Stone said, “I’m the only candidate for Milwaukee County executive that has voted against increasing government pensions.” But is this really true?

The problem with this question is that it is misleading. It creates a doubt in the voters mind making them think that all of the other candidates have voted FOR increasing government pensions. That’s just not true.

So why would the Journal-Sentinel encourage this sneaky deception and then rate the statement “true”?

Earlier this week we pointed out that Journal Communications is the parent company of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, WTMJ AM620 radio and WTMJ Channel 4 (television). Each of the 3 sources appears to reinforce each other. None of them will criticize one of their sibling media sources. After all, Journal Communications is a business and criticizing one, discredits all.

For years it has been obvious that WTMJ AM620 has been a shill for the Republican party. It is now becoming clear that the Journal-Sentinel is now whoring their columns out to the GOP just as their radio station has been for years.

By lobbing this softball question to Stone, and letting him manipulate the wording in order to earn a “true”, the JS has discredited themselves.

Abele’s website states, “Chris will grant a short-term property tax exemption for new small business startups based on new net jobs created in Milwaukee County.”

The JS honed in on what is legal versus what is possible.

Technically the JS is not wrong, but in practice they blew it. It would not have taken too much work for the columnist to find another recent example of a tax break that was not legal but was enacted shortly after it was proposed. Former County Executive, now Governor, Scott Walker announced that he would issue pension obligation bonds to pay for Milwaukee County’s pension liability. It was illegal at the time but Walker pushed it through anyway. Both the Wisconsin legislature as well as Governor Jim Doyle approved legislation that would allow Walker to borrow money to pay for present day expenses.

So is it fair to hold Abele to a higher standard than the man who was in the seat Abele hopes to win? We rate this a double standard.

This is the case of a recent story the Journal-Sentinel ran “Ament backs Sullivan in County Exec Race”.

Our problem is not so much the substance of the story, which is simply misleading, but the way that they chose to portray the long time former County Exec. Columnist Daniel Bice starts out the column with “F. Thomas Ament, the disgraced former Milwaukee County executive”…

We rate this story “deceptive”.

A journalist cannot start out their column with the premise of a lie and expect following that lie to be given credence. Ament was not disgraced. He committed no crime. He was never charged with a crime. Ament’s first mistake, and this is the one that led to the rest of the pension scandal, was to be a democrat. Journal Communications Republican talk radio show host Charlie Sykes (WTMJ) railed non-stop against Ament in order to drum up support to recall Ament. Journal Communications reporters and editors (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) ran stories supporting their own guys (Sykes) positions and restating an accusation of a generous benefits package that could have never benefited the exec in the amounts they claimed in the first place because it would have been illegal. Journal Communications television (WTMJ Channel 4) supported the whole thing by running non-stop anti-Ament stories. Fox6 also got in on the act since Fox pretty much always oppose Democrats, leaving only 2 other mainstream television sources who jumped in on the action because it seemed like it was thing thing to do.

It was a classic case of the tail wagging the watchdog.

Now, nearly 9 years after the feeding frenzy, and millions of dollars earned by Journal Communication which unethically manufactured the frenzy, they’re taking cheap shots at Ament again.

The substance of Bice’s story is that Ament wrote a check to candidate and former State Senator Jim Sullivan. Sullivan, who was Ament’s State Senator, and before that Ament’s Alderman, gave Sullivan $200. Sullivan is facing philanthropist Chris Abele who is already running television ads and can afford to drop a million dollars of his own money into the campaign if he chooses, and State Representative Jeff Stone who has the benefit of a virtually non-stop pro-Stone radio station promoting his campaign. And who owns that radio station? You guessed it — Journal Communication’s very own WTMJ.

So the big story here, and Journal Communications would prefer it not be laid out this simply, is that Sullivan took a $200 campaign donation from a former County Exec who served the people of Milwaukee County for over 30 years. Meanwhile, Journal Communications, whose radio station will be providing what would otherwise cost hundreds of thousands of dollars in free advertising, is supporting another candidate with their donation of free air time.

While the story about Sullivan is a stretch, the premise of the story and the portrayal of Ament is certainly deceptive.

This is why today, we at Watchdog Milwaukee will be introducing our own fact checking — WATCHDOG FACTCHECK. We will be rating those who do the ratings. Our ratings will be less about the candidates themselves, but more about how the mainstream media presents issues and candidate positions.

We appreciate the fact that several years after creating Watchdog Milwaukee, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel created their own Watchdog Reports. What we don’t appreciate is that they have not doled out their brand of watchdogging with the same balance and level of objectivity that we have used here. Now we understand, and know that our critics will not bother to read this whole paragraph, that we are not the pinnacle of objectivity. We certainly have our point of view and there is no question that we approach issues with a thorough and complex understanding of issues that cannot be summed up in a short slogan or campaign bumper sticker. But what we do pursue, and we do it fairly well, is to provide needed analysis and in some cases expertise where others bring only an agenda. Sometimes our critics agenda is partisan, and sometimes it is commercial.

This is our foray into watchdogging those who claim to be the watchdog.

Therefore we will provide the ratings, especially in cases when we find egregious and flagrant abuses in journalism, to the public. Our ratings are not meant to be the sole and final decision for readers to adopt. What they are meant to do is to create an understanding and dialogue of often complex issues which do not always make their way into the public discussion. We will call upon past experience and insight to provide insight and understanding. We will also open up the comment section so others, who have opposing views can respond as they see fit. What we won’t entertain in our forums, is personal attacks or profanity. Our forums are not meant to be a ring for a vicious dog fight, but rather a way for our readers to sniff out the facts and bark out their own point of view.

We will start out with the pinnacle of reporting. “Accurate” is what every reporter and columnist should strive for. The accurate report provides information which gives the reader real insight and provides a public service. We believe the reporters or columnists who consistently put out “accurate” information are those who espouse the principles of the man who has inspired Watchdog Milwaukee — Edward R. Murrow.

“A stretch” is reserved for reports or assessments which have an element of truth but don’t really provide an accurate portrayal of events, opinions or comments.

“Strained” shows a lack of objectivity and either an inability or unwillingness for the reporter to do their homework. A strained column may be the result of a reporter not having the time necessary to do an accurate and in-depth analysis due to a variety of reasons ranging from attempting to file their story with inadequate time due to an impending deadline, or simple laziness.

“Deceptive” is usually reserved for the worst of the worst. We will attempt to use this rating sparingly because it is our opinion that most reporters and columnists attempt to do the right thing. We call on our readers and even those who have been tarred with unfair labels by the media, to contact us with their side of how “Politifact” just blew the story. We will not give out the “deceptive” label lightly. Deceptive reporting is all that we are not, and sadly, is the most closely espoused by another Wisconsinite, former Senator Joseph McCarthy.

Finally, we will give the rating “double standard” to politifact and its reporters who treat different candidates so utterly different that their bias is glaring upon analysis. For instance, if Politifact analyzes the statement of one candidate in order to entrap them into making a statement which they may not have all the facts on, and then asks their opponent a different question which is clearly a softball question, we will call them on it.

An example would be, if Politifact asks Candidate A “Do you like puppies” and Candidate A replies “yes” and rewards that candidate with a “True” and then asks Candidate B “why didn’t you get your dog vaccinated in 1978″, those questions are no where near the same and we would rate that a “double standard” along with an explanation of why that rating was assessed.

Comparisons have been made to GOP Presidents who made speeches to schoolchildren, but what the wild reaction made me think of is my own reaction to the news that then-President Reagan had been shot. I was liberal even then, and it would have been hard to find an action or opinion of Reagan’s with which I agreed. But I was upset by the shooting and would have been horrified if he had died: he was, after all, the President of the United States.

But the immediate conspiracy theories — and the willingness of conservative parents to keep their kids out of school rather than risk their being exposed to ideas they (the parents) disagree with — are the final proof that conservatives will never accept Obama as a legitimate President. (That doesn’t mean they’re all “Birthers” — that’s just one concrete way of delegitimizing Obama.) I don’t think it’s just about race, though it would be hard to deny that’s a contributing factor. For whatever reason, they reject him: he’s not their President, and I dare say a fair number of them would celebrate if he were assassinated. I realize that’s a terrible thing to say, but scan the righty blogs and I think you’ll agree.

Reader Advisory Committee Member Kelly Kasum Ressel, for instance, criticizes those meddling local bureaucrats who mandate that pool owners put up proper fencing to keep children out. She complains that this places the responsibility on the pool owner rather than where it belongs, on the children’s parents. What she actually has a quarrel with is the old common-law doctrine of the attractive nuisance, which does exactly that. The governments are actually helping pool owners, since if sued under that doctrine they can argue that erecting a fence that complies with local ordinances is exercising reasonable care.

Shouldn’t even “Advisory Hits” have some standards?

Patrick Dorwin of Badger Blogger is quoted in the so-called “Best of the Blogs” implying that drilling in the ANWR will bring down our heating-oil prices this winter. I hate to break it to you, Patrick, but any new drilling wouldn’t yield actual fuel for at least 10 to 15 years — until about 2030, according to the Bush Administration itself — and when it does, it’s not going to make much of a dent in prices. I know that polls show that half of Americans think expanded drilling will lower gas prices by next year, but one would hope our “best” bloggers would stick to the facts rather than faux populism.

Now let’s turn to the letters page. Hoo boy. James Pawlak thinks our history textbooks ignore all the “persons seeking religious freedom” who populated the U.S. Without going too deeply into the history of the American colonists, I can tell you that the most commonly used examples — the Pilgrims and Puritans — wanted the freedom to practice their religion and make sure everybody else in their colony practiced it, or else. That’s not the usually intended meaning of “religious freedom.” (I’m not even going to get into Pawlak’s views on the role of white men in American history.)

Retired MPD Captain Glenn D. Frankovis thinks Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn should send some officers to St. Paul to help with security at the Republican National Convention. What concerns me here is that he twice refers to this as sending “troops.” This paramilitary mindset is a dangerous one, and all too common in those running security for large political gatherings. I hate its spread to urban police forces.

Then there’s blockhead William A. Draves, who thinks that a small gap between Wisconsin males’ and females’ ACT scores — in favor of males — while Wisconsin colleges are graduating more women than men is evidence of some sort of anti-male conspiracy. Of course, Draves either doesn’t know or chooses to ignore that test scores are but one aspect of students’ qualifications that college admissions offices evaluate; high school grades weigh at least as heavily, if not more, and girls generally outdo boys in that arena. He also plays statistical games by not telling us the percentage of college applicants that are male, only the percentage of graduates, as if the other number doesn’t matter.

Well, I’m exhausted. It’s tough when people are being wrong in the newspaper. Especially those the newspaper itself chooses to feature.

In truth, I think a requirement limited to Milwaukee is a bad idea that could backfire; I’d like to see a statewide mandate, or better yet (dreaming here), a national one. But that’s not Smith’s problem with the plan.

Our noble columnist ratchets up the class-war rhetoric, opening by informing us that “leftists … never stop coming up with new ideas to steal other people’s money” and sarcastically inquiring why 9to5 isn’t also demanding that all workers get company cars. Gee, Al, I dunno, maybe they’re holding out for corporate jets?

I might have more patience with Smith’s failure to understand the difference between paid sick leave and a company car, or with his complaints about confiscating people’s wealth, if I hadn’t recently finished reading an advance copy of Mystic River author Dennis Lehane‘s new book, The Given Day, a historical novel about the years 1918-19 which focuses on labor unrest, climaxing with the disastrous Boston Police Strike of 1919. (Don’t look for it in stores yet, as it’s not coming out until late September, but you can pre-order it here.)

This isn’t a book review, so I won’t be going into detail, but I will say that, though flawed, the book is well worth reading, and not just because it provides a salutary reminder of what workers and labor organizers had to face less than a century ago — it’s also an entertaining story. (Before Patrick McIlheran‘s Reality Patrol arrests me, I do understand the difference between fact and fiction, but there’s a great deal of verifiable historical fact behind this fiction.)

In the same way that the TV series Mad Men reminds us why we need feminism, The Given Day vividly illustrates the need for labor unions (and laws protecting the right to organize). Of course, if the last several decades hadn’t seen the systematic dismantling of organized labor, most Milwaukee workers would be unionized, and a proposal like 9to5′s would be unnecessary.

But it’s Smith’s rhetoric that reminds me most viscerally of the novel, and of the real-life anti-labor forces from which it draws its inspiration. Smith compares requiring sick leave with mob lootings of people’s homes, and clearly thinks those stuck in dead-end jobs with no benefits deserve their fate, given his casual admonition that if they don’t like it, they should “expand their skill set.” Those who opposed organized labor also compared workers’ demands to theft, and were similarly contemptuous of those who were anything but grateful to have employment, no matter how terrible the pay and conditions.

To move away from the fictional past to the semi-fictional present, Smith hauls out the old “tax hell” nonsense. This tired idea bears even less scrutiny given MillerCoors’s recent decision to leave Milwaukee for Chicago — not exactly known for its low-tax, low-regulation environment — in part because of Chicago’s transit system, the kind of improvement for Milwaukee that those of Smith’s ilk rabidly oppose.

It seems that conservatives have really taken to this idea of a Second Gilded Age. One little hint, guys: Mark Twain coined the term “Gilded Age,” and it wasn’t complimentary.

Obama, Reagan and the world of make-believe

Barack Obama visited Mount Rushmore the other day, full of audacious curiosity. He asked a ranger about the chase scene across the monumental faces in [Alfred] Hitchcock‘s “North by Northwest” — “How did they get up there in the first place?” The Associated Press says he asked. “They didn’t. It was a movie set,” the ranger replied. One must note that when we had an ex-actor as president, he didn’t need that whole movies-are-make-believe bit explained to him, much as Reagan’s critics implied so.

There are two mendacious claims here. The first is that Barack Obama’s failure to realize that the Mt. Rushmore scene in North by Northwest was not filmed on location is evidence that he doesn’t understand that movies aren’t real life. That’s ridiculous. All it proves is that Obama doesn’t know much about making movies — hardly a disqualification for the presidency.

The second claim is that St. Ronald Reagan, contrary to his (no doubt liberal) critics, did understand that movies are make-believe. In fact, there is plentiful evidence that the late ex-President conflated film and real life on numerous occasions.

Let’s start with this:

Reagan regaled audiences about a B-17 pilot who would not bail out of his crippled plane on his way back from a European mission because his wounded gunner couldn’t make the jump. The pilot comforted the lad: “Never mind, son. We’ll ride it down together.” Reagan asserted that the pilot was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously.

However, military author-historian Lawrence H. Suid relates in his book “Guts & Glory: The Making of the American Military Image in Film,” that he couldn’t verify such a story, either through the White House or the Air Force History Office.

Suid eventually located the source. A World War II veteran recognized that the story was too perfectly similar to a scene in a popular 1944 air drama about the Battle of Midway, “A Wing and a Prayer,” starring Don Ameche and Dana Andrews. In a climactic scene, the radio operator tells his pilot that the plane is afire but he can’t move. The pilot returns, “I haven’t got the altitude, Mike. We’ll take this ride together.”

Also, a number of sources, including Ron Kampeas of the JTA News Service, report that Reagan, who spent World War II in Hollywood making training films, told both Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and famed Nazi-hunter Simon Wiesenthal about his experiences filming newly-liberated concentration camps. Sympathetic biographer Edmund Morris relates that while Reagan was involved in editing raw footage of the death camps and was genuinely horrified, “He (Reagan) would sometimes say, ‘I was there at the liberation of the camps. I was there with Eisenhower’s Army. I saw the Jews being liberated. I saw the dead bodies.’”

There are other examples I could recount. Next time McIlheran wants to slam Obama, he might think about having more evidence for his claims; next time he wants to defend Reagan, he might do some research first. (I here give him the benefit of the doubt — something he rarely gives liberals — and assume he was not deliberately lying.) Google is a good place to start, Patrick.

Hey, you kids get off my lawn!

(“Shorter” concept invented and perfected by bloggers much more clever than I am.)

It’s not as if McIlheran was making any political points (though I suppose it’s possible to read into his “Quick Hit” a general criticism of single mothers). He didn’t even blame the government!

Not that many people get to use the Journal Sentinel editorial page as their pulpit. Is it too much to ask that those who have that privilege actually have something to say?

Listening to Channel 12 reporter Nick Bohr “report” on Scott Walker you would think it was a paid television ad. Bohr not only let Walker get away with deceiving news watchers about the fiscal health of Milwaukee County, but he failed to call Walker to the carpet for the destruction of the infrastructure and overall health of the county. Bohr then proceeded to let Walker take ridiculous and deceptive pot shots at challenger and State Senator Lena Taylor.

Bohr contacted Taylor to get her response while the State Senate was in session. Effectively, if she wanted to answer Bohr’s questions on his schedule, she would have had to leave the floor of the Senate during debates (in other words, not do the job she was elected to do) and work around a reporters schedule.

You’re probably wondering, is Bohr an idiot? Clearly the answer is yes.

As a citizen journalist, I know that politicians are always going to be self serving and that’s ok — journalists should expect politicians to defend their positions and advocate their agendas. After all, that is what they were elected to do. The problem with some journalists, and yesterday Bohr was a shimmering example of this, is that they take what the politician says and report it as fact without ever doing any research.

But what ever happened to looking at all of the facts?

Without doing any in depth research, we know a few things about Milwaukee County that are in the recent new which Bohr should have pressed Walker on had he been doing journalistic due diligence.

Here are just a few questions that Bohr, or any other reporter, could have expanded on and I’ll premise this by saying, “Executive Walker, you said that there is a surplus in this years budget yet”…
1) The bus system which used to be the top rated bus system in the nation for farebox recovery has suffered from large fare hikes and route cuts and consequently now has one of the lowest ridership rates in the country despite historically high gas prices.
2) Milwaukee County Parks, once known as a crown jewel of the county, has been allowed to decay as staff that has historically maintained the parks have been cut. Infrastructure continues to fair. How do you reconcile the neglect of the parks with your claims of strong and responsible management of the county?
3) Half of the staff has left the Medical Examiners office whose budget and consequently the salaries of the employees, which you have cut. Autopsies and crime lab backups are a major problem in your County which have resulted in jail overcrowding which in turn leads to increased overtime costs at the jail and House of Corrections. Now after half of the staff is already gone, you’re suggesting increasing the salaries in the Medical Examiners office to make them competitive so the County can keep its needed employees. Isn’t it a bit too late for that?
4) Forced overtime at the House of Corrections is out of control. Employee morale is at an all time low, yet you continue to resist hiring additional correctional officers despite overtime costs which could have paid for additional officers. While it is an election year and it is understandable that a politician is prone to bragging about their accomplishments, how does it make fiscal sense to understaff the HOC especially in light of the young man who recently died of a methadone overdose as an inmate where he clearly got his drugs when he was incarcerated?

Any of these questions could have been posed to Walker. Instead, reporter Nick Bohr and WISN 12 chose to run an ad for Walker, disguised as a report. This clearly calls into question both Bohr and WISN 12′s journalistic integrity.

I’ve written on this site before about Schulze and have called him out for being one of the worst reporters working for the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. In short, this instance of substandard reporting is no exception. According to Weishan, his comment to Schulze was akin to “never say never” and made no mention that he was actively considering a run.

Schulze took “never say never” and turned it into a possible run for the office of County Executive.

Bud Entries represented the district which included Oak Creek and part of Franklin. He campaigned on a part time board and only served in a part time capacity while drawing a full time salary. He moved out to Ozaukee County while still collecting a $50,000 a year full time salary as a Milwaukee County Supervisor. The press gave him a pass on it and he didn’t run for re-election.

Tim Johnson lost his taste for government quickly and did not run for re-election.

Rob McDonald found that governing was much harder than spewing rhetoric and he also called it quits.

Peter Agnos was exposed for being bumbling and inconsistent even in his positions which he thought he supported but voted against. An interesting side note here is that Agnos never truly won the election against former County Board Chairman Karen Ordinans but the voter fraud that Agnos could have easily been busted for was never investigated. That was unfortunate — especially since t

Ryan McCue recently jumped ship and ran for the Mayor of Cudahy. Clearly McCue sensed what was going to happen in Milwaukee County in the coming years due to reckless policies enacted by “reformers” and didn’t want to stick around to see the outcome.

Paul Cesarz is the one past “reformer” who remains on the board today. Oddly enough, even after being exposed for bilking a million from citizens in a pharmaceutical scheme, Franklin and Hales Corners voters returned him to office. One has to question the wisdom of voters who would make such an egregious error in judgment.

This is unheard of in Milwaukee County. Their swift fall from grace shows that their special election rhetoric did not translate into ballot box victories in the normal election cycle. Their successes breeding anger and hate burned brightly in 2002. But while the fires of hate may burn very hot and very bright, those fires are not sustainable in the long term.

Gerry Broderick was the one 2002 candidate who never said he was an ally to County Executive Scott Walker, a formerly little known Republican Assembly Rep to Wauwatosa. Broderick never bought into the faux reform movement which was pushed by Republicans and the Republican shill group, Citizens for Responsible Government. His liberal district which encompasses the liberal east side and Shorewood has rewarded him with re-election since he has not sucked up to Walker and has maintained his liberal views.

Case 1: off duty deputy solicits an undercover MPD officer for sex, gets arrested. This is a misdemeanor violation of the law.

Case 2: Deputies confiscate a ‘ton’ of drugs from a car on the freeway (Clarke makes a great press conference out of it) Same officers illegally enter and search a home related to the drug bust (their sergeant knows about it). Officers then write less than honest reports about incident.
This is a clear cut violation of Civil Rights and it tainted the whole case. Officers were not allowed to testify in court and the bad guys got off.

Case 3: Deputy does not notify supervisor about a packet of paperwork that needs verification of terms from a court that is closed for the weekend. (Note, it is not departmental policy to notify the supervisor.) However, the deputy did notify the next shift during debriefing (which IS policy). Paperwork is about an inmates release date and only the court can verify the terms…court opens Monday. No policies were violated.

Case 4- A Deputy calls in sick three times in one year. Although CONTRACTUAL agreement states a deputy is allowed 3 sick occurrences, Clarke has taken it upon himself to CHANGE the contract to making the 2nd sick day a write up and the third an internal affairs case. While this is not a violation of the deputy contract, it is now Clarke’s new policy

Now the fun part, the interactive portion of my story.. you get to pick the discipline each case received. Remember two of these people violated the LAW, one violated a new policy that violates the deputies contract with the county and the fourth didn’t actually violate any policy.

Discipline issued to the four cases:

A- a three (3) day suspension (stays in personnel file)
B- a one (1-5) day(s) suspension (stays in personnel file)
C- a seven (10) day suspension and transfer to the jail (although not for discipline because Clarke says the jail isn’t for disciplining deputies!?) and stays in personnel file
D- a six (6) month probation period/ written reprimand and transfer to the jail( see above comment) to include removal of the reprimand after the 6 month probation period.

Scroll down a bit for the answers.

Here was the discipline that Clarke handed out.
Case 1-C
case 2-D
case 3 A
case 4-B

Is there logic here? Deputies are sworn to uphold the law and yet under Clarke, if you violate state law and disregard the civil rights of the citizens you’re going to get a hand slapping. However, if you violate a precious departmental policy and “Hell hath no fury like a David Clarke scorned.”

The saddest part about this whole story is that internal affairs doesn’t even have to have proof you did anything wrong… that’s right… all they need is a suspicion. Numerous cases have been given discipline WITHOUT proving guilt. Isn’t that the craziest thing you’ve heard coming from a law enforcement agency?

Publishers Note: It is not the policy of Watchdog Milwaukee to permit anonymous postings. However, when there is clearly a likelihood that there will be personal ramifications, we will protect the identity of our contributing writers. Since Sheriff David Clarke has shown a clear pattern of vindictive behavior against those who do not subscribe to his political philosophies and motivations, we are sure that Clarke would take action against any deputy or member of a deputy’s family should their identity be compromised. That being said, several sources have come forward to us now and in the past to request we expose some of these problems within the department. Since the corporate media has chosen to give Clarke a pass on his egregious behavior and thereby failed in their duties as a watchdog, we are taking the opportunity to do what they should have done in the first place — bring to light a story which has long been kept from the public. The man who inspired Watchdog Milwaukee, legendary news man Edward R. Murrow, would have wanted nothing less.

But there is one glimmer of light. Now this is just a guess, and I have nothing other than my gut instinct to back it up, but I would think that the majority of Americans now believe that Fox News is just a mouthpiece of the Republican party. Does that mean their ratings will go down? No, in fact it probably means the opposite. All hardcore GOP partisans are likely to get their “news” from their ever faithful Fox affiliates. Yes, it’s a bit like a President Bush publicity tour — only listen to people you want to listen to and exclude those who don’t agree with you.

For years we’ve heard cries of “it’s not fair” and “the liberal media” as the nation as been irresponsibly dragged to the right from a media who, worried they’ve been perceived as too far to the left, has continued to cater to the deceptive whines of the right. And still, despite that dragging, many people still haven’t gotten it.

A prime example of a newspaper that just hasn’t gotten it is our own Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. I’ve accused them of a right-wing bias in the past and their recent posting “best of blogs” is no exception. Citing three hardcore right wing blogs accompanied by venomous citations from each, they felt compelled to provide their brand of “balance” by citing one lefty blog and the quote they attributed to it was primarily a quote from another place. Unfortunately the folks down at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel still don’t get it. Southeastern Wisconsin doesn’t need another Waukesha Freeman. We don’t need another source for right wing news dumped at our door steps every day. Their numbers will continue to fail as long as they keep beating the drums of the GOP. If they’re worried about balance, then provide balance. One Eugene Kane isn’t enough for them to say they’ve reached the pinnacle of balance.

But at least with Fox News, I think people are starting to get it. But look at how they’ve figured it out. Now again, this is just a theory. It’s not through Democratic lecturing. It’s through two things — the rise of citizen journalists in the blogosphere and through the use of humor on shows (like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report) which put together montages of the GOP mouthpieces coupled with “reporting” on Fox News.

Just as the problem with “Mallard Fillmore” is not that it’s conservative, it’s that it isn’t funny, the problem with Mr. Legacy Pundit’s column isn’t that it’s conservative, it’s that it’s mind-bendingly stupid.

It was today’s column about taking sides in a civil war that provoked this rant. Of course there are times when it makes sense to take sides in a civil war, when there are clear good guys and bad guys, and anyone who says otherwise is being either disingenuous or historically forgetful.

However, the question is whether it makes sense to take sides in Iraq’s civil war. Who are the good guys, and who the bad? Jonah doesn’t even suggest whom he sees as the heroes. In fact, he himself points up the problem when he says, in his next-to-last paragraph, “… the 21st [century] will be a lot more ugly if Sunni Salafists or Iranian pawns win in Iraq.”

But aren’t those essentially the two competing sides? Sure, there are (dwindling numbers of) Sunni and Shiite moderates, as well as lots of people who don’t give a damn about politics but just want to live in peace and safety. But they’re not the ones with the mortars and bombs.

Jonah doesn’t think he needs to figure all this out. All he’s interested in is trying to prove liberals are hypocritical for not wanting to take sides in Iraq when they want to take sides in Darfur. And, as usual, he only proves how limited his own brainpower is.

There are intelligent conservatives out there. Why, oh, why, must the J-S keep running this dreck?

That time is now.

Republican partisan and US Attorney Steven Biskupic did just that when he went after state administrator Georgia Thompson with the flimsiest of arguments. Biskupic claimed that Thompson steered lucrative travel contracts to Adelman Travel whose owners were also donors to the campaign of Governor Jim Doyle.

Biskupic’s stormtrooperesque efforts were an attempt to smear Doyle right before the election. Unfortunately the mainstream media owes Thompson a huge apology for reporting the GOP press releases as though they were fact. The result is the destruction of Georgia Thompson’s life in an era when we should all know better. Americans were right to hope that reporting had changed since the baseless rantings of former Senator Joe McCarthy were reported as fact.

Here’s another rub — Adelman Travel was the winner of that contract not because of the sole decision of Thompson, but because they had the lowest reasonable bid. Yes, another business was close but their score didn’t put them ahead.

The federal government, whose partisan attack dog persecuted Thompson, should reimburse her for her legal fees. The media who “reported” allegations as facts needs to regain their credibility by apologizing.

But Jim’s Watchdog post “AirTran Deal Not So Bad for Milwaukee” continues to generate a lot of discussion as we weigh the merits of AirTran’s proposals and Midwest’s growth plan. Also on the table: How committed to Milwaukee would AirTran be? How committed is Midwest really? What does real growth mean in the air travel industry? – and other questions.

More than anything, Milwaukee’s parochialism and often quaint perception of itself within the larger economy is a steady undercurrent to the AirTran question, and local media perpetuates this. The New York Times and AP, on the other hand, have given AirTran’s latest offer more merit than it has received in local media. Read the AP/New York Times story here.

Nationally it seems, AirTran’s takeover of Milwaukee’s “regional airline” is not considered so nefarious.

In comparison, here’s the link to coverage in the Journal Sentinel.

McGee wrap up and a look back
Only a few blocks of Riverwest are in the 6th Aldermanic District, but because the neighborhood is just across Holton Street from the eastern end of the 6th, Riverwesters took a strong interest in Ald. Michael McGee, Jr. In fact, Riverwest Currents, the monthly community newspaper, supported McGee against Marlene Johnson three years ago and has featured the alderman on its cover (in 2004, a couple of months before the barrage of headline-making McGee hijinks hit).

Scanning the blogosphere after the election, I found some commentary and a nice link to our analysis of the McGee recall attempt election night on http://riverwestneighborhood.org, a great looking website. Check it out.

That’s a take from east of the 6th. Here’s a post-election take from a nicely-designed website from west of the 6th, in Sherman Park, by business consultant James T. Harris, who mans the 7-9PM slot Sunday nights on TMJ – TMJ’s only black radio host that I’m aware of.

Most the criticism of McGee in the blogosphere and in media came from outside the district (I live and vote in it). Here at Watchdog, McGee has been an ongoing subject of blogs and commentary during his first term. We went back and forth over the recall, but even early on the alderman was a prime candidate for our “LackeyWatch.”

Here’s Jim on the snafu over McGee’s name.

“Faces of Rage” – thoughts on aldermen, vicious cops and male strippers.

Here we come to McGee’s defense in the fight against those “forces of darkness.”

The full McGee archive – 16 posts dating back to March 2005.

Enjoy!

They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. If that is the case, I should be flattered that the JS has started running “Watchdog Reports”.

It just seems a little icky.

It’s not a terribly honorable thing in journalism to take others work and claim it as your own without giving credit and I have had JS reporters do that after promising at least to mention Watchdog Milwaukee in their columns. At the same time, they have a larger audience than we do so if a story is more important than the byline, then I’m not one to be offended.

I have neither a wonderful nor a terrible relationship with the JS. I write a blog for them (without compensation I’ll add) which from all of the e-mail responses I’ve gotten must result in a ton of readers. On the other side, I’ve received late night calls from JS reporters screaming at me for being critical of them. Why? Because I’m doing what a watchdog does. The snide comments I’ve heard from compensated “journalists” include “well I’ll just consider the source”. Another berated bloggers as less than gossip columnists who don’t have to follow journalistic ethics. (A term I’ve come to realize is only selectively adhered to by some compensated journalists.)

Is it completely ripping off Watchdog Milwaukee? No. I’m not the first to consider myself a Watchdog. In fact, it was shortly after I began writing for the JS under the byline “The Watchdog” that they started writing “Watchdog Reports” so I’m sure there’s someone over at the JS who is convinced that the idea came from an internal source.

Still, does this reporter, columnist, blogger, call me what you will, care about credit? A better way to say it would be that I am flattered. If what we do inspires the Journal-Sentinel to get back to journalistic roots of solid, hard-core reporting, I’ve done my job and the only one that deserves credit is the one who inspired Watchdog Milwaukee — legendary newsman Edward R. Murrow.

I can’t help but wonder if Murrow would be flattered if he knew he inspired me.

When I heard that the JS had acquired CNI, publisher of the Brown Deer Herald and other community newspapers I was concerned but it didn’t appear that anything changed. Then the entire northshore had its CNI newspapers merged into one Northshore Herald. The Northshore Herald was a pretty good newspaper.

But alas, the Northshore Herald is no more, having been gobbled up and incorporated into the JS. For now at least, the JS is publishing the Herald as a special section in the JS as Northshore Now.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a blogger for the JS’s online presence for both Brown Deer and the Northshore communities. It’s my intention, and it’s worked out well so far, to blog there at least once a week.

That being said, I’m worried. I really enjoyed the Brown Deer Herald. I’ve been a subscriber for over ten years. Fortunately, the JS has kept the same writers so there is that consistency. I wonder, what has changed since the JS axed the Neighbors section? Will the newly created Northshore Now section go the way of the Neighbors section?

Time will tell, but I hope they keep Northshore Now.

Consider this — the stories that Cary Spivak and Dan Bice write are edgy but their columns have fun with people who take themselves too seriously.

Spivak and Bice have mixed investigative journalism with humor and that’s a good thing. It’s true that they can get a little sarcastic but it makes their columns all that much more amusing.

While many other reporters take the easy pickings, the Spice boys are willing to do a little digging.

But those who are sometimes the focus of a story need to have a thicker skin — and all this from a former pol (recovering nicely thank you) who was once the brunt of one of those edgy stories.

Here was their announcement:

It’s time.

For more than eight years, we’ve been writing this column two, three and, occasionally, four times a week. But our final column will run Feb. 18.

Cary Spivak then will join the Journal Sentinel’s new investigative team specializing in business, and Dan Bice will be writing a new solo column, much like this one, that launches March 4.

It’s been fun.

I’ve long thought their column was one of the better ones in the JS and they probably had what was close to the perfect job — an opportunity to poke fun at those that deserve it and the freedom to do a little investigative work to make future columns sparkle. Hopefully, Bice will keep his edge and Spivak won’t be shuffled off to investigate the inner workings of shoe stitchery, metal forging or other mundane coverage of the business world.

This year has presented dramatic changes for how the public receives its news. All political bloggers should be proud of what we have accomplished.

The public was hungry for a much spicier dish than the mainstream media has been serving up. In speaking to our political leaders we have discovered that many important stories were being buried or simply not written. For years now, the simple, the easy, the thought free stories we have all come to expect from our mainstream media have dominated the headlines and the newscasts. ‘If it bleeds it leads’ has been coupled with sports, weather and a peppering of health “news” all packaged for the public as what they need to know. In an unfortunate filtering of current events, several of todays “news” reporters turned their back on the legacy of legendary newsman like Edward R. Murrow.

Bubblegum journalists like Fox6′s Ted Perry and Peter Linton-Smith have regurgitated Republican press releases and talking points as news. While they failed to provide the public with news, we in the blogosphere succeeded. Where the public found deception in the mainstream media, they found truth in the blogosphere.

At the same time, our work allowed some journalists to step up and take chances. MSNBC’s Keith Olberman stepped forward to become the modern day vision of Edward R. Murrow. This may have never happened had bloggers not stepped forward to share their opinions and expertise in places they held knowledge.

Our work, as important as it is, has been met by our ideological foes with threats and in a few instances, even condescension.

We found a public hungry for something besides repackaged Republican press releases. They responded by talking to their friends, coworkers, acquaintances and families about stories that we wrote. Many of them became regular readers and subscribers to our blogs.

We also reshaped how the mainstream print media delivers news as subscriptions fell. In some cases they responded by wisely by giving some of their veteran columnists blog capabilities of their own. Whether they succeed or fail with their own blogs is something that is yet to be seen. Unfortunately their bread and butter, the local daily in Milwaukee, chose to reduce its coverage of local political news even further, defying business models for success but leaving a void that bloggers now have the opportunity to fill.

While we enjoyed many successes, we also experienced some losses. Blogger Cory Liebmann, a veteran private investigator, closed down Eye on Wisconsin, one of the most insightful blogs in Wisconsin. Political pundit and activist Bill Christofferson from The Xoff files pulled the plug on election day. Scott Stearns from Brewtown Politico went dark as did Bill Stephen’s blog, Sadie Says.

But while some of our friends moved on, others stepped forward to fill their shoes. Veteran reporter Gretchen Schuldt spun off from Watchdog Milwaukee to start Milwaukee Rising. Jim Plaisted opened the doors for Plaisted Writes and Ken Mobile from Mobile’s Take took to the keyboard. Cory Liebmann resurfaced as a writer for One Wisconsin Now.

Political leaders, past and present, also had an impact. State Representative Mark Pocan shared with us some of the challenges he faced in the legislature. Meanwhile, former Madison Mayor Paul Soglin of Waxing America brought us insight about Dane County politics. Oshkosh County Supervisor Jef Hall stepped forward with his two blogs, to provide some understanding of why things are they way they are in his capacity as an elected official. College students also stepped forward to lend their voices to the discourse.

Bloggers worked to keep politicians and political wannabes in check. We quickly exposed and debunked some of the bogus claims from politicos and even political action committees. After they and their candidates were exposed as liars, the public received insight which helped them to make the right decision in those races. In a couple of cases, bloggers were even threatened with lawsuits but the bullying didn’t work.

Challenges also presented themselves as blogs were attacked by a new form of spammer which seeks to add in links to commercial ventures without adding to the public discourse. Splogs, known for looking like blogs with the sole purpose of encouraging clicks for advertisers, thereby generating revenue for themselves, have started to be a confusing problem for bloggers. As we strive to differentiate ourselves from these commercial parasites of the blogosphere, technology is stepping forward to help screen out the overwhelming amount of links they’ve been sending us.

As we look forward to the coming year, we can be proud of our accomplishments. The state of the blogosphere is strong and the public is hungry for more. We must continue to scoop those with greater resources than us and rise to our abilities.

We end with the words of Edward R. Murrow — the man who inspired this blog and whose spirit lives on within many in the blogosphere. “Good Luck and Good Night”.

There are thoughtful, intelligent conservatives out there. P-Mac is not one of them.

If it weren't enough that on his blog in the past week he has suggested that it's a wonderful victory over the forces of oppression that a Texas school district is returning to the term "Christmas vacation" (approvingly quoting a blogger who says that "the lefties are all upset" about the "dirty words" Christmas and Easter); that global warming is a hoax whose proponents are really interested in increasing centralized government power, and that liberals who believe what the overwhelming majority of qualified scientists say blame all the problems on Bush; that we can "win" in Iraq if that country's civilian leadership and police force will only man up, and that the Iraqi economy is flourishing and trickling down; that climate change (which isn't real) will be good for the economy….

Even if none of that disturbed you, you would have to take note of his sickening entry about Sen. Tim Johnson's (D-S.D.) stroke, where McIlheran talks about what a good thing it would be if the GOP got control of the Senate — via Johnson's death or disability — but piously notes that he and other right-wing bloggers are of course praying for Johnson's recovery.

If I thought it would help, I'd pray for McIlheran, but I think he'd be better served by a visit to the Wizard of Oz.

First, their online news has gotten better and I can only imagine that it's because of an excitement that reporters have when they know they can scoop even the news or the radio.  (I'll admit to a bit of pride in having scooped all other media outlets on multiple stories so I can relate.)

Yesterday, reporter Linda Spice instigated the story about the Falk Corp explosion and within about 10 minutes it was online.

The JS is now accepting photo submissions from its readers.  With the rise of digital photography, the JS is on the cutting edge with their inclusion of reader submissions.

Editorially, writers are now questioning whether reducing the size of legislative bodies makes sense fiscally.  They may be Johnny-come-lately(s) on this one but it's better late than never.

So there is hope for the JS. 

Things are not going well on the North Side, where income shrunk in the last year or two or three, but if anyone needed an economic indicator to tell them this, they were fooling themselves. The North Side of Milwaukee is imploding fast.

We criticize the Journal Sentinel during elections, but in the last week, the daily newspaper has given us pause to think about what’s really going down on the North Side by reporting, basically and honestly, how badly things are devolving.  The stories began in the middle of last week with the private school voucher bus crash and continued through Sunday, when the daily reported that, yes, even state certified day care centers had succumbed to the drug dealing that is financially propping up the community.

Milwaukee is now #2 in violent crime spike, following Minneapolis at #1.  This was reported in the Twin Cities last summer.  Why it was left until now in Milwaukee is anybody’s guess.  (If reading the JS article linked above, please note that the daily’s reported definition of “The Boston Miracle” is plain wrong, a fundamental flaw in criminal justice and civics reporting that requires a post of its own.)

W-2 is a failure in progress.  Please note that any excuses given by the state in this JS article are far from valid.  It's time for Gov. Doyle and state Legislators such as Lena Taylor, Barbara Toles and Alberta Darling to reform welfare reform.

Another meltdown in the private school voucher program.  In the Milwaukee education market, the "choice" program offers the very poor some very bad consumer choices, at the expense of the good ones. Another state-created problem on the North Side.

Faces of rage in the inner city.

Can I get a witness? 

I am a witness.

Milwaukee Rising blogger, Gretchen Schuldt (formerly of Watchdog Milwaukee) has a long but insightful column on the hatchet job that the Public Policy Forum did on the City of Milwaukee in a recent report.  It turns out that they accused the city of not doing enough for economic development and rather than do a little double checking with the city on what the city was doing, they ran to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel with their report which appears to not tell the whole story including that there are multiple entities working with tax dollars in our metro area already focused on economic development.  (Note: Chicago, which PPF must believe is a morase of urban decay, doesn't have a city plan for E.D. either — could it be there are other entities in Chicago working on E.D. also?)

The Spice Boys Blog directed us to a report on the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign which points out that the same stations which are profiting from massive dollars from this falls elections devoted a paltry 36 seconds per newscast to election news.  It turns out that over 10 minutes of each newscast is advertising and the sports and weather category rakes in a whopping 7 minutes of the 30 minute "news" time slot.

Here at Watchdog Milwaukee, we've contended that much of what passes for news in the mainstream media is simply regurgitation of press releases.  The big teased story the other day on TMJ4 10pm newscast was whether or not a chocolate fountain is a good thing.  (Note: It's not.)

Now I'm reminded why I like my DVR (similar to TIVO) so much. 

"Marriage. Shall section 13 of article XIII of the constitution be created to provide that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state and that a legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state?"

We’ve all seen the ad. Face of an all-American blonde, blue-eyed, curly-haired boy appears on your TV screen. He gazes up at the camera in an innocent close-up. “If daddy marries another man,” the kid asks, “Who’d be my mom?” Another kid comes on, this one a bit shorter and with brown hair. “I’m confused,” this second kid says, also gazing up at the camera, trying to look as confused as the other kid. But this kid’s a little younger and a smile sneaks onto his face. After all, this is just a commercial.

Those kids, my 14-year-old daughter says, are really too young to know what they’re talking about. In fact, she says, many adults don’t quite get this “Defense of Marriage” thing on the ballot today.

My daughter spent some time this summer volunteering with Fair Wisconsin, knocking on doors, working to help people understand what the marriage amendment is all about, hoping to persuade them that a 'No' vote is the right thing to do.  Voting 'No' vote means that civil unions would still be legal in Wisconsin and that domestic partners would be able to share health care and other benefits such as pensions. 'No' means they would not be denied the right to make critical health care decisions for their loved ones.

She says it’s important that life partners have these basic things because the U.S. Constitution says it’s against the law to deny them to people. If the couple happens to be gay, they’re out of luck if the referendum passes. Gay couples cannot get married under Wisconsin law. The referendum doesn’t change this, leaving gay couples only one option if they want to care for their life partners – not be gay. The referendum, she says, is just wrong.

But based on conversations she had at the doors, a lot of people are just as confused as the kids in the ad. In St. Francis, she found more than a few people at the doors who said, “I’m against gay marriage, I’m voting 'No.'”

“People hear the words 'gay marriage' and automatically, the first thing that they think is, 'No,'" my daughter says.

The people in those St. Francis houses were obviously missing something. Apparently they didn’t realize that marriage was under attack. They're as confused as the kids in that ad we've all seen.

The guy who wrote the marriage amendment, state Rep. Mark Gundrum (R – New Berlin), says all that voters have to do is read the referendum on the ballot and the confusion will end at the polls. That might be wishful thinking.

“I’ve read the sheet a million times but it seems no matter how many times I read it, it’s still not clear,” she adds. “The wording is too vague and if you don’t read it carefully, it could be expressed for either ‘No’ or ‘Yes.’ It kind of makes you not want to vote on it at all.”

'No' is what the law in Wisconsin already says about gay couples getting married. 'No' is what you vote when politicians propose senseless laws like the marriage amendment. 'No' is what you say to politicians who create problems where none existed, like the idea of the courts making gay marriage legal in Wisconsin.

There's a missing problem here, and that seems to be the source of all this confusion.

“When they get older," my daughter says, "those kids in the commercial are going to look back and really regret that their parents allowed them to be in that ad.”

Before you gasp in shock, I'll share that Wisconsin Public Radio is my mainstay.   I'll admit that it's not my ideal vision of talk radio.  I've only heard one perfect format and that was during my trip to Ireland.  Liberals and conservatives battled it out on Irish Public Radio and you got a real good sense for what the issues are.  Even if you listen for a 10 minute segment you get the feeling that you are wiser and better informed of both sides of the issues.

I don't know if that would be possible here because I get the sense that our nation has become less kind and more partisan.

But Wisconsin Public Radio has a good thing going with host Ben Merens.  Merens format is different in that he has interesting guests with differing views on his show and he asks insightful questions.  For example, he'll have a Republican on for one segment and then he'll have a Democrat on.

More importantly, Merens doesn't share his opinions.  Yes, he challenges but his role is more of a moderator who facilitates ideas and adds to the public discourse.  His guests are the ones expressing an opinion.  Merens doesn't tell them how to think or what to do.

But Merens has broken his silence.

In an editorial published in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Merens wrote:

Hosts should be moderators of public debate. Not that hosts shouldn't have opinions. And I actually believe they should voice them sometimes – but not to the detriment of the public debate.

We can ask open-ended questions. We can seek to understand positions we don't hold nor would ever consider holding. We owe it to the public to allow a wider range of views to be heard on our shows than those we hold ourselves.

It's not easy doing what Merens does and it can't be easy to strive for balance.  It takes someone who has great listening skills but who can challenge a guest when that guest says things that are not accurate. 

I've experimented with the talk format with podcasting and it really is a challenge.  At a camping trip this summer I brought my podcasting equipment with the intention of doing a joint podcast with an old college friend of mine and showing balance with us debating the issues.  It was horrible.  In my 20's I was much more rambunctious and felt I needed to be heard, but in my 30's and now in my 40's I've learned that a skill as simple as listening is a strong tool.  I'm not abandoning podcasting — but next time I'm looking for a balanced exploration of the issues, I'm going to explore the role of host with two guests with diametrically opposed views.

Can I monologue?  Yes, with monologues I'm right up there with the best of them, but it takes real skill to be able to show balance.  Merens has those skills.

The poll, conducted for OWN by Abacus Associates, a national survey research firm, asked 718 likely Wisconsin voters to list the top two issues demanding action from government. Nearly half (45%) ranked health care as number one or two, with health care the top priority for most.

The poll found taxes to be the second-most cited concern (34%), followed by the economy and jobs (34%) and education (31%).

“Health Care reform is on the ballot this November,” said OWN Director John Kraus in a press release. “This survey of public opinion shows that health care reform is a top priority for voters, and they want it to be a top priority for state government.”

But do the campaigns get it? The OWN poll found that more than half of likely voters (53%) are "dissatisfied" with how much they are hearing in these elections about health care reform. Only 35% said they thought they had "the right amount" of information.

Wisconsin health care costs have hyper-inflated 75 percent since 2000, making the state one of the most expensive in the nation to buy health insurance. Yet the race for governor has focused on sleaze and scandal — fair play in campaign funding, corruption, pay-to-play contracting and special interests. This week, jobs and the economy took center stage.

Rather than blame the campaigns, OWN pins the responsibility on the media.

“When a majority of voters say that their top issue has received too little attention, it brings into question the media’s focus and coverage of the election,” Kraus said.

Wisconsin Democracy Campaign is also criticizing state TV news and its vaccum of political coverage even as news programming is framed by negative political ads. Media, in turn, blames the mudslinging machines set to full throttle by the campaigns.

OWN's health care/blame-the-media press release was largely ignored by media Tuesday (Journal Sentinel posted a brief on its All Politics Watch minus the blame angle). When OWN repackaged its media release the next day to reveal that their poll put Doyle in front of Green 47% to 41%, they fared no better in Milwaukee. Another All Politics brief.

On the streets today, the Journal Sentinel main does feature a story on polling, but talks about the new Wisconsin Public Radio/St. Norbert's College poll, which puts Doyle up 51% – 38%. That poll is contrasted with the Wall Street Journal/Zogby online poll, which has Doyle in the lead 47.4% – 45.6%. There is no mention of the OWN poll.

One Wisconsin Now is a relatively new organization, formed in the last year to rebuild Wisconsin's progressive traditions, its mission to help connect the state's progressive nonprofit groups and their goals to issues and policy, to candidates and the voting public. OWN's conclusion on media may be misguided, but in its first major poll, they've proven much more compelling than the usual polling suspects that media turns to: the notoriously Left Public Radio/St. Norbert's or the notoriously Right Wisconsin Policy Research Institute (WPRI). OWN's polling is scientific, comprehensive and well worth a look.

Did you know that voters in the Milwaukee media market are much tougher on Gov. Jim Doyle than voters in markets in the rest of the state (jobs and the economy and media)? Or that nearly 60 percent of undecided voters in the state think health care is receiving short shrift in the governor's race?

Interesting stuff. And, with election day less than three weeks away, a potential wake up call for the Doyle and Green campaigns.

"Hello"?

For the next 50 minutes, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reporter Anyssa Johnson screamed at me for a few lines I wrote in a column last month.

I tolerated the call and do not doubt that Johnson believed in her heart that I was being unfair in my column.  After all, it's not often that a reporter gets mentioned as being lousy at their trade but when I nominated her as one of the worst reporters, I simply said,

Anyssa Johnson: This JS reporter has somehow managed to get assigned to the political beat.  She focuses on innuendo and scorns issues, leaving the public in the dark and unable to discern the positives and negatives of candidates.

Her recent article covering the Tom Reynolds v Jim Sullivan race has some of the same old stuff for Johnson but at the end it does offer some decent insight — something I'm not used to Johnson focusing on.  But back to the phone call…

'Consider the source' was what Johnson said one of her collegues told her.  So let's explore that.  This source, Watchdog Milwaukee, breaks news stories that the Journal-Sentinel sometimes covers as late as a month later.  This source, Watchdog Milwaukee, covers news stories that the JS never even touches.  We don't pretend that neutrality in an campaign means giving equal amounts of column inches to both subjects with legitimate ideas as well as lying detractors.  Rather, we dismiss liars as liars and it would be refreshing if the JS did also.

From there the call only turned more personal.  "This is about your own recall isn't it" she screamed.  'No Anyssa; this is about bogus reporting.  This is about doing what Edward R. Murrow used to do and in the JS case, it's about betraying the legacy of Murrow.'  But as long Johnson was making this about me, I said we should explore what it is that the JS did to County Supervisors in 2002.  They did a hatchet job.  They didn't do their research and accused Supervisors of not doing their homework without citing lines that they believed Supervisors should have caught.  Their own reporter covering the County Board didn't catch the problems with the pension scandal before it happened and she received the same information packet Supervisors did.  The JS profited from increased circulation but NEVER, EVER reported the lines that would have been an indictment against Supervisors.  Never in any of the documents provided to JS reporters, could they find an area which Supervisors missed.  Why you ask?  Because those lines they insinuated existed were no where in the packet.  Yet did they report this?  No.  Instead, they ran with republican talk radio recall mania, choosing instead to stick with innuendo and deception and snipe rather than report.

Johnson's sort of dismissive and insulting comment sums up why people are turning away from the mainstream media.  Arrogance of reporters and even those who decide which stories get in and which stories get dumped is why the public is turning to blogs that break real news and offer honest commentary, albeit opinionated, yet have nothing to lose.

We'll continue to cover legitimate stories and the late night bullying of one reporter won't change anything.

That being said, you almost have to admire the fact that Johnson contacted us.  Had it not been at 11pm at night and had the tone been more civil, I probably wouldn't have asked her if she had been drinking.  There were moments when I almost felt sorry for her.  I had no intention of publishing this story until I read her column on the Reynolds-Sullivan race.  She's usually not as good as she was in this story but she managed to write more bunk even if it was mixed in with some substance.

Johnson writes:

"Jim Sullivan is about as far left a liberal as anybody can be," said Reynolds, of West Allis …   

Sullivan countered, "If it's not pursuing an extreme right-wing social agenda, Tom Reynolds is not interested in the subject matter."

Ok.  We get it.  Reynolds says x about Sullivan and Sullivan says y about Reynolds.  How does this make any voters better informed on the issues?

She continues:   

It has become one of the most contentious races of the year, as the candidates have sniped over ground rules for debates, responsiveness to constituents, and how the other spends his war chest.

While Johnson is correct that it's been contentious, she's wrong about candidates sniping over ground rules for debates and "how the other spends his war chest". 

Ground rules for the debates have been discussed between the faith-based groups that offered to provide the free space in churches and Tom Reynolds — debates which Reynolds ducked.  Sullivan was silent on ground rules, leaving those up to the host.  What Sullivan did say and Johnson failed to mention was "I will debate Tom Reynolds anytime, anywhere".   Offering to debate his opponent is hardly sniping as Johnson asserts.

And it wasn't Sullivan, it was the blog community including both Watchdog Milwaukee and Milwaukee Rising who is questioning how Reynolds is using his war chest which in Reynolds case is less a chest and more of a slush fund.

Apparently Reynolds is feeling the heat.  Johnson writes, "Reynolds said he's been miscast as a kook and a zealot as payback for refusing to sell his vote to lobbyists."   In this one sentence, Johnson has allowed Reynolds to skirt why he's been cast as a kook and a zealot.  It's because Reynolds (who only prints things he agrees with) did the printing for fringe "Pastor" Ralph Ovadahl who called Pope John Paul II a "minister of Satan".  It's because Reynolds attended a conference on homo-fascism and it's because Reynolds asks job applicants for his capital office staff if they're virgins and have accepted Jesus Christ into their hearts and those examples are just a modest sampling of what Reynolds has done over the past few years.  Lobbyists have nothing to do with why the self-wounding Reynolds is seen as a kook.

But it's not just that Johnson got her facts wrong.  She has given a voice to Reynolds claims about his opponent instead of focusing on what Reynolds stands for.  Continuing with Reynolds she writes, "He insisted that Sullivan would be beholden to the road builders, teachers unions and other organizations that have endorsed him."  What proof does Reynolds have for this?  None.  Why would a reporter run with a quote that is not backed up by any substance?

But this story really isn't about Reynolds v Sullivan race.  It's about lousy reporting.  Johnson asked me why I would call her out and I told her that she did a hatchet job on past races and one in particular that comes to mind.  Her poor reporting hurt real people — real people who had good intentions and made a positive difference but who then had to find a job despite her words which were forever dedicated to print and which any potential employer could easily look up.

In our conversation, Johnson chose at times to take a nasty tone including threatening to have the Journal-Sentinel attorneys go after us.  We expect that since we write hard hitting columns that sometimes people who like to harm other people, don't like.  If the Journal-Sentinel wants to send their $250 an hour attorneys from Foley and Lardner after us for penning two lines nominating Johnson they wouldn't be alone.  It was about a year ago that the republican shill group CRG, ironically named Citizens for Responsible Government, had one of their partners send us a letter threatening to go after us after we published a graphic directly from the CRG website which showed a connection to CRG and the Republican party of Wisconsin.

Johnson claimed that it was not fair for a story to be written about her because she is not a public figure.  But she is a public figure.  Every time she pens a column for a newspaper which is distributed to hundreds of thousands of homes with her name on it, she becomes a public figure.  She cannot simply snipe and expect to be given a permanent pass and now no reporter who makes thier living through poor writing or vindictiveness (after talking with her it appears in her case that it is the former) should ever think they will get a free pass again.

The blogosphere is here to stay and the public will decide which blogs rise in popularity and which ones become relegated to little more than a public diary.  Unlike the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, there is not just one blog in Milwaukee County so savvy news seekers will quickly discover where the insight really is.  Here at Watchdog Milwaukee we realize that we're not always going to break the story.  As volunteers, we don't have a crew of well paid writers.  What we do have is passion and a love of writing coupled with an interest in providing an alternative news source which reporters news stories which the mainstream media often doesn't feel are worthwhile to print — for whatever reason.  

Over the past few years the corporate media has become corrupted and blinded to what news is and to what Murrow would have demanded had he been running the show.  The media has given Republicans a pass and gifted years of positive coverage honeymoon periods to the GOP.

Keith Olbermann finally said no.  Olbermann had a Murrow moment recently that was shockingly honest.  Like Murrow, who took to the airwaves to expose Senator Joe McCarthy as a fraud and called McCarthy's witch hunts exactly what they were, Olbermann has taken President Bush to task for his incompetence handling 9/11 and the wars that followed.

Olberman is now like the boy who said the Emporer has no clothes — a truth sayer who said what he saw and was unafraid to express himself.

Olbermann exposed the Fox News snipe against President Clinton for what it was — a shameless right wing attack on a man who tried to do his best and was more successful that the current President, who hasn't even tried.   

Olbermann could be our generation's Murrow. 

Hopefully Olbermann is not silenced by MSNBC.  I don't watch much cable television news, but after hearing the passionate and articulate Olbermann, I can see setting the TV to MSNBC more often. 

Link: A textbook definition of cowardice – Keith Olbermann comments on Bill Clinton's Fox News interview 

Today we add a new category "Buried by the Media" which will highlight issues that the mainstream media specifically knew about but chose not to report on.  We're hopeful that they would begin to cover issues like this but due to some extreme bias in some of the news rooms, we're not going to hold our breath.

There was a time in this town when news was reported.  That time was when there was still both a Milwaukee Sentinel, which was published in the morning, and there was a Milwaukee Journal which was the afternoon daily.  With the merger of those two papers, some argued that it would be a better paper which informed people of more interesting issues. 

Sadly, the opposite has happened. 

This trend was in full swing even back in 1996 when I talked to former Supervisor, now Alderman Tony Zielinski.  Zielinski said that he found it nearly impossible to get coverage for some of the initiatives that he was working on but he was elected before the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel was just one paper and if he had a story, the two papers would compete to see who would get the scoop.  Now admittedly, Zielinski is a bit of a press hound but the fact is that even some of his more eccentric initiatives made it to print.  His constituents and the rest of the newspaper readers were better served because they were better informed of what Zielinski was doing.  Whether his efforts earned him praise or criticism was irrelevant — his constituents knew he was doing something versus todays climate where it seems that if you have a buddy in the new editing room, a criticism can be buried and praise can be pumped.  What has been passing for good news editing has been the low quality sludge that we've seen recently.  It is no more good editing than there was good advice coming from the pumpers in the movie Boiler Room.

As an example — have you heard criticism heaped upon Republican Mark Green for all of his multiple connections to the dirty money he pulled in from embattled Congressman Tom Delay or even the money Green has gotten from Republican lobbyist and convicted felon Jack Abramoff?  Clearly not.  Have you noticed how anytime a Republican alledges a scandal about Democratic Governor Jim Doyle, even if it's just made up and the claim has no merit, it makes the front page yet the news editors have bought into Green's bogus argument that he doesn't oppose stem cells despite a solid record of opposing stem cell research?  The MJS even had one of their own, Ken Lamke, go on the Republican shill Mark Belling show and say that it was Doyle, not Green, who was being dishonest about stem cells when Lamke knows full well that Green has split hairs by saying he only opposes embryonic stem cells while all the time he's been voting against stem cell research.

What about Sheriff David Clarke's decision to wear a gun while bartending, his $600,000 remodeling of his office (and they call this guy a conservative?) or his campaign signs that didn't even have a political disclaimer pointing out who paid for the advertising. 

Hard cutting stories which select scoundrels wouldn't want covered have gotten buried.  We're willing to unbury them. Now if we only had a fraction of the staff or even a fraction of the resources Milwaukee's mainstream media has, we could really clean up the near scandalous reporting, or more accurately, lack of reporting, that has been happening in our media market.

Rather than leave his sidearm in his car or at home as would be in keeping with department policy, he apparently decided it would make more of a statement if he was wearing a gun.

Watchdog Milwaukee has learned that there is an apparent blackout of all stories that would be critical of Sheriff David Clarke at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.  Multiple tips have come into their offices and they have ignored them.  A tip so blazingly important as this should not have been ignored, yet they have chosen to not publish these key news stories.  

In the coming days, Watchdog Milwaukee will be investigating and reporting those stories which the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel as well as the mainstream media has chosen to bury.  We believe it is the right of the public, not just the powerful, to have information that is critical to making a decision.  We hope our 6000-7000 per day readers will pass along the links to these stories to people they know.

A few weeks ago, Esenberg penned a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel column equating my year 2000 vote for the pension plan to the genocidal massacre of Native Americans.  Imagine that.  I voted for a plan that staff informed me was something other than what it was, and apparently Esenberg thinks that's the same thing as the mass murder of Native Americans. 

Huh. 

Is this a guy who should be teaching young minds who are going to be arguing for truth and justice as attorneys once they graduate from Marquette?  What kind of logic connects a six year old vote to a genocidal mass murder?  Is this the type of person who should be teaching at a University?  I suppose if UW-Madison can have 9-11 conspiracy theorist Kevin Barrett, Marquette University Law School can have their Rick Esenberg, but shouldn't there be a higher standard for higher education?

But this part is really rich — not only has Esenberg managed to slide into a position at the law school, but he's also a regular community columnist at the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.  That's right — the "liberal media" as Republicans like to call it, has given him a regular slot where he regularly writes and gets to publish his nonsense.   Hopefully they won't be affording the same regular column inches to Kevin Barrett.

Not only does Esenberg pen his right wing venom in Milwaukee's only daily, but he's also got a Republican apologist blog called Shark and Shepherd.  In his blog, he shot back at me again because I dared to respond to his over the top column in the Journal-Sentinel.  Here's what I said:

Journal Sentinel community columnist and Walker-apologist Rick Esenberg blamed former county leaders for today's problems ("Why the county's in this mess," July 5). He went so far as to suggest that bus routes that Walker has cut should be renamed the "Jim McGuigan Trail of Tears," an over-the-top allusion to the genocidal massacre of American Indians. The remark was racially insensitive.

Esenberg, apparently upset that the JS would dare let me challenge his goofball comment, responded in his blog:

The unrepentant Jim McGuigan takes to the editorial page to suggest, oh great furies, that I am a racist for suggesting that, maybe, his vote in favor of huge county pensions might have harmed the people who depend upon county programs.

Well I'm no Professor, but I did take logic in college and I'm not seeing how Esenberg was able to connect his racially insensitive comment with a vote I made 6 years ago.  I'll go further and say that my vote had nothing to do with why Esenberg is a racist if that's what he wants to call himself.  I stand by my position that it was racially insensitive to connect a genocidal massacre to a vote on a legislative body.

You'll also find this side tidbit to be interesting.  Esenberg says in his blog that he's from Milwaukee.  In his Journal-Sentinel columns it says he lives in Mequon.  So who is Esenberg lying to this time?  Is it his blog readers or the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel readers?

The following paragraph was partially lost on the cutting room floor which changed the context a bit but not the overall nature of the column. 

Last week, community columnist and Walker apologist Rick Esenberg of Mequon blamed former Milwaukee County leaders for todays problems.  Esenberg went so far as to suggest that bus routes that Walker has cut should be renamed the "Jim McGuigan Trail of Tears", an allusion to the genocidal massacre of native Americans.  Esenberg's racially insensitive remark was over the top and I was shocked that it came from a Marquette University Professor.

I'll simply follow up by saying that it's painful to see the County fall apart as it has under the hatchet of Walker.  There is a better way to do things.  To take the approach that everything that's happened is someone else's fault so todays problems need not be fixed is irresponsible. 

Professionally, Walker has come a long way from his days as a Wauwatosa Assemblyman who sent out a press release condemning the Million Man March but his simplistic ideas back then are no different than those now.  The only thing that has changed is his rise to power and his ability to enact the ideas which he championed as a member of the Assembly.

But just look at the result.  Fiscal chaos.  Failing infrastructure.  Land sales revenues budgeted just to meet operating expenses.

There is a better way. 

###

Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: Stop county blame game 

In it, they write that: 

“In the House there were three key votes to gauge how serious members there have been about ethics reform.  A vote on April 27^th essentially dictated which amendments would be allowed.  Blocked amendments included those that would have set up an Office of Public Integrity, restricted the revolving door that allows former members to become lobbyists and made members pay higher charter rates – rather than first-class rates – for flying on those corporate jets.’ 

They go on to say that: 

“A “no” vote was a vote for stricter rules.  Voting that way were Democratic Reps. Tammy Baldwin, Ron Kind, Gwen Moore and David Obey and GOP Reps. Jim Sensenbrenner and Mark Green, who is running for Governor.  Voting “yes” were GOP Reps Paul Ryan and Tom Petri.  The measure passed 216-207. 

Another vote (213-216) on May 3 was for substituting that virtually meaningless bill with a stronger version.  Voting “yes” were Baldwin, Kind, Moore, Obey and Green.  Voting “no” were Ryan, Sensenbrenner and Petri. 

The vote (217-213) on the final bill occurred the same day.  Voting “yes” were Ryan and Petri.  Voting “no” was the rest of the House delegation.  Particular praise for Sensenbrenner and Green for bucking House GOP leadership.”

Let’s dissect the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s analysis: 

The Journal Sentinel claimed that in the first vote, a “no” was a vote for stricter rules.  That was true of the Democrats who voted against the weaker version which passed with the Republican Majority voting “yes” so that they wouldn’t have strong rules governing their behavior.  However, it certainly did not include Rep. Sensenbrenner who clearly voted NOT for stricter rules, but rather because he didn’t want any rules at all.  That should have been logically understood by the results of the second vote, when Sensenbrenner voted against the stronger version which would have replaced the “virtually meaningless bill” which Sensenbrenner also voted against.  If Sensenbrenner truly wanted stronger ethics reform in the House, he would have voted “yes” on the second vote. Had he and one other congressman voted “yes” on the second vote then stronger ethics reform would have passed.  Neither Ryan, Sensenbrenner nor Petri were willing to do so. 

Mark Green voted “no” on the first vote, not because he wanted stronger ethics enforcement, which is clearly evident by the way that he has consistently ignored ethics rules in our Wisconsin State Legislature, and in how he takes illegal campaign money from people like Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay, but because he is running for Governor.  His voting “yes” on the second vote was also because he is running for Governor, but the vote didn’t pass, so it didn’t matter. 

As for voting for higher charter fees rather than first class fees, Sensenbrenner doesn’t care that other Congressmen pay higher fees for their travel, he doesn’t pay for his travel to begin with.  His costs are paid for by lobbyists so a bill dictating higher fees doesn’t affect him, but it does make him appear to be more “ethical” to those who aren’t paying attention. 

There is no praise that should be extended to Sensenbrenner or Green for their votes – only a clear recognition of their campaign posturing from those who have the intelligence to recognize the difference. 

Praise should be given to those who are courageous enough to do what is right all the time, regardless of the position of their party.  It should not be given to those who only occasionally take a stance when they know that a bill will pass without their support, and they can look good for the press for faking a stance “on principle.” 

Did this article intentionally mislead you regarding how Reps. Sensenbrenner and Green voted and why?  Or did the Journal Sentinel Editorial board just not recognize the difference in how and why Democrats voted against the first bill, and why Rep. Sensenbrenner did so, yet voted against a stronger ethics legislation? Or why Mark Green voted as he did?  You be the judge.

The evidence suggests that Milwaukee education slipped unawares into this alternate universe some time ago (about 1993-4) and has remained there since, regulation and compliance supplied by the folks at our local daily newspaper, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. New evidence was realized Sunday, June 25, in the daily's "Crossroads" section under the innocuous headline "Residency rule's demerits at least merit a discussion." It was written by Patrick McIlheran, the daily's right-wing editorial columnist, who's made a name for himself of late reporting false MPS drop-out rates while inflating bad pro-school choice research.

In the editorial, McIlheran runs readers through a recent study by UW-Milwaukee education professor Mark Schug and Lakeland College economist Scott Niederjohn, who are out to show that Milwaukee Public Schools' requirement that its teachers live in the city is harming the "quality of education" in MPS.  Remove the requirement, get better teachers, the Schug-Niederjohn study concludes.

Who's partially to blame for the residency policy, in place since 1977? Why, of course, the teachers union, Schug and Niederjohn insist, and McIlheran eagerly reports. The union (MTEA), Schug says, has no incentive to get rid of residency because what MTEA really wants is to control the MPS school board. To leverage school board votes in low turnout spring elections, Schug says, the union needs all of its members living in the city and eligible to vote. That's why the union, though formally opposed to residency, Schug argues, backs down on the issue of residency during collective bargaining.

That's the world according to the alternate universe of pro-school choice and charter-based research, according to a professor of education at UW-Milwaukee.

In the real world, the teachers union has been vehemently opposed to residency since 1977. In the real world, school choice advocates such as ex-MPS superintendent Howard Fuller, ex-MPS Director John Gardner and ex-Mayor John Norquist publicly vilified the union for caring too much about residency throughout the 1990's. The upshot, according to its critics, was that the union didn't care ENOUGH about reform and the quality of education in MPS — because its priority was on members who too often whined about having to live in the city.

The union leadership, many of whom were working in MPS before 1977, could live anywhere they wanted, and Sam Carmen, et. al., were doubly vilified for living outside the city limits. By the late 1990's, the union talked about residency only when asked, and focused on progressive reforms in the schools, such as mentoring programs and other changes designed to find and retain top teachers and support young teachers. 

Add to all this the fact that the residency debate truly ticks MPS parents off. One of our most cherished parental choices is the freedom to remind teachers that we really don't want to hear about the residency issue. In the real world, it's a bit insulting and far, far off topic when it comes to the education of our children.

Back to the outer limits of the 2006 alternate universe, and residency is now apparently the fault of Sam Carmen, et al, for backing off on the issue and sitting idly by while the best MPS teachers left the system. In the alternate universe, the union can never do the right thing on behalf of students and parents — while anything that can be twisted to bash MPS, its teachers and its students, is researched and then explored in the pages of the Journal Sentinel.

How do we fix the system, according to Schug and Niederjohn's alternate reality? Get the state legislature to end residency because the union won't; focus on basics [back to hooked on phonics again]; expand charters [despite astounding failures in the program]; and expand choice to the middle class [in choice schools where nonunion teachers are paid less and have fewer benefits]. In the alternate universe, most roads and grants funds naturally lead to arguments for school choice.

Back in the real world, Schug really is a professor of Education at the University of Milwaukee-Wisconsin, the university within the city limits that trains many MPS teachers. If MPS really has too few of the best teachers, I think I know which classrooms at UWM to begin looking for the root of the problem.

In the real world, however, the grant funds to get to the root of the problem just wouldn't flow. And the Journal Sentinel and Pat McIlheran would never breathlessly twist and turn the findings onto the editorial pages.

But it wasn’t Walker who promised fiscal restraint and it wasn’t Walker who promised to only use the sales tax for infrastructure. Therefore, he didn’t feel compelled to adhere to the promise.

I’m hardly an apologist for Walker and you won’t see me showing up at any fundraising events for Lil’ Scooter, but the fact is that he pulled one over on the public and he got ya good.

Yep, you’ve been punked.

You can’t say we didn’t warn you but now there’s more important things to consider, like the proposal to increase the sales tax again.

Whatever the promise that comes along with it, the terms of that promise can change — just look at what happened with the 1/2 cent. Maybe next time it won’t be Walker who is snatching away the revenues for a full cent addition to the sales tax. Regardless of who it is, the additional funds could be siphoned off just as easily as these were.

But Walker didn’t work alone. Let’s just be honest and spread the blame out where it belongs — with the State Legislature and with Governor Jim Doyle. Now the legislature is a place you would expect to butter up to Walker. After all, many of his partisan pals in the Republican controlled legislature thought their golden boy may have been the next governor and they would want him to be able to reduce taxes in the County he runs before an election (even if it was just done with borrowed funds), but why would Doyle not pull out his veto pen? Why would he have given Walker an easy way out? We don’t know.

One thing is definate — the promise to use an additional sales tax for cultural or quality of life spending could easily be changed just like the last promise for a 1/2 cent sales tax for infrastructure and capital improvements was changed to allow Walker to use those funds at his discretion.

In short, it’s just bad policy. This doesn’t even begin to touch upon the problems that the sales tax in and of itself is a regressive tax and snatches away a disproportionately higher percentage of income from the poor than does the income tax — a tax Counties don’t even have the ability to levy.

If anything, before we give more money to the County who has been resistant to raising the one tax it does have control over, we should eliminate counties all together. Duties of the counties could be divided between cities/towns and the state. Many European countries haven’t had counties for hundreds of years and they’re doing just fine. But if you’re going to keep counties, reduce the politics and power plays that go on by eliminating the position of County Exec. Most of Wisconsin’s 72 counties don’t have one so why are they necessary? Even Milwaukee County’s neighbor to the north, Ozaukee County just has a County Board and a hired County Administrator.

Counties first came into play when towns and cities were weak and communication was poor. Now we’ve got telephones, cell phones, pagers and fax machines. The borders of counties were drawn so that any County Supervisor could make it to the County Board meetings with just a one day ride by horse. With paved roads and the superhighways we have now in Wisconsin, one could easily make it from Kenosha to Superior in less than a day. So why do we need counties again?

This is not to say that there is not a current role for counties. If they are going to be part of our political landscape in Wisconsin they should be run and funded appropriately. Removing the County Exec position is just the beginning to de-politicizing Counties. As now-generations of County officials have been saying for years, it’s time to eliminate state madates and for the state to take over the court system.

But let’s not pretend that the bandaid approach to governing (via more sales tax) is going to solve an overly politicized fiscal crisis. The financial wounds that Milwaukee County has suffered from 4 years of Scott Walker are deeper than anything a once cent sales tax Band-Aid will fix. The answers we as the public have a right to know about the fiscal health of Wisconsin’s most populous county may not be known until they put together their budget for this year, and possibly the year after.

###

By the way, if we had an Air America affiliate in Milwaukee with a host who was educated on how our local governments run here, the public would be better informed.

"I don't want people to read too much into it, other than we are trying to be careful in what we do," said Biskupic, an appointee of President Bush's.

"I don't want people to read too much into it". What does that tell you? What does that tell any person who has common sense? If U.S. Attorney Steven Biskupic, the man who was prosecuting the case, who is already a partisan Republican, is telling you not to read too much into it, does it make sense to read more into it? Schulze thinks so but since he couldn't get even a partisan Republican to take a few shots at the Democratic Governor, clearly he needed to phone a hard-core political hatchetman right? If the facts won't lay out an indictment for a sitting Democrat then it's important for the public to get an in-depth slathering of innuedo, right?Picture the phone call:

Ring, ring Graber: Hello? Schulze: Hi Rick, it's your old pal Steve Schulze Graber: Oh hi Steve, how are the kids? Schulze: They're great. Rick, now that Georgia Thompson has been indicted on the travel case I need a few juicy shots at Governor Doyle and Biskupic isn't playing nice. Can you throw me some good innuendo and attack quotes? Graber: Oh sure "…..(partisan attack)……." Schulze: Thanks Rick — that's what I was looking for. Graber: No problem. Say hi to your lovely wife for me would ya? Schulze: And yours too — we'll talk to you later, bye.

Am I saying that Schulze is a little too tight with Republicans? Of course. Just look at his previous stories. Where was the Democratic oppostion? Clearly it's a one way street with Schulze. Then there's this snippet from the June 3rd Wisconsin State Journal:

Frank Tuerkheimer, a UW- Madison Law School professor and former federal prosecutor: “The very fact that there's a trial tells me that whatever pressure has been brought against her to name names hasn't worked," Tuerkheimer said. "I would infer that there are no names to name."

Was it a slow news day for Schulze? Could he not find any real news so he took the easy route and focused on innuendo? Schulze is an embarassment to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel but worse yet he's an embarassment to the news industry at large. An ethical newsman like Edward R. Murrow would have fired Schulze a long time ago. We hope that the JS at least starts to keep an eye on the trash that Schulze writes and if they don't, we hope you take a serious look at the name of the reporter on each story before giving it any credence.

###

The dems are whacking away at the innuendo and did a fairly good job dismantling the innuendo machine that Schulze is a part of. Click here for their take. The following item from their page is especially telling:

Question: Didn’t Governor Doyle meet with Craig Adelman about the travel contract before it was awarded? Fact: No. Press reports to this effect were simply false and the news outlet that reported it was forced to run a correction. [source: Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6/8/06]