds and speaks of economic success as evil. He tells a story to the low informed that big business is out get you, greedy, want to kill you, makes up tax breaks they take "advantage" of that do not exist. His class warfare and constant campaign is extremely offensive.

Steve – please give the time, date and speech the President said that. I have been following him for years and have never once – ONCE heard anything close to that come out of his mouth. He and his wife are self-proclaimed successful. He doesn’t criticize success. He criticizes those who are successful expecting all the burden of getting us out of debt to be covered by those less fortunate – i.e. financially secure - than they.

It is unfortunate Troy that the President doesn't instead find ways to stop spending a Trillion dollars a year more than we are collecting. I do recall how he bullied the Banks in his first few months in office, how he chastised the successful and warned them against going of to Las Vegas, etc. He has been constantly on a screed against the Millionaires and Billionaires for 5+ years. I'd think every person in every room he's made those comments should demand an apology and then I'll call Justice Roggensack and ask for her apology.

Thanks morninmist – now I know where to go stand with my Pat Roggensack for Supreme Court sign on Saturday.

Translation: Vote for Fallone because he will give the unions everything they want, bought and paid for.

You too can get your own AFL-CIO e-mails by becomming an e-activist, you will receive e-mail updates on local, state and national issues that are important to keep politicians on the union payroll.

Does this mean that Fallone is dedicated to making judgements in favor of liberal causes rather than being fair and impartial?

I am confident that the AFL-CIO money spent on this type of effort comes strictly from within our state. Fallone would not accept this help if any funds were from the AFL-CIO home office, or out of state members.

All candidates will accept out of state money. To accuse one and not all is not just.

Please be sure to let Fallone know about that, Troy.

I absolutely will.

ha ha
by your "logic" this would mean that Roggensack is dedicated to making judgement in favor of Repuglican/TeaParty causes rather than being fair and impartial!!

From the MJS:
"Roggensack received $8,625 from the Republican Women of Waukesha County and $500 from the Republican Party of Walworth County.

In addition, Roggensack received $1,250 from Diane Hendricks, the billionaire president of ABC Supply Co. who has advocated for so-called right-to-work legislation to limit the power of private-sector unions. Hendricks, of Beloit, is the biggest financial backer of GOP Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and has supported groups that back Republicans."

..............

CowDung
11:12 am on Thursday, February 14, 2013

Does this mean that Fallone is dedicated to making judgements in favor of liberal causes rather than being fair and impartial?
...

Ok. I will look for you.

........................
atthec44
11:01 am on Thursday, February 14, 2013

Thanks morninmist – now I know where to go stand with my Pat Roggensack for Supreme Court sign on Saturday.
...

Morninmist:

Not the same. Do you have a letter from any of Roggensack's donors stating that they expect Roggensack to rule in favor of their specific causes or specific matters coming before the court?

Unions are big money special interest groups.

Unions may campaign for issues important to their members, but to compare union money to TeaParty money is downright laughable.

Why can't she lose the primary? The top 2 vote getters go on to the general election...

I just confirmed it, CowDung. Roggensack is the incumbent and therefore cannot lose the primary..

The incumbent usually ends up with the advantage financially. If you are alarmed by that, you should be just as alarmed with the special interest money is flowing in for Fallone as well--particularly after reading the post from morninmist where it is clearly states that the group is giving money because they expect Fallone to rule in favor of the issues they support.

Who did you confirm it with, ThomasPaine? Please post a link to your source for this.

While she is very unlikely to lose the primary as the incumbent, it is indeed possible. There is nothing about the incumbent status that makes her immune to losing in the primary election.

You're right CowDung. I just called the GAB and apparently it's a runoff election.

Does a primary even make any sense? Why wouldn't this just be a standard election item? The partisan elections have multiple candidates and the primary is used to select a candidate for each party. That does not seem to apply in a non partisan election.

Anyone who believes RoJo's drivel clearly has no concept of what Marxism is.

No partisan, inflammatory rhetoric here. Nice to see the double standard in action.

Knowing what Marxism is (or isn’t) has never stopped TeaParty Extremists from the accusations. It’s nice to see the rest of the country is getting wise to the madness.

Political ideologies carry the same name but do evolve to meet modern times. Are you ashamed to be called a Marxist?

Steve – I will embrace the accusation of Marxism the minute you admit the Conservative’s Fascism.

"America, love it or leave it"? Nah, I don't like that one. If everyone did that, we'd still be the same backward place we started out as. How about - "America, love it? Help to make it even better!"

Considering that the bill contains provisions that deal with people living on Native American tribal lands, there may indeed be a question of constitutionality. Isn't it something of a gray area with their 'nation within a nation' status and the authority of the government on their lands?

There's also the constitutional matter of equal protection under the law. If this law applies only to women, then it is discriminatory, exclusionary and unconstitutional.

Another stupid post by mornimist

#lowinformedvoter

#ijustcontributed$100totheRoggensackcampaign

Probably not. But Food Stamps were designed for low-income people to be able to purchase fresh food and produce. Fresh produce is getting past my budget, so do you want to limit Food Stamp purchases to canned goods and boxed meals?

My wife and I are treating ourselves to NY Strips cooked on our own grill tonight. We probably do this 2-3 times per year.

Food stamps should not entitle you to eat better than the people who are funding your handout.

Most of us spend conservatively most of the time in order to be able to splurge a little on rare occasions -- like your strip steaks. How would anyone know whether that person ahead of you in line buying a steak with a Quest card hadn't eaten ramen noodles for a week in order to afford that good dinner for once? My understanding is that these cards are not lavish in the amount of food you can buy.

Food stamps up 49.3% under Obama. We'll never get out of the hole this socialist Marxist created. Free stuff is more fun for now.

Free stuff= votes

You snot, drive through the inner city and shop at all of the fine grocery stores that don't exist. Then pick up your veggies and fruits. Post the list here of all of the fine stores you shopped at, you braggart. Instead of being grateful for your bounty you assume quest care users are too lazy. Karma comes back. And I hope it bites you hard. Guess your mama and papa missed the boat when it came time to teach you about humility. All of your so called conservatives only think about one thing...yourselves. But then again, you have the audacity to also call yourselves Christians. Sorry bunch of humans.

Brother sitting on corner without a job sipping on a 40 paid for by Obama. mm mmm mm

So call him or send him an email.

Perhaps you should write a letter to United Wisconsin and find out why they got so offended...

What difference, at this point, does it make whatever they call themselves nowadays?

@CowDung....Its Johnson's pejorative use. For many, teacher is now a pejorative term. Justice Roggensack didn't do herself any favors by sitting next to him during such a partisan attack, but we know it was done to mobilize the base. Personally, I think United Wisconsin is trying to make something out a whole lot of nothing.

Of course they are trying to make something out of a whole lot of nothing--that is their purpose for existing...

Lyle, they've got nothing so they need to create something - just as they did with the Walker recall. It'll work with some. You can see that easily enough and you don't need to look any further than this blog.

The public employees unions and their supporters have picked this as the next battleground. It's getting old and annoying and they'll lose this one as they did the last two or three or however many it's been because they have to rely on nonsense such as this. Bradley's wagered her credibility for political gain, as evidenced in today's J/S. Which makes this charge by UW all the more laughable.

It may not be inherently evil, but it is Un-American.

@Brian Dey...I would be more than willing to debate with you what is American. For over two centuries we have allowed for all ideologies and spoken freely about the merits and problems of such. As an example; is involuntary servitude, American? We practiced that for over two and a half centuries. How about committing genocide against indigenous peoples? Stealing land from indigenous people seems to be very American. I look forward to your response.

Let us not forget the wholesale slaughter of 30 million unborn human beings via Roe Vs Wade, how American is that?

Yeah, we have tolerated some pretty terrible imports over the years, like involuntary servitude, but these were not "American" ideas, as you well know. I'm sure you are appreciative the conservative movement that finally impressed the outlawing of such behavior against the wishes of liberal "progressives" that didn't want to give up their "property".

Seems the taking of land from indigenous people hasn't quite been shaken, simply look at liberal Justice Sutter, and his "progressive" pals on the Supreme Court that ensured we would continue to allow such injustice.

I am interested in your extrapolation of "genocide", and you might even throw in an opinion on killing the nearly, and newly born (which I believe are the weakest among us), that are an inconvenience for most "Progressive" liberals.

Perhaps you could join those of us in the conservative party as we eliminate some of these weaknesses inherited, now that I realize you agree with us.

The Science is still out on when humans become humans. I tend to disagree with the science of those (Christians) who are looking for reasons to find life at conception to back up the myths they have been spoon-fed. Until then, Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and life does not begin at conception.

I would like to know what the newly born killing statement is all about. I personally find it a little difficult to believe.

Come on Lyle .. It is a bad thing, when you think it is OK to force me by gunpoint to pay for someone else's priviledge .. it IS A BAD THING

@Bottom Line...Involuntary servitude was imported, but continued long after those that introduced it had outlawed it. The landed American Aristocracy were the proponents of such a system and behind the wealth in land, the second largest asset of America was slaves. You indicate that it was the conservatives (reactionaries) who ended the unique and evil institutions, but it was in fact the progressive movements of the time who were committed to change that led Americans to create a more just society. Remember it was the Republican Party that was the progressives in the mid to late 19th century. The Democrats, controlled by the south were the conservatives of their time. That lasted until the mid 20th century.

@Johnny Blade...We are all forced to pay for things we may not necessarily agree with or support. Now if you are claiming it's at the point of a gun, then it sounds to me as if you're not paying your taxes. We the people have vested our government with the ultimate power, the use of force. It's unfortunate that people resist paying their fair share and must be compelled to do so. Just accept the fact you're going to have to pay taxes and fees for the greater good.

And that is why Collectivism/marxism/socialism/neo-conservatism is EVIL .. Lyle please enlighten me on when Forced taxation meaning income and property tax was enacted because it wasn't in the constitution. being a supposed history guru you should know. When have we given them the power of force against its own people, why should the govenrment be able to use force and i can not.

So you condone VIOLENCE to meet your ends and this is inherently EVIL .. This is not freedom

Lyle .. If this was truly a free country i should be able to OWN my land, grow my own food, educate my own children, provide my own water .. WTF do i need the government for .. So yes your ideology is EVIL, I don't see how it isn't

Johnny – If America is so oppressive, you are welcome to leave any time you see fit. Here is my question. Where in the world are you going to go and not pay any kind of tax? You had better be well armed. Anarchy means all that personal property you so love and crave are as good as stolen by those more powerful.

Oh, by the way. If you are a homeowner/landowner, you do own your land. If you have a note from the bank, they can seize it for non payment, but that is not the governments fault. It is in the contract you signed with the bank in order to purchase the property.

"f this was truly a free country i should be able to OWN my land, grow my own food, educate my own children, provide my own water .. "

What's keeping you from doing that, Johnny? Other than maybe you don't have a right to more than your share of the groundwater.

Really .. You guys are that ignorant, Do you know what allodial title is. Do i not rent my land in Wisconsin from the government, property tax is renting land from the government, it is the New Fuedal system. If i don't pay my rent, they take my land. You guys are seriously clueless.

So cuz everyone is not free that means America should not be free.

Iam not an Anarchist .. I am for limited government to protect your rights .. The Constitution.

You guys are indoctrinated lemmings licking the trough of collectivism .. spewing your collectivist violence on people who want freedom.

There has been a war going on between collectivizing, coercive government and the allied forces of individualism, freedom and markets for quite some time

And Freedom will WIN

Now i have no problem paying sales tax, gas tax, usage tax .. But income tax is Slavery

@Johnny Blade….I would like to ignore your virulent rant against society, but I think you’re going to unnecessary extremes. I make no secret to the fact that my personal ideology is as a social democrat. However, my position as a social democrat recognizes the need to balance the needs of the greater community with the needs of each individual. These concepts are contained in the two concepts of the sovereign community and the sovereign individual.
Our founders drew up and agreed to the principles of our sovereignty, forming a social contract between the community and the individual. The foundation of the social contract is our constitution. In order to reap the benefits and protections of the community for each individual; we as sovereign individuals, must give up some of our unfettered freedoms and a part of our accumulated wealth to support the needs of that community.
(continued)

@Johnny Blade (continued).....The accumulated wisdom of the community has devised means and policies to support the needs of the community. This includes taxes and fees assessed; the drafting and implementation of laws and regulations; and the institution of government to administer the will of the people. The government is charged to use whatever means necessary to maintain a stable and just society. We all have duties and responsibilities to help in the maintenance of the rule of law, the health and safety of the populations and the general security of all. If we all do our duty responsibly, then the government has little need to intervene with our personal lives and freedoms. We make our will known through the legal means of exercising our voting rights and the acceptance of the majority’s decision.
Neither the community nor the individual can long survive without the other and we all share an equal dependency, to think otherwise is the thoughts of the unaware fool.

Lundt – the same rights that allow you to make inflammatory comments are the same I have to place them on a scale. Please don’t deny me my rights in order to justify yours. Saying something is irresponsible compared to calling someone Un-American are on two different levels. Period.

Steve – please state the communist in the President’s staff. This is news to me.

Faux is keeping the stupid -in the family!!

Downtown Josh Brown ‏@ReformedBroker

How stupid is the audience for this, scale of 1 to 10? RT @DRUDGE_REPORT: FOXNEWS signs Herman Cain... http://drudge.tw/VZbHCI

..................

Steve ®

4:19 pm on Thursday, February 14, 2013

Obama had a self proclaimed communist in his administration. Keep it in the family

Of course it is Free Troy. You voted Obama and are low informed. Thanks for playing and proving our point.

His name is Van Jones.

Steve – disagreement is not low information. It is disagreement.

Van Jones is not Marxist or Communist or anything like that. Turn off Fox News and crazy blogs. They are misinformation and lies.

Mmm kay

Good thing youtube is around to save it forever.

That's nice.

Where's the Problem? The Governor is doing the right thing and the Lefty cry babies are upset because it doesn't fit their narrative, that he sucks. Time for the Lefties to grow up. What have the state Democrats been doing?

The centerpiece is a venture capital fund. A fund with a $400 million price tag failed two years ago. Walker hasn’t released the details or the amount of his most recent proposal, but it’s safe to assume the money will be in the same ballpark.

Other Walker proposals:

*Add $75 million to an existing tax credit designed to encourage existing Wisconsin businesses to expand and invest in job training.

*Lift the maximum $47.5 million cap on a tax credit program designed to encourage startup companies.

*Spend an additional $11 million to market Wisconsin as a place to do business.

*Spend $6 million on programs that support “high-potential entrepreneurs and businesses.”

*Spend $500,000 to assist military veterans in starting their own businesses.

*Spend $100,000 to attract international visitors to Wisconsin.

*Spend $75,000 to attract meetings, conventions and sporting events.

It should be noted that Democrats support much of this agenda, particularly the venture capital provision. However, the provisions contradict the traditional conservative notion that the free market should handle these things. Venture capital?

You do realize that PAC groups spent over $135,000 on ads for Kloppenburg and/or against Prosser, don't you? It seems that the Dems have set the precedent in big spending for the SC race...

"Roggensack Gets Club to Beat Down Middle Class and Poor Wisconites"

This is what you get when the left has NOTHING! Most of all, NOTHING better to offer. Fallone is a basket case hack and the left knows it. If the left is too cheap to support him, like they were too cheap to support the recall, he will lose.

BornFree – All I hear is a bunch of unsubstantiated accusations with nothing to back them up. Even the charge of liberal bias is unfounded. It seems to be a recurring theme to conservatives to blame the media when their policy positions are shown to be oh so very extreme, insensitive and out of touch for the majority of the country.

Again, questioning the citizenship of the President? We aren’t past this, yet.

Ridiculous

Not questioning...Just following the pattern of all the manure the Obama Administration spreads. Why would we believe anything this guy says.

There is no doubt that the Democratic Party has adopted the Socialist ideal of redistribution of wealth. One only need look at what Harkin said when he stated that there was no spending problem, just a wealth distrubution problem. Excuse me, but only the Communist regimes believed that government had the right to determine one's wealth.

Get real, you liberals are proof that the zombie apocalypse is happening. And you are the zombies believing every piece of crap this Barry guy utters.

What about the redistribution of wealth to the upper 2% in this country? Executive pay skyrocketing, middle and working income stagnant at best. Since our government isn't a pulsating, glutinous entity but rather people, some of them are very susceptible to the blandishment of lobbyists representing large corporate interests. When government representation "marries" corporate interests, what is that? Let's look at real numbers and real facts. Special interests are the single greatest threat to our democratic republic.

It amazes me the mindset that think wealth is a zero sum game. The middleclass is deteriorating because the unemployed labor pool is growing. Think about it. 12 million out of work for nearly half a decade. These people are willing to work for far less than their predecesors. They just want a job. Than Obama, who has no understanding of economics promises to raise the minimum wage, which will create more layoffs. That has been proven in the past repeatedly. So genius thinks that by taxing the wealthy, that will fix things. But in reality, it will either cause inflation, or higher unemployment. You social progressives amaze me. If that is what is taught at Harvard, I'm glad I didn't waste my time.

They can speak freely, Just speak nicely.

Two years since Scott Walker 'dropped the bomb' and state economy is still shattered: http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/two-years-since-scott-walker-dropped-the-bomb-and-state/article_606a46a0-7518-11e2-bc13-001a4bcf887a.html#ixzz2KhY9NRMI … #WIunion

There are jobs but no takers, how is the state economy "still shattered". Just more sour grapes from the drum banging union scum.