Obama News Conference, July 22 (Video, Transcript)

The debt talks collapsed yesterday.

There are dueling explanations as to what happened.

Here's the full video of Obama's Friday evening news conference:



Here's the transcript of an angry Obama's version of events.

Speaker of the House John Boehner tells a different story.

Here's video of his full news conference:

Obama 'Don't Call My Bluff' Hissy Fit

It's not good when the president of the United States deals with an issue with threats and then just walking out of the room.

Obama is definitely not a great negotiator.

From the Huffington Post:

Lawmakers and the White House had what nearly every party is describing as a "tough" and "testy" meeting on the debt ceiling Wednesday afternoon, culminating in a stormy exchange between President Barack Obama and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).

It was the fifth straight day of talks, but the first in which attendees, speaking on background, were willing to admit that steps were taken backwards. According to multiple sources, disagreements surfaced early, in the middle and at the end of the nearly two-hour talks. At issue was Cantor's repeated push to do a short-term resolution and Obama's insistence that he would not accept one.

"Eric, don't call my bluff. I'm going to the American people on this," the president said, according to both Cantor and another attendee. "This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

Obama needs to grow up.

He's not a dictator. He can't just dismiss a branch of the U.S. government and demand that he gets his way.

Obama is so pompous.

"This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

What's so arrogant is that Obama doesn't include himself in the bunch he accuses of being "more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

Clearly, Obama isn't interested in resolving real problems, and he doesn't know how to lead.

Moreover, he doesn't get that the American people think the worst about Washington is the uncontrolled spending and taxation that's destroying our future.

Someone needs to tell Obama that being president isn't easy. It requires dealing with issues in a mature, measured fashion.

It's more than golfing and romping around on Martha's Vineyard.

Maybe Obama should have tried holding his breath until he got his way.



Obama became "very agitated."

What an embarrassment!

He doesn't seem to understand that there are checks and balances on his power.

Milwaukee Fire Department: Name Change

UPDATE, July 26, 2011: Aldermen balk at changing name of Fire Department
___________________

Milwaukee Alderman Terry Witkowski wants to rename the Milwaukee Fire Department to Milwaukee Emergency Response Services.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

The Milwaukee Common Council is considering a proposal by Ald. Terry Witkowski to rename the Milwaukee Fire Department as Milwaukee Emergency Response Services.

Witkowski said the change would better reflect the work of the department. He said only 7% of the department's calls are related to fire; the remainder range from paramedic services to chemical cleanups. The new name would save the department from criticism that it responds to relatively few fires, making the department less of a target during the city's next round of budget cuts, Witkowski said.

"A part of what makes me bring this forward is that every time we go through budget cuts, we hear about this 7%," Witkowski said Wednesday.

Witkowski added that the name change would cost very little - uniforms, engines and stationery with the new name would be ordered only as equipment wears out.

Fire Chief Mark Rohlfing agreed that the department was "a multiservice organization," but he remains wary of the way the alderman is pursuing the change. Rohlfing hoped that a name change would be accompanied by a larger discussion of the department's role in responding to the city's emergencies.

"Let's talk about it, you know, look at our mission, our vision, and look at what we want to change our name to, what best reflects what we do," Rohlfing said Tuesday. "One of the reasons they hang on to that name is tradition, pride and all those kind of things."

Rohlfing said he expects the firefighters union to oppose the name change.

...The ordinance will be considered at Thursday's meeting of the council's Public Safety Committee. If approved by the committee and the council, the name change will be effective in 60 days, although the department will continue to be officially chartered as a "fire department organization."

With all due respect, this is a lame idea, an utter waste, weird politics.

Does Witkowski really believe that a name change for the department would make it less of a target when it comes to budget concerns?

"Milwaukee Emergency Response Services" wouldn't be immune from budget cuts.

What an ineffective smokescreen!

Witkowski's plan to have "uniforms, engines and stationery with the new name... ordered only as equipment wears out" is ridiculous.

A name change would involve more than altering uniforms, engines, and stationery. Witkowksi doesn't consider other things such as equipment and signs and the fire stations themselves.

The process would take years, possibly decades.

Ask firefighters if they want to be called "emergency response service workers," since they really don't spend a lot of time responding to fires.

I don't think it would go over too well.

Should the Milwaukee Public Schools be renamed Milwaukee Public Child Warehouses, Meal Halls, and Leftist Indoctrination Centers, to better reflect the reality of what happens there?

Obama and Social Security Checks

In addition to playing class warfare politics, Obama is playing on the fears of people dependent on Social Security as well as other federal programs.

He's lying to the elderly, the disabled, veterans, and federal employees - the politics of fear.



From CNSNews:

President Barack Obama told CBS News today that there may not be enough money in the U.S. Treasury to cover Social Security checks after Aug. 3 if Congress does not agree to lift the legal limit on the federal debt and allow his administration to borrow more money.

"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Obama told CBS News anchor Scott Pelley in an interview.

However, according to the Daily Treasury Statements published by the U.S. Treasury Department, the ongoing flow of federal tax revenue since the Treasury declared that it had hit the debt limit on May 16 has been more than sufficient to cover the combined costs of federal spending on interest payments, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, the Veterans Affairs department and federal workers wages and insurance benefits (including wages and insurance benefits for military personnel).

Specifically, according to the Daily Treasury Statements, as of the close of business on May 16, the federal government had taken in $1.333454 trillion in tax revenues since the beginning of fiscal 2011. By the close of business on July 7, tax revenues for fiscal 2011 had grown to $1.629630 trillion. Therefore, between May 16 and July 7 the federal government took in a total of $296.176 billion in new tax revenue.

In that same time period, total interest payments on the national debt equaled $14.632 billion.

Thus, the new tax revenue of $296.176 billion the federal government took in between May 16 and July 7 was enough to pay the federal government’s $14.632 billion in interest obligations during that period 20 times over.

Is Obama unaware of this reality?

Has he simply been listening to advisers, accepting what they feed him, and lacking the intellectual curiosity to question them?

Obama is either clueless or a shameless liar when it comes to threatening to withhold checks.

That's not smart politics. It's stupid. It's cruel.

Thaddeus McCotter: Budget - Cut, Cap, Balance

Presidential candidate Thaddeus McCotter weighed in on the budget impasse.

He supports the "cut, cap and balance" approach.

That approach entails "not [voting] to raise the debt ceiling unless Congress votes to drastically cut spending, [imposing] a cap on future spending, and [approving] a balanced budget amendment."

Video.

Rob Cowles Threatened

According to an unnamed prominent Green Bay-area business leader, Republican Wisconsin State Senator Rob Cowles was "threatened" by Gov. Scott Walker's office.

Cowles was told that if he didn't vote for the Budget Repair Bill, the administration would run a Tea Party candidate against him.

This was reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Dan Bice, union member.

He tosses out charges against the Governor's office without naming the accuser.

Bice provides quotes from the "prominent business leader" that literally puts words in Cowles' mouth.

Bice makes the case that although he doesn't name the "prominent business leader," he's not anonymous.

The Green Bay-area business leader, who has not given campaign money to Democrats or Republicans, contacted No Quarter last week and spoke on background, meaning the paper knows the individual's identity. But the leader asked not to be identified by name in the Journal Sentinel because doing so would hurt the person's business and industry relationships.

Poor baby!

Being identified would hurt the leader's business and industry relationships.

Then why contact Bice?

The leader probably was confident that Bice would run the story that puts Walker's office in a negative light without expecting the leader to go on the record.

The Journal Sentinel knows the leader's identity.

So what?

Let the public know who is making the accusations or don't run the story. This is just gossip.

Very Bice.
__________________

UPDATE: Cowles fires back at Milwaukee report of intimidation

State Senator Rob Cowles is firing back at a story in the Milwaukee-Journal Sentinel which alleges Governor Walker threatened to put up a Tea Party candidate against him, if he didn’t vote for Walker’s bill to limit public union bargaining.

"There was never any effort by the governor's office to intimidate any of us," the Allouez Republican says. "There were some aspects of the process that some of us didn't like, but there was never any effort to threaten us with any primaries, the whole story is a fabrication."

The paper says Cowles made the remark when he called a prominent Green Bay area business leader to seek support in his recall election next month.

Columnist Dan Bice said the business leader asked to stay anonymous. But the person quoted Cowles as saying “I didn’t like this bill, either … I didn’t like being put in this position … but the governor’s office told us if we didn’t give them our support, they would run a Tea Party candidate against us.”

...Cowles says it's an effort by national unions to smear him to try and defeat him in the August 9th recall election. He maintains his long-time support for the budget repair bill.

"When the private sector has been bludgeoned by this difficult recession, the public sector has to be part of the solution," Cowles says. "That bill brought some fairness between the government sector and the private sector."

Cowles rips Bice's story to shreds.

That's gotta hurt.

Wisconsin 14: Who Paid?

When Wisconsin's 14 Democrat senators fled the state earlier this year to avoid performing their duties as elected officials, they claimed they were paying for their expenses out of pocket.

Were they lying?

[A]t a recent national gathering of liberal activists, one prominent national group bragged about raising $200,000 to help keep these Wisconsin Senators out of state.

Democracy for America claims to have provided funds for the AWOL senators.

Someone isn't telling the truth.

I'm shocked. Shocked!

Video, from the MacIver Institute:

Ron Johnson's Senate Speech, June 28 (Video, Transcript)

UPDATE, June 30, 2011: Harry Reid cancels Senate July 4 recess
__________________

UPDATE, June 29, 2011: Johnson vows to fight any attempt in Senate to proceed with Fourth of July recess

Freshman Sen. Ron Johnson said Wednesday he will try to block any move by the Senate to recess tomorrow in advance of the Fourth of July holiday, saying lawmakers should remain in session to work on the budget and spending issues.

Johnson’s comments come a day after he took to the Senate floor vowing to block regular business unless Democrats advance a budget plan.

“We’re just trying to ratchet up the pressure on Democratic leadership, who controls what we do by and large,” the Oshkosh Republican said in an interview. “I’m doing this to make a point, to make sure we start turning our attention to the budget.”

...Johnson was joined by nine GOP colleagues at a press conference Wednesday demanding the Senate stay in session.

It is so refreshing to finally have someone like Ron Johnson representing me in the U.S. Senate.

What a tremendous improvement over Russ Feingold!

Ron Johnson presents real hope and change.
__________________

Ron Johnson isn't satisfied with business as usual in Washington.

He may be new in the U.S. Senate but he isn't afraid to shake things up.

He knows changes are needed in Washington. He wants to be part of the solution.

Video of Johnson speaking on the floor of the Senate, June 28, 2011:



Transcript:

SENATOR RON JOHNSON: “Mr. President, I ask to be allowed to speak for up to ten minutes.

“Thank you.

“Mr. President, I've been here for almost six months now.

“But I've been carefully watching Washington for more than 32 years, while operating my manufacturing business in Oshkosh, Wisconsin - watching how increasingly broken Washington has become over the years.

“Nothing I've seen in the last six months changes that evaluation.

“Washington is broken and America is going broke.

“Our economy is in a coma; people are suffering.

“America hungers for leadership, and it it’s not getting any - not from President Obama, not from the United States Senate.

“We can't afford to have a broken political process - not now - not while America is hurtling toward a financial crisis.

“Under Democratic leadership, it has been over two years since the United States Senate has passed a budget, and there is currently no mark-up going on in the Budget Committee to produce one.

“America is going bankrupt, and the Senate refuses to pass a budget.

“The President's budget - the one he presented several months ago to great fanfare, remember that? It was 4 ¼ inches thick, 2,400 pages long. Who knows how many thousands of man hours that document took to produce? It was going to be the solution to our fiscal problems.

“But it was so unserious, it would have added over $12 trillion to our nation’s debt.

“It was so unserious, when it was voted on in the United States Senate, it lost by a vote of ZERO to 97.

“It was so unserious, that not a single member of the President's own party voted for it.

“Instead of rolling up his shirt sleeves and personally tackling the number one problem facing this nation right from the beginning, President Obama delegated his role in sporadic negotiations to Vice President Biden.

“Now that those talks have broken down, the President is finally getting personally involved in this process.

“But what kind of process is this – a few people, talking behind closed doors, far from the view of the American public? Is that the process that is going to decide the fate of America’s financial situation, of our financial future? Is this how our government is supposed to work?

“I don’t think so.

“Of course not.

“Unfortunately, this has become business as usual in Washington.

“As a manufacturer, I know if the process is bad, the product will be bad.

“Business as usual here in Washington is a bad process.

“Business as usual is bankrupting America.

“It must stop.

“America is simply too precious to subject our financial future to Washington’s ‘business as usual.’

“Now I'm pretty new here, and I don't pretend to understand everything that makes the Senate work (or maybe more accurately, doesn’t allow the Senate to work). But I do know the Senate runs on something called unanimous consent.

“So unless we receive some assurance from the Democrat leadership that we will actually start addressing our budget out in the open, in the bright light of day - I will begin to object. I will begin to withhold my consent.

“The Senate needs to pass a budget. It shouldn't be that difficult.

“Families do it every day. A husband earns $40,000. A wife earns $40,000. Their total family income is $80,000. That's their budget. That's what they can afford to spend. American families figure out how to live within their means.

“The federal government should be no different. A budget is a number. We should first pick one number, and then a set of numbers, that won't let America go bankrupt.

“So let me start the process by throwing out a number: $2.6 trillion. This is $800 billion more than we spent just 10 years ago. That is the amount that President Obama, in his budget, says the federal government will receive in revenue next year. If we only spent that amount of money, we would be living within our means. What a concept, huh?

“If we want to spend more than $2.6 trillion, Members of Congress and members of this Administration should go before Congressional committees and openly justify what they want to spend, how much they want to borrow, and how much debt they are willing to pile on the backs of our children, our grandchildren, and our great grandchildren.

“They should explain just how much of our children’s future they are willing to mortgage.

“The American people deserve to be told the truth.

“Unless that happens, I will begin to withhold my consent.

“Unless there is some assurance that the Senate will take up its budget responsibilities in an open process, I will begin to object.

“Madame President, I note the absence of a quorum.”

I'm so glad we sent Ron Johnson to the Senate.

Collective Bargaining Law Takes Effect

It's been a long painful process and taken a long time but Governor Scott Walker and Republican legislators can finally say "mission accomplished."

The budget repair bill takes effect today.

From the Associated Press:

After months of heated debate, ear-splitting protests and legal maneuvering, Gov. Scott Walker's divisive collective bargaining law is finally set to take effect.

Secretary of State Doug LaFollette published the law in the Wisconsin State Journal newspaper on Tuesday. The measure goes into effect Wednesday, capping an ugly four months in Madison that saw state senators flee the state and massive protests at the state Capitol.

The 14 Democrat senators who fled the state to avoid voting on the bill couldn't stop it.

Thousands of protesters couldn't stop it.

LaFollette couldn't stop it.

Judge Maryann Sumi couldn't stop it.

The law takes effect today.

Everything seems to be OK.

Apocalypse not now.

Walker Signs Budget

Yesterday, at a private ceremony in Green Bay, Governor Scott Walker made good on his promise to balance the budget, eliminating a $3.6 billion deficit without raising taxes.

It's not perfect. Nothing is. But it's good.

Of course, the Leftists are saying it's a disaster.

I think that's the clearest indication that the budget is good for the state, putting Wisconsin on a path to prosperity.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Gov. Scott Walker signed a two-year $66 billion budget Sunday that will cut nearly $800 million from public schools, expand taxpayer support for private voucher schools, cut taxes for investors and businesses, clamp down on property taxes and put the state's finances in better shape than they've been in for more than a decade.

Using the vast veto powers of Wisconsin governors, Walker struck out dozens of budget provisions, including one that would have allowed bail bondsmen in Wisconsin. He also used his veto pen to bar public employees from collecting pensions unless they work for a state or local government for five years or more, set up new possible limits on a family-planning program and allow state officials to do more no-bid contracts.

As previously announced, the GOP governor also vetoed a provision that would have allowed most fired Milwaukee police officers to continue to receive pay while they appealed their dismissals.

Walker's 50 vetoes were less extensive compared with those issued by previous governors, but that's due largely to the fact that Walker's fellow Republicans run both houses of the Legislature and worked closely with the governor in crafting the legislation. Walker has the broadest veto powers of any governor nationwide, allowing him to strike out entire provisions of the budget or rewrite sections by selectively crossing out words.

Wearing khakis, a blue shirt and no tie, Walker signed the budget Sunday afternoon before a crowd of about 100 at Fox Valley Metal-Tech - a site chosen to highlight a tax cut for manufacturers included in the budget.

...A few hundred protesters gathered outside Fox Valley Metal-Tech, chanting "Shame!" as Walker's guests drove into the parking lot. They held signs decrying budget cuts and chanted, "Recall Walker!"

The budget - Walker's first since taking office in January - closes a $3 billion shortfall over the next two years largely without relying on tax increases. It raises spending by $1.1 billion, or 1.8% over two years, and leaves the state with an estimated $300 million surplus in its main account by June 2013. Republicans in the Legislature passed the budget earlier this month on party-line votes.

"Our balanced budget makes tough choices while also providing a path to prosperity for our state and our people," Walker said in a 20-minute speech. "Through honest budgeting, we are providing an alternative to the reckless tricks and gimmicks of the past. To move forward together, we are acknowledging that we have to make sacrifices to protect the next generation by decreasing the serious debt that they would otherwise inherit."

Fiscal responsibility.

What a concept!

Video from FOX 6 News:

 

Protests, WI Capitol, June 16, 2011

Here's video of the pathetic protesters at the Capitol in Madison on Thursday, the night the Senate passed the budget:



Fizzle.

WI Senate Passes Budget

The Wisconsin State Senate passed the budget, 19 Republicans voting for it and 14 Democrats against.

The Democrats actually voted. They didn't flee the state and head to Illinois this time.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

The Legislature on Thursday handed Gov. Scott Walker his budget remolding government at every level, even as new details emerged on how it could lead to the expansion of the state's school voucher program to many districts around the state.

The Assembly passed the measure 60-38 at 3 a.m. Thursday, and 19 hours later the Senate approved it 19-14. All Republicans were in favor of it, and all Democrats were opposed.

Because senators made no changes to it, it will go straight to the Republican governor without having to return to the Assembly. Walker is expected to sign the bill soon, and he will have the ability to reshape it with his vast partial-veto powers.

Walker can "reshape it with his vast partial-veto powers."

Reporters Patrick Marley and Jason Stein make it sound like Walker has some evil powers that the previous governor, Democrat Jim Doyle, did not.

Although the spin is predictable, that makes it no less annoying.

The legislative approval cemented Walker's bid to solve a $3 billion two-year shortfall by cutting spending on schools, local governments and public workers' benefits rather than raising taxes. The approval would end one chapter in one of the most tumultuous legislative sessions in decades that opened in February with Walker's legislation ending most union bargaining for public workers.

In the budget, Racine would begin a school choice program right away, but other school districts could eventually meet the criteria to be folded into the program. A Senate leader, however, said Republicans would accept the expansion of school choice, but then change it soon with separate legislation so vouchers cannot go beyond Racine.

State Superintendent Tony Evers denounced the Assembly for adding the choice expansion to the budget at 2:30 a.m. Thursday , saying the proposal could eventually lead to voucher programs in Green Bay and then possibly Appleton, Eau Claire, La Crosse, Madison, Oshkosh, Sheboygan, Superior and West Allis.

"Once again in the middle of the night, the majority party in the Assembly voted to expand taxpayer-funded vouchers for religious and private schools. This time the result is a hidden expansion of vouchers statewide," Evers said in a statement. "Wisconsin is now set to expand vouchers for private and religious schools, while making a catastrophic . . . cut in funding for public schools."

But Republicans, including an aide to Walker, said they would take action to ensure that voucher programs would be available only to students from Milwaukee and eastern Racine County.

...The details of the voucher expansion became clear just before protesters disrupted Senate proceedings by chanting "Kill the bill!" and locking themselves to the railings in the public galleries. Also Thursday, the Department of Administration and the Wisconsin State Employees Union reached an agreement that will open all eight entrances to the Capitol beginning on Monday, ending months of restricted access.

After the 10 p.m. Senate vote, Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) urged senators to leave quickly because of "security concerns." Some senators were escorted away by law enforcement.

...Small protests broke out throughout the Senate proceedings. In the evening, a group of demonstrators bellowed at senators from just outside the chamber while state troopers lined up in front of them.

What? No zombies?

 

Sumi Ruling Overturned

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has overturned Judge Maryann Sumi's ruling blocking the Budget Repair Bill.

Read the ruling here.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Acting with unusual speed, the state Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated Gov. Scott Walker's plan to all but end collective bargaining for tens of thousands of public workers.

The court found a committee of lawmakers was not subject to the state's open meetings law, and so did not violate that law when they hastily approved the measure and made it possible for the Senate to take it up. In doing so, the Supreme Court overruled a Dane County judge who had struck down the legislation, ending one challenge to the law even as new challenges are likely to emerge.

The majority opinion was by Justices Michael Gableman, David Prosser, Patience Roggensack and Annette Ziegler. The other three justices -Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Justices Ann Walsh Bradley and N. Patrick Crooks - concurred in part and dissented in part.

From Reuters:

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday said a controversial measure that curbs the collective bargaining rights of public workers can go into effect.

The high court overturned a lower court, which had ruled Republican lawmakers violated the state's open meetings law when they passed the measure.

Well.

That's done.

Maryann Sumi Strikes Down Law

UPDATE, June 14, 2011: Maryann Sumi's ruling is overturned by the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
_______________

I knew Dane County Judge Maryann Sumi was going to strike down the budget repair law. It was inevitable.

I'm sure her husband, the very anti-Scott Walker, pro-union, Democrat Carl Sinderbrand, and her very anti-Scott Walker, pro-union, Democrat son, Jake Sinderbrand, are happy.

What really bugs me is that Sumi took weeks, MONTHS, to make her decision.

I suppose once it became clear that JoAnne "I'm Ecstatic" Kloppenburg couldn't find a way to disenfranchise thousands and thousands of Wisconsin voters and that bit of recount chaos was no longer sucking the air out of the room, Sumi saw no point in dragging her feet any longer, particularly with the June 6, State Supreme Court date looming.

Besides, the Leftists needed something to celebrate this Memorial Day weekend, however temporary.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A Dane County judge has struck down Gov. Scott Walker's legislation repealing most collective bargaining for public employees.

In a 33-page decision issued Thursday, Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi said she would freeze the legislation because GOP lawmakers on a committee broke the state's open meetings law in passing it March 9. The legislation limits collective bargaining to wages for all public employees in Wisconsin except for police and firefighters.

"It's what we were looking for," said Dane County District Attorney Ismael Ozanne, a Democrat.

"It's what we were looking for."

No kidding.

Was there really ever any doubt it was what the Democrats would get?

Of course not.

...Steve Means, the number three official at the state Department of Justice, said the agency and GOP Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen have been surprised at Sumi's handling of the case and asked whether she would recuse herself from it.

"Obviously we're disappointed in the ruling. We do think it reflects a number of legal errors, but it's for the appellate courts at this point," Means said.

Means said Sumi had made her decision without holding a trial or making clear beforehand that no trial would be held.

...Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald (R-Juneau) responded in a statement. "There's still a much larger separation-of-powers issue: whether one Madison judge can stand in the way of the other two democratically elected branches of government. The Supreme Court is going to have the ultimate ruling, and they're still scheduled to hear the issue on June 6. This overdue reform is still a critical part of balancing Wisconsin's budget."

Ozanne agreed that the court case is still far from settled.

"It's not over yet. I'm positive of that," Ozanne said. "The supremes are the supremes. They can do what they want."

GOP lawmakers like Fitzgerald also have said they would consider passing the law a second time as part of the 2011-'13 state budget if it was necessary to ensure that it takes effect.

"Act 10 was passed and signed into law in accordance with the rules of the state Legislature," said Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald (R-Horicon), Scott Fitzgerald's brother. "I remain confident that the Wisconsin State Supreme Court will rule accordingly and Act 10 will become law."

Here's video and more information, from the MacIver Institute:

The judge who had been blocking implementation of Wisconsin’s public employee collective bargaining reforms has now struck down the law altogether, saying legislative Republicans failed to give proper notice before acting on the bill in committee.

Dane County Circuit Court Judge Maryann Sumi issued her ruling Thursday, writing that the law is voided because lawmakers failed to provide proper public notice of a Conference Committee meeting wherein the bill was amended.

“The court must consider the potential damage to public trust and confidence in government if the Legislature is not held to the same rules of transparency that it has created for other governmental bodies,” Sumi wrote.

Republicans argued that the Legislature, when in Special Session, is not bound by the law requiring a broad public notice.

“This was not the case in which proper notice was missed by a few minutes or an hour,” Sumi wrote.

However, GOP lawmakers asserted they did provide the minimum two hour notice justified by the the ‘good cause’ provision of the statutes, even though that was also unnecessary. Sumi disagreed.

“Act 10 was passed and signed into law in accordance with the rules of the state legislature,” said Assembly Speaker Jeff Fitzgerald. “I remain confident that the Wisconsin State Supreme Court will rule accordingly and Act 10 will become law.”

Republicans are expected to immediately appeal the decision. Since an appeal would likely take time to be heard, they may also move to pass identical provisions as a part of the biennial budget next month.

Read Sumi's ruling.

The Supreme Court takes up the matter on June 6.

Hopefully, it will eventually put an end to this obstruction.

Paul Ryan: 'Grandma Off Cliff' Ad

The Agenda Project, a Leftist group, has created a truly disgusting political ad.

It attacks the Republicans' budget plan by depicting a figure resembling Paul Ryan pushing an elderly woman in a wheelchair in a park-like setting. "America the Beautiful" plays in the background while birds sing.

The man ignores a sign, "Do not go beyond barricade," and the woman begins to panic and struggle. Eventually, he throws her off a cliff, literally. The man then simply turns back, pushing the empty wheelchair.

The words "Is America beautiful without Medicare?" appear on the screen.

Then, "Ask Paul Ryan and his friends in Congress (202)225-3031."

Watch.



Really sick.

The Leftists have no shame, unless they're screaming "SHAME" at the top of their lungs.
____________________

Chris Matthews, MSNBC Democrat hack always yapping about ugly conservative rhetoric, really enjoyed the ad.

From Media Research Center:

A clearly amused Chris Matthews narrated and laughed at a liberal ad showing Republican Paul Ryan murdering an elderly woman by throwing her off a cliff. This is the same MSNBC anchor who railed against "ugly" conservative talk and wondered if it led to the shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords.

...[O]n the January 11, 2011 Hardball, Matthews highlighted the shooting of Giffords and foamed, "People like Mark Levin, Michael Savage, for example who every time you listen to them are furious, furious at the Left with anger that just builds and builds in their voice, and by the time they go to commercial, they’re just in some rage, every night, with ugly talk. Ugly sounding talk."

He lamented that conservatives see the other side "as evil, as awful. Not just disagreeable but evil." Matthews then implicated these talk radio hosts in the shooting of Giffords by a deranged person: "And my question is doesn't that give the moral license to people who have crazy minds to start with?"

Yet, on Tuesday, Matthews joked, "Finally, grandma gets thrown off the cliff." Earlier, he called it an "ad that's over the edge, literally." But, this was also made in an amused tone.

And the Leftists insist that MSNBC doesn't have a liberal bias?

Right.

Here's the video:



Transcript

CHRIS MATTHEWS: And talk about an ad that's over the edge, literally. A liberal group has produced [ad plays onscreen.]- catch- Oh, there you see it, not holding back on that one. [Laughs.] Throwing grandma or- that's- I think it is supposed to be Paul Ryan pushing the wheelchair with grandma over the edge. That's in the Sideshow. We will show you the full ad.

MATTHEWS: Finally, grandma gets thrown off the cliff. A liberal group called The Agenda Project has just released an ad whacking at Paul Ryan's to privatize Medicare. Subtle? This ad is not.

[Plays ad of Ryan throwing an old woman off a cliff.]

MATTHEWS: Boy, I love the point of view on that one as she tries to slow down with her feet. Anyway, the irony here, Paul Ryan may be driving the Republican Party off the cliff.

Obama: Easter Egg

Wauwatosa Mayor Vetoes Labor Contracts

The union minions were celebrating last night when the Wauwatosa Common Council reversed its decision and approved labor contracts.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

The Wauwatosa Common Council reversed itself late Tuesday and approved three public employee labor contracts aldermen had rejected a month before.

The decision came in the context of a supercharged political environment in the hometown of Gov. Scott Walker, with some of the dozens of speakers from the city urging officials to reject the contracts until Walker's budget-repair bill goes into effect, and others echoing union demonstrators' support of bargaining rights.

Aldermen were still speaking about the decision as of 11 p.m., but when the vote was taken at 11:10, the result was 8-7 in favor of the contracts.

Ald. Dennis McBride, one of five who sought the special meeting to discuss the contracts, referred to Wauwatosa as a "deeply divided city."

Ald. Cheryl Berdan, who works in Walker's Milwaukee office, urged that the contracts be rejected, pointing out that the city voted in favor of Justice David Prosser in the recent Supreme Court election - one that many viewed as a referendum on Walker's budget plans.

City Administrator James Archambo, responding to questions from aldermen, said the contracts constituted "a vastly subtler issue and a vastly closer call" than the partisan debates over it suggested.

Aldermen who favored the three contracts - which would cover city public works employees, clerical staff and dispatchers - argued they'd save the city money.

Their speeches came after spirited testimony from members of the public on both sides of the issue.

The parking lot was jammed and the crowd spilled out into the hallways at City Hall and a separate room with closed-circuit TVs.

And though people opposed to the contracts attended in force - some holding signs complaining about union "bullying" - so did supporters of the contracts wearing pink stickers proclaiming "I support fair contracts."

Both supporters and opponents lined up to speak at the special meeting held to reopen the discussion of the labor contracts.

The union supporters' celebration was short-lived.

From WauwatosaNOW:

Mayor Jill Didier has vetoed the ratification of three union contracts approved by a slim majority of the Wauwatosa Common Council last night.

She has put a stop to collective bargaining agreements with the public works, clerks and dispatchers unions, which represent about a quarter of the city's employees.

Didier has been vocal in explaining that it was a petition of five aldermen that forced the special meeting and a new vote on the issue. She reiterated that sentiment in a letter to the city clerk exercising her veto power as mayor.

"I believe it is wrong for council members to take this approach to policy-making," she said.

The process was "fully vetted" and normal procedures were followed when the council voted to deny the contracts March 15, she added.

"As the leader of this organization, I must strike the balance of well-being of our workers, our responsibilities and the expectations of the Wauwatosa community," she said.

Will some Wauwatosa Common Council members flee to Illinois?

I don't know why they would but that's been the reaction of elected officials when the unions don't get their way.

Paul Ryan: Family Received Benefits After Father's Death

The Leftists have no shame.

Paul Ryan's father died young, and the family received survivor benefits for a while.

Liberals are using that to attack Ryan.

From Hans Bader, the Washington Examiner:

At the age of 16, Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., suffered the death of his 55-year-old father. Because of his father’s early death, the government made survivor payments for a few years to Paul Ryan’s family – including for Paul Ryan himself. Ryan collected benefits for two years, until he turned 18.

The net effect of the death of Paul Ryan’s father was likely to reduce taxpayer expenditures on Ryan’s family, since retirees typically collect at least a decade’s worth of benefits. (My own father died five years short of retirement. The result was that my mother, who could otherwise have collected spousal benefits when he retired, instead had to wait well over a decade for benefits, reducing her lifetime social security benefits. She was effectively punished for his death.)

But the Daily Kos blog is now using his father's early death against Ryan. A Daily Kos diary attacks Ryan in a post entitled, “Entitlement-hating Paul Ryan collected Social Security benefits until he was 18.” Never mind that Ryan’s recent budget proposal doesn’t in fact seek to abolish entitlements, much less get rid of Social Security. It merely seeks to cut the rate of growth of exploding Medicare costs by eventually giving its recipients vouchers they can use to shop around for medical care.

Not all Daily Kos diaries reflect the views of Daily Kos as a whole, but this one does, since it was briefly featured on the top of the front page of Daily Kos, and is still listed as a “recommended” blog post in the sidebar on the right side of Daily Kos's main page. More than 183 Daily Kos readers have commented in response to it – virtually all in agreement with its hateful sentiments.

Here's the post from the slimy Daily Kos: "Entitlement-hating Paul Ryan collected Social Security benefits until he was 18."

The post attacking Ryan ends with this:

What an evil hypocrite.

No, Paul Ryan is not evil, though Obama tried to paint him as evil.

No, Paul Ryan is not a hypocrite, as Bader explains.

It's sick that the Leftists would cite the death of Ryan's dad to attack him so unfairly.

The fact is the Daily Kos liberals are fringe nuts.

They are filled with hate. It blinds them from the truth, which is convenient. The truth is their enemy. Their extreme agenda doesn't fit with reality.

Paul Ryan is not evil and he's not a hypocrite.

When it comes to the Daily Kos minions, however, I think a case could be made that many of them are not good people.

Donald Trump and Paul Ryan

I watch Celebrity Apprentice.

I don't always agree with Donald Trump's decisions on the show.

There was no question that he should have fired Gary Busey instead of Mark McGrath. It was a move that Trump did purely for ratings. He wanted to keep the loony Busey around as long as he could.

Of course, it's only entertainment. It's a show. I don't have a problem with Trump trying to deliver a product that's as entertaining as possible. From a ratings standpoint, I suppose Trump exercised good judgment by keeping Busey another week. Trump is a showman.

In addition to being a showman, Trump is skilled at business. He has managed to amass a fortune. There's no question he's successful.

When it comes to diving into presidential politics, Trump is being a great showman. The fact that he's getting the media and some citizens to take him even remotely seriously as a candidate is testament to his skills as a performer.

However, when it comes to Trump's ability to be the voice and face of the conservative movement, the performance completely falls apart.

Savannah Guthrie interviewed Trump for the Today Show.

Guthrie didn't give Trump a chance to answer her questions, but putting that aside, Trump doesn't sound like someone with defined, solid principles.

When you compare what Trump has been trying to sell the American people in this round of media appearances with what he's said previously about issues and President George W. Bush and Obama, it makes Charlie Sheen appear more mentally stable than Trump.

Here's video of Guthrie's interview with The Donald:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Just before the 3:00 mark, Guthrie asks Trump about the Paul Ryan budget.

Transcript

SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Do you support the Ryan plan to bring the deficit down by $4 trillion?

DONALD TRUMP: I'm very concerned about doing anything that's going to tinker too much with Medicare. I protect the senior citizens. Senior citizens are protected. They are lifeblood, as far as I'm concerned. I think Paul Ryan is too far out front with this issue. I think he ought to sit back and relax.

Excuse me. Savannah...

GUTHRIE: So how do you attack the deficit if you don't touch Medicare, the entitlements, as you well know, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security? That's where the debt problem is. How do you address it if you're not going to touch Medicare?

TRUMP: Do you know how you do it? By stopping what's going on in the world. The world is just destroying our country. These other countries are sapping our strength. OPEC is sapping our strength. We can't pay $108 a barrel oil. It's sapping our country. And by the way, they are going to raise it higher because now Saudi Arabia said, 'There's plenty of oil. We're going to cut back.' Excuse me...

GUTHRIE: How does that go to the debt crisis?

TRUMP: Well, I'm saying what we want to do is create a strong country again and you can solve the deficit problem the easiest way.

GUTHRIE: But would you raise taxes to attack the deficit?

TRUMP: I don't think you have to. And let me just tell you, if we get this economy going again and we can do it by getting jobs, by bringing our jobs back, bringing them back. Let the other countries worry about themselves.

GUTHRIE: Should the U.S. cut defense spending to attack the deficit?

TRUMP: No. No, not in my opinion. We need great defense. I guarantee you of all of the Republicans, I'm the strongest on defense.

It's possible that NBC did an awful job of editing the interview, but as aired, Trump is dissing Paul Ryan.

I don't think a serious Republican presidential candidate would say that a powerhouse like Ryan should "sit back and relax."

Trump complains about other countries sapping our strength. I think he's serving to sap the strength from potential Republican candidates at the moment.

I look forward to June when Trump announces that he is NOT running for president, but there will be another season of Celebrity Apprentice.

S&P Downgrade and Obama's Speech

Standard & Poor's downgraded the United States rating outlook to negative.

The White House responded by claiming it was a "political judgment."

The Wall Street Journal is not on the same page as the White House, but it agrees that politics are involved in the assessment.

Chief White House economist Austan Goolsbee declared that S&P had made a "political judgment," and we'd have to agree, though probably not for the same reasons. The bulk of S&P's analysis is taken up with repeatedly citing what it sees as next-to-no chance that Washington will do anything significant on deficit reduction this year or next.

"The outlook reflects our view of the increased risk that the political negotiations over when and how to address both the medium- and long-term challenges will persist until at least after the national elections in 2012," said the credit rating outfit. S&P's announcement is almost wholly a political analysis of the budget outlook.

There is only one reason the rating agency could suddenly have turned this dark on politics in Washington: President Obama's speech at George Washington University last Wednesday. Mr. Obama's "fiscal policy" speech may have sent progressive pundits cart-wheeling, but its political effect was to poison the prospect for budget negotiations.

The harshness of Mr. Obama's anti-Republican rhetoric and the universal conclusion that this was a Presidential campaign speech make it very difficult for GOP Congressional leaders to believe they can enter into a budget negotiation in which the White House will deal in good faith.

The hyper-politicized Obama White House calculated that the release of a GOP proposal by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan was the moment to unveil its re-election counter-attack. This week Mr. Obama is taking that speech on what looks like the campaign trail, first at a Virginia community college and then in front of the millionaires and billionaires at Facebook's headquarters in Silicon Valley.

S&P, as did many others, said it saw the Obama and Ryan budget proposals "as the starting point of a process," but "That said, we see the path to agreement as challenging because the gap between the parties remains wide." And: "We believe there is a significant risk that Congressional negotiations could result in no agreement." And this stalemate will continue "over the next two years."

S&P is simply connecting the political dots after last week's un-Presidential tirade against the GOP.

...The Ryan budget has been criticized as heartless and cruel. But its purpose is to address the rising U.S. debt problem without tanking the U.S. economy, and to do so before a truly heartless and cruel credit downgrade of the sort S&P gave Japan in January. Mr. Obama's response was simply to mock the GOP proposal.

The ratings agencies are hardly the last word on U.S. economic health. But the S&P outlook is a warning to the White House that financial markets have noticed that this President seems to have decided that his path to re-election lies in demonizing his opponents rather than seeing to the nation's fiscal well-being.

The Wall Street Journal nails it.

Obama sent a loud and clear message last week. Rather than showing his interest to work with Republicans for the good of the nation, Obama made a campaign speech.

"[T]he S&P outlook is a warning to the White House that financial markets have noticed that this President seems to have decided that his path to re-election lies in demonizing his opponents rather than seeing to the nation's fiscal well-being."

Exactly.