During his recent campaign to unseat Alberta Darling for the 8th District State Senate  --- Sheldon Wasserman emphasized that a Major Component of his Campaign was going "door to door" throuhout the district, to meet as many voters as possible "face to face".  He has said that this practice helps him to keep in touch with the thoughts of the folks in his district.

In this last Campaign, Wasserman says that he knocked on 24,528 doors during the year leading up to the election.

Without a doubt --- that is a lot of doors !  It is interesting that the Media never questioned the number of Doors, or what it exactly meant !!

Sooooooooooo --- what exactly is "Knocking On Doors" ?

Obviously the objective to Knocking on a Door, is to get someone to answer ..... introduce yourself ...... and possibly have a short discussion about the issues and concerns for that voter in the upcoming election.

Of course, not every door will be answered.  So in many cases, the Knocking on the Door (or ringing the bell) would probably be followed with leaving some literature behind, perhaps a door hanger or a campaign brochure. 

Even with a "no answer" door, courtesy would demand that the occupants be given an opportunity to answer -- maybe a minute on average -- some a little longer or less, depending upon the size of the house and how long one would be expected to get to the door to answer it.

When a Door is Answered,  depending upon the concerns of the individual who answers the door, it would be reasonable to assume it will take more time than when there is No Answer.

Another variable that would work into determining the time that is spent on each Door, would be the distance between the doors.

In places like Shorewood, where the houses are very close together, it shouldn't take more than about 30 seconds to walk down one walkway to the sidewalk, and up the next walkway to the door.

In other parts of the district, such as Fox Point, the distance would be much greater, and it would not be inconceivable that some houses could be a couple of minutes apart, unless you are cutting through their yards, which a politician would be wise not to do ...

And let's not forget that we are in Wisconsin --- when the walks are ice covered and slippery, when it is snowing or raining, or when it is just plain hot --- these are all factors that will affect the time for each Door.

Taking Wasserman's number of 24,528 doors, we can do some guesstimating on the time that was involved:

If it was 4 minutes per door, that would be 98,112 minutes, or 1,635 hours divided by 52 weeks = 31 hours per week

If it was 3 minutes per door, that would be 73,584 minutes, or 1,226 hours divided by 52 weeks = 24 hours per week

If it was 2 minutes per door, that would be 49,056 minutes, or 817 hours divided by 52 weeks = 16 hours per week.

Even at the lowest number of minutes per door, it would be the equivalent of two 8 hour workdays per week, for an entire year. 

That would be a lot of time for someone who is a Medical Doctor and a Legislator and a Family Man --- especially when considering that there were campaign events, meetings, debates and appearances. 

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?  YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME !

Nobody ever said that Sheldon Wasserman is stupid --- but he seems to be too clever by half when running for office.

Consider that it seems the Main Theme of his present campaign to unseat Alberta Darling for the State Senate is that he has saved taxpayers Thousands of Dollars by riding the bus to Madison, instead of driving and collecting mileage payments for his travels.

If we take a look at the math --- it would be incredibly dumb for Wasserman to drive to Madison when he can sit back on the bus and do work while being driven to Madison.  After all, he is an OB-GYN --- I would imagine his hourly rate would work out well north of $300 per hour !  Why would he collect "chump change" for mileage reimbursement, while he can make hundreds of dollars more, while being driven to work ?

The chutzpah is that Wasserman is pretending that he is taking the bus to save taxpayers money --- while he is doing so to make more money for himself.

I also have to wonder why if Wasserman thinks that Public Transportation is so good --- why he hasn't used his high profile position to help Milwaukee and Wisconsin come into the 21st century with updated transportation, including light rail, high speed rail, and improved bus service.

Another example of relying on the gulliblity of the electorate has been Wasserman's Number One Issue since first running for the Legislature.  He has consistently complained that "rich" suburbs such as Shorewood, Fox Point, Whitefish Bay, etc., do not get as much money from the state for their school systems since they are so real estate rich --- while MPS gets (according to Wasserman) more than its fair share, as the property values in Milwaukee are not nearly so high.

Yet at the same time that Wasserman has been trying to change the formula so MPS gets less money, and the suburbs get more -- he made sure that his house is just south of Shorewood, in Milwaukee, so that his wife could keep her job with MPS.  Talk about biting the hand that feeds you !!

Perhaps the slickest move that Wasserman has made in his political career, is pretending is to accept donations from his supporters for current and future campaigns, while pocketing the money to repay himself.

In his first election foray, Wasserman put Thousands and Thousands of his own dollars into his campaign to defeat the incumbent.  This was perfectly legal, as the US Supreme Court has ruled that a candidate cannot be restrained by election campaign finance laws, as they have a right to "free speech".

Now here comes the Slick part --- in subsequent campaigns, Wasserman took New Donations to his campaign, and put them into his own pocket to "repay" the "loans" that he spent in his first campaign.  Of course Wasserman never told the folks giving him their $25 or $100 that their money was not going to help get him re-elected, but was actually going to him for his past expenditures.  Oh yes --- perfectly legal --- but ethical and honest ???

Perhaps all of the above could be overlooked if Wasserman was a dynamic figure in Madison, who works tirelessly to improve the lives of his consituents, works to improve schools, and above all, with his being a Medical Doctor, working to make Wisconsin Health Care affordable --- while it is actually one of the most expensive states for medical services.

 But in his 14 years in the Legislature, Wasserman can only take credit for 10 bills.  And zero credit for using his high profile position to push for Progressive Legislation to enrich the lives of his constituents, especially in Health Care Costs.

On November 4th --- I will be voting a split ticket --- Obama for President, and Alberta Darling for the State Senate.

What do you think ?  Your comments are welcome !!

 Dr. Sheldon Wasserman, a member of the Wisconsin Assembly since 1994, describes himself as an active participant in the assembly, who has a great attendance record.  Dr. Wasserman  prides himself as being very concerned and involved in medical issues.

Wasserman  has pointedly proclaimed that he is an "Independent" who just happens to be nominally a Democratic --- but is very much in tune with the Republican sentiments that many of his constituents share.

While maintaining his aloofness from the Democratic Leadership in the Legislature, over the past 14 years, his lack of being a Team Player has resulted in very, very few of his legislative proposals ever becoming law.  

In speaking with sources in both the Democratic and Republican parties, the insider sentiment is that Wasserman is a Doctor Do Nothing.

One example of his lack of leadership ....................

In the 2007 - 2008 Session, Dr. Wasserman was assigned to the

Assembly Standing Committee on Health and Healthcare Reform

Of the 46 Items that came out of the Health and Healthcare Reform Committee during the last two years,   Wasserman authored or co-authored only the  three following bills:

AB 104   Relating to: permitting a mother to breast-feed in any public or private location where she is otherwise authorized to be.

And

AB 318 Relating to: prescriptions for antibiotic drugs for treatment of chlamydial infections, gonorrhea, or trichomoniasis and requiring the exercise of rule-making authority.

And

AB 713 Relating to: the minimum sale price of prescription drugs.

The Question I have is what kind of Leadership has  Dr Wasserman exhibited on the myriad other Healthcare Problems that face the citizens of Wisconsin ??

Perhaps first and foremost, is the extraordinarily high healthcare costs in WI !

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel -- Posted: Nov. 20, 2006

"Employers in Wisconsin pay an estimated 26.5% more to provide health benefits than the national average, according to a respected national survey released Monday.

The annual survey by Mercer Health & Benefits LLC found that health benefit costs average $9,516 this year for each employee in Wisconsin, compared with $7,523 nationally.

That's $1,993 in additional average costs for each employee."

Other  Critical Healthcare Issues that face Wisconsin citizens also include:

*Senior Care --- a single catastrophic illness can wipe out a lifetime of savings

*Outrageous Drug Costs --- why do our citizens have to go to Canada to get drugs they can afford

*Single Mothers --- Wisconsin leads the way in unwed mothers, who do not have the resources or skills to raise a child

*Uninsured --- often middle class blue collar workers in between jobs, left in the nether land of no healthcare coverage

*Underinsured --- even those with healthcare coverage through their employers cannot afford to get sick --- the co-pays and  deductibles for one major illness can easily amount to a year's worth of wages for low income workers.

*Denied Service --- Insurance companies making the decisions as to what gets covered by insurance, even when the procedure, protocol or drugs is prescribed by the patient's doctor

* And much, much, more ................

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?  YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME !

IT IS THE DAY BEFORE THE PRIMARY ELECTION NOW --- AND ONLY ONE CANDIDATE HAS DEEMED IT WORTHWHILE TO SHARE HIS VIEWS IN DETAIL ON THE ISSUES  --- SEE HIS RESPONSES BELOW:

IT PROBABLY ISN'T TOO SURPRISING AS THE OTHER CANDIDATES ARE SPENDING ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF MONEY ON ADVERTISING THAT TALKS ONLY ABOUT ISSUES THEY WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU --- AND THEY KNOW THAT IN MOST FORUMS, WITH ONLY A MINUTE OR TWO FOR A RESPONSE THEY CAN OBFUSCATE LONG ENOUGH TO NOT ANSWER IN DETAIL.

IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF THE BIG MONEY SPENDER WINS --- AND EVEN MORE INTERESTING IF ANY OF THE CANDIDATES WHO HAVE PUT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS INTO THEIR CAMPAIGNS, REPAY THEMSELVES WITH FUTURE CONTRIBUTIONS AS WASSERMAN HAS IN THE PAST.
 

There are Four Candidates in the Democratic Primary this coming Tuesday in the 22nd District Race. 

They are Andy Feldman, Guy Johnson, Dan Kohl, and Sandy Pasch.

 I sent a questionnaire to all four candidates, and promised to post their responses today in my blog, without editing or commentary.

 Although it would be impossible to cover all issues and relevant questions in one questionnaire, I tried to present a wide scope of issues that any Assembly Representative will have to address at one time or another.

 As of this moment, I have the response from Guy Johnson, which follows.  As (and if) I receive responses from the other candidates, they will be added in the order received.

 I have now received a response from Sandy Pasch, which follows Guy Johnson's response (does not answer questionnaire).

 
As of Friday Afternoon (9/5/08) Dan Kohl and Andy Feldman have made No Response at all.
 

(note questions are in italics, answers in bold)

 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES

THESE ARE FROM CANDIDATE GUY JOHNSON 

 

 Why are you running to represent the constituents of the 22^nd Assembly District.

 

I have the desire to serve the people of the 22^nd and my experience as Shorewood Village President pairs with that desire.  I will be honored to be selected by the people in the district to represent them in Madison.

 

 What do you think will be the defining issues of this Primary Election.

 

My answer is different today than it was at the beginning of the campaign.  At the beginning of the campaign I was sure that fiscal correction of the state budget was the most important issue.  Now, I am beginning to think that while the state budget is the most important legislative issue, this Primary Election has focused on spending to win the race!!  How much should a candidate spend?  I think between 5000 and 10000 is fine, but other candidates seem to feel that spending much more is O.K.  I'm concerned.

 

 What do you think sets you apart from the other candidates for this Seat.

 

I have significant elected office  experience and it is the kind of legislative experience that will be helpful to the 22^nd-combining services to save funds, voting for the ban on smoking, enhancing our central business district, etc.  None of the other candidates have any legislative experience.

 

 If you are elected, will your voting on the issues reflect only what you think your constituents support, or will you look at the broader picture of what is best for Wisconsin as a whole.

 

I will look at the broader picture of what is best for Wisconsin as a whole, while listening really carefully to the voters of the 22^nd.

 

 

 Do you believe that local governments should rely more or less on monies from the State ?

 

In order for true local control, money should come from the locale, not the state.  This is some wishful, idealistic thinking however because as it stands now, the funding approach at the state level intertwines with local government funding.  Good communication between local and state is the best way to ensure local control to the greatest degree possible.  As your state representative, I would work closely with the district's school boards and municipalities to get the best and fairest levels of local/state funding packages.

 

 Do you believe that the State should fill the role of  "re-distributing wealth" from more Prosperous Communities to those who are Less Prosperous, or from those who have Fewer Social Support Needs to those who Maintain more Facilities for the Needs of the Poor, and Treatment for Mental Health Issues.

 

This question is hard to answer because there are many functions that the state has to fulfill, some are more fitting to the state, some are constitutional mandates, some are current law-thus the state has to re-distribute wealth in some cases. Concerning mental health, the state should definitely play a significant role.

 

 Should the State distribute more financial resources to Poor School District from more Affluent School Districts.

 

My answer to the above question holds here.  The State of Wisconsin is constitutionally responsible for educating citizens.  Wisconsin has chosen a combination of local control and state control.  Since 1993 the state has had much more control than the local school boards (in terms of finance structure).  This is a current reality, but must be revisited in this next session.  Can the state afford to fund at current levels?  How much difference should there be between the education a student receives from one community to another?  How much money is enough?  These questions need serious consideration as the state rethinks the funding formula.

 

 Do you support School Choice, Charter Schools, Open Enrollment, etc.

 

School choice and open enrollment are expensive programs that have not proven themselves wise investments.  Charter schools can be very effective ways of reworking schools of districts.

 

 Do you think the current Election Campaign Finance Laws are generally adequate for State Political Candidates, or would you like to see changes.

 

See my first answer.  I think too much money is spent on elections.  We are in danger of watching individuals buy seats.

 

 What is your opinion of Public Campaign Financing ?

 

My answer above fits here.  We should carefully fund campaigns and control outside funding sources to protect us from lobbyists purchasing electoral power.

 

 What is your opinion on the current Laws regarding Campaign Financing of Judicial Candidates.

 

See above.

 

 Do you think Judicial Races should continue to be nominally "non-partisan", or should the candidates run under "party banners" ?

 

Non-partisan is best here.

 

 Are you contributing any of your own money into this race?  How much ?

 

Yes.  $100.

 

 If you contribute any of your own money into this race,  will you use future contributions to repay yourself the monies  you "loaned" to your Campaign.

 

 No.

 If you are currently employed or  self employed,  is it Full Time or Part Time, and approximately how much do you earn on a yearly basis.

 

My full-time job is with UWM where I am the director of the executive MBA program (in the 50-100 K pay range).  I also have a part-time job as president of the Shorewood Village Board (1300 per year pay). 

 

 

 If you succeed in winning the Seat in the Assembly, will it be your "Only" employment, or will you continue to work in Full or Part Time in any other business, job or profession ?

 

I cannot answer this at this time - needs to be determined.

 

 Do you have Full Health Care Coverage Now ?  If so, is it from a Private Employer or a Government Employer ?  Do you have more than one coverage, such as from a spouse's plan, and if so, is that from a Private or Government Employer ?

 

I have health coverage through my full time employer.

 

 If you have current Health Care Coverage that you are able to retain if you are elected, will you forgo additional Health Care Coverage from the State ?

 

Needs to be determined.

 

 Do you support a Single Payer Universal Health Care System for All Wisconsin Residents?

 

I support universal health care, but it has to be worked out not just in Wisconsin, but at a national level.  I fully support Badger Care and the steady move to ensuring that we are insuring all children, followed by families.  This will take some work across the body politic of the State of Wisconsin.  I look forward to working on this issue.

 

  Do you think that Health Care in Wisconsin has a "monopoly" aspect with physicians hired by hospitals and large physician groups?  Do you think that Hospitals and Large Health Care Groups should be able to hire physicians and set their rates ? Do you think there should be a cap on the number of physicians that can belong to any practice ?

 

Physicians' groups, hospitals, private individuals-all should be able to set their rates.  This should be matched with an accountability system.  Minnesota has put a system into place where individuals can see how effective and expensive medical folks are, then decide whether to use them or not.  I like the concept.

 

 How do you think we can stop the Job Drain of Manufacturing Jobs from Wisconsin.

 

Quality of life for workers and employers are important:  safe neighborhoods, good parks, housing that is affordable and well-built, high quality education and extensive business research support will help bring both employers and employees to the state.

  Specifically, what Green Legislative Initiatives do you support, or would like to see implemented.

 

Public transportation, funding for alternative clean energy, high quality (and speedy) review of new energy systems. 

 

 

 Do you support Regional Light Rail for the Milwaukee - Racine - Waukesha - etc. areas ?

 

Yes.

 

 Do you support Hi Speed Rail between such points as Milwaukee, Chicago, Minneapolis, Green Bay, Madison ............ ?

 

Yes.

 

 Do you think we have Too Many Counties in Wisconsin, with duplicative services and taxes.  Would you support a minimum population per County ?

 

Your question focuses on one unit of government.  I think we have to look at different approaches to delivery of services.  The North Shore Fire Department is an example of one system across multiple communities.  Can we mimic this with road repair, plowing, school bus service, administrative services, etc.?

 

 Do you support keeping the Teacher Salary Caps ?

 

The entire funding formula needs careful review.  We cannot remove the teacher salary caps without addressing the rest of the formula.  Since we have had this formula since the early 1990's it is time to review and make thoughtful changes to protect our investment in high quality K-12 education while we fix the budget defecit.

 

 In regards to the legal drinking age in Wisconsin, which of the following would you support:

 Keep the law at 21 years of age for all alcoholic beverages.

 18 years of age for beer only, all other beverages 21 years of age.

 18 years of age for beer and wine, 21 years of age for hard liquor.

 21 years of age for all alcoholic beverages, except 18 years of age for persons that are married, a member of the National Guard, or a Veteran of any Conflict in the Armed Services.

 

Keep the law at 21.

 

 What is your position on Concealed Carry Laws ?

 

Keep current law as is.

 

 

OTHER COMMENTS AND VIEWPOINTS YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH THE VOTERS ...............

 

Given the lack of media coverage in local affairs, I commend bloggers for attempting to fill the gap.  Thank you Dave.  I would also urge readers to see the Village Spillage blog on whitefishbaynow.com written by Kevin Buckley - he has had quite a few postings on the 22^nd Assembly race.

 

I hope to earn your vote on September 9^th.  Guy Johnson

 

 RESPONSE FROM SANDY PASCH

Hi David,
Thank you for your interest in this campaign.  Unfortunately, I do not think I will have time to adequately respond to your questionnaire at this late date.
If you'd like a response for the general election, I can comply with your request.
Thank you, Sandy

Yes, Yes, Yes ---- I know that Bureaucratic and Lunacy is  redundant ---- and most other local municipal governments will give Germantown a good run for its money for this dubious distinction.

 

In the Metro section of today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, were two articles that put Germantown in the current lead. 

 

On page B1 was an article about the dangers of backyard pools for little kids.  It was noted in the article that:

 

"Fencing and other safety measures are recommended by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission for large inflatable's as well as conventional in-ground and above-ground pools"

 

Further noted in the article:

 

"Safety standards vary widely, and their enforcement is far from vigorous in some communities".

 

Giving an example:

 

"Capt. Craig Evans of the Germantown Police Department said his department lacks the resources to patrol neighborhoods for compliance with a village ordinance that requires fencing around any pool with water deeper than 18 inches".

 

 

SO - if enforcing the pool ordinance to protect youngsters from drowning is too time consuming for the Germantown police - what would be more important ??

 

Going to the next page in MJS Metro section, we find out that CELL PHONES IN SCHOOLS WILL SOON BE A POLICE MATTER IN GERMANTOWN.

 

Per the Article on page B2, :

 

"The Village is considering an ordinance that would allow police to issue tickets to students if they violate rules about the use of cell phones and other electronic devices in schools"

 

"Police chief Peter Hoell said he thinks the ordinance would be used only a couple of times a year"

 

"The Village Board is expected to approve the ordinance Aug 18, given that is was unanimously recommended this week by the board's Public Safety Committee"

 

SHAME ON THE SCHOOL BOARD FOR WANTING TO TURN MUNDANE DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS TO THE POLICE ---

 

SHAME ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE FOR ITS RECOMMENDATION

 

SHAME ON THE VILLAGE BOARD IF THEY ACCEPT THIS SUBSTITUTE FOR THE SCHOOLS DOING THEIR JOBS

 

AND SHAME ON THE POLICE FOR ENDORSING BIG BROTHER IN SCHOOLS WHILE NOT HAVING THE TIME TO ENFORCE AN ORDINANCE TO PROTECT --- AS IN PROTECT AND SERVE !!!

 

Helpful Hint to Germantown Police ----- Check out Google Earth ------- maybe one of your officers could be dragged away from doing the school's discipline duties, go on Google Earth and identify each house in Germantown with a pool, and then take a drive by them to verify their compliance.

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK ? 

 

MAYBE YOU HAVE A BETTER EXAMPLE OF BUREAUCRATIC LUNACY YOU WOULD LIKE TO PUT INTO CONTENTION FOR THE PRIZE !

 

YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOMED BELOW:

 

The following information was posted on

http://wassermanwatch.wordpress.com/2008/07/14/sheldon-wasserman-

is-wasting-your-tax-dollars-to-fund-his-negative-campaign-for-state-senate/

Sheldon Wasserman Is Wasting Your Tax Dollars to Fund His Negative Campaign for State Senate

July 14, 2008  

AN WASSERMAN WATCH EXCLUSIVE

On Friday, Wasserman Watch got hold of records from the Elections Division of the Wisconsin Government Accountablity Board that Sheldon Wasserman is using your tax dollars to fund a significant portion of his war chest for the State Senate Campaign against Alberta Darling.

Records from the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board show that Wasserman applied for the Wisconsin Election Campaign Fund (WECF) grant every two years since 1994, receiving a total of $21,459.20 from taxpayers.

 

The WECF is taxpayer money handed to candidates who agree to certain finance limits.  But, records show that Representative Wasserman was holding onto that money as a minature slush fund to help pad his current campaign finance account for the Wisconsin State Senate Campaign.

 

 Campaign finance records show that prior to the fall 2004 election, Wasserman had $138,416.68 in his campaign finance account when he applied for tax dollars to pad his campaign.  He received a check in the amount of $2,726.20.  During the campaign candidates usually spend down their warchests, but Wasserman actually grewhis warchest, showing $169,821.38 cash on hand after the election!  This seems to be a trend that some candidates are following when they have an assembly seat and go unopposed or win by wide margins, then when they do not spend the money a candidate would use it for a large scale race like State Senate after a candidate would serve 10 or 12 years in the Assembly.

 

 Here is the list of WECF Amounts that Rep. Wasserman Recieved from 1994 to Today

1994-$6,519

 

 1996 -$3,888

 1998 -$3,734

2000 - $4,588

2004  $2,726.20

In 2002 and 2006 Wasserman applied for the taxpayer handout, but he ran unopposed and did not qualify for public funds 

Total: $21,459.20

Representative Wasserman since 1994 has used close to $22,000 of your hard earned tax dollars to fund a significant part of his war chest.  It is important to know that the $1 you check off on your tax forms to go to the State Elections Campaign Fund can be abused by career politicans in just the pure purpose of doing anything to stay elected.

 

Below Are Wasserman's Campaign Finance Reports from 2002 to Present.  Make sure your pop up blocker is turned off to view these reports.

 

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2007/WassermanS-JAN08.txt

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2007/WassermanS-JUL07.txt

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2006/WassermanS-JAN07.txt

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2006/WassermanS-PREF06.txt

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2006/WassermanS-JUL06.txt

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2005/WassermanS-JAN06.txt

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2005/Wasserman-JUL05.xls

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2004/Wasserman-JAN05.xls

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2004/Wasserman-PREF04amd.xls

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2003/Wasserman-JUL03.xls

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2002/Wasserman-JAN03.xls

 

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2002/WassermanS-PREF02.xls

 

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2002/WassermanS-PRPF02.xls

 

ftp://doaftp04.doa.state.wi.us/electionsboard/2002/WassermanS-JUL02.xls

 

 

 

 

 

 Deciding not to let the voters of Shorewood elect a trustee to replace Phinney who resigned his seat, the Village Board interviewed 12 applicants ..........

 

( I believe none of the twelve have ever subjected themselves to the bright light of the election process and found this back door way to office to be more palatable !)

 

The Village Board Members selected Sean Cummings, who is the co-chair of the D2D Committee. 

 

The D2D project, replacing the SHS natural field with an artificial field, and possibly adding a big dome for winter, was touted as a private contribution project that would cost in the $3 million range.

 

The "private contribution" aspect of the project may have been well intentioned at first, but the D2D Committee, with Sean Cummings in the lead, quickly acquired about $1 million in taxpayer money from the School District, the Village Board and the CDA.

 

In the meantime ---  the School Board is cutting back programs like music, arts and languages, and is trying to figure out which school building to close for the lack of students and money  ..........

 

Mr Cummings should fit right in with the present Board Trustees, who have a penchant for overlooking the mundane every day needs of the Village of Shorewood, for the bright lights and glamour of the Big Dollar Projects.

 

WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ?  PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT BELOW ! 

 As readers of this blog know, I have written "ad nauseam"  :-)  about the lack of consideration for small business parking in areas where there is No Construction Work being done, but No Parking signs are left posted --- and tickets are written for patrons of businesses and residents who might have "logically" thought if there is No Work going on, parking for a few minutes should be ok --- Wrong !!

 

Contacting the Officials that Be had not been very productive, as the finger pointing (Construction Crews, DPW, Administration, Police, BID) invariably followed a circular pattern, 

 

I am happy to report that Guy Johnson, the Shorewood Village President, as he promised,  has taken an interest in this situation and is reviewing it with the Village Administration and DPW.

 

Will there be an immediate change to the current practices ? 

 

I don't know ---- but I am encouraged the process is being reviewed ---- and that the plight of the hapless small business owners is now a consideration.

 

WHAT DO YOU THINK.  PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COMMENT BELOW.
 

The contribution limits for individuals in the presidential primary race is $2300.  This has been a problem for Hillary Clinton whose money primarily came from big contributions, and quite a number of contributors who hit the limit, and could not be hit up for more, versus Barack Obama, whose contributions came from more individuals in smaller amounts --- individuals he could go back to several times, with no fear of their hitting the limit.

Although there is a limit on contributions from individuals to a candidate, the big loop hole in the campaign finance laws is that a candidate can contribute unlimited amounts to his or her own campaign.

So when she was running out of money in  February Hillary Clinton loaned her campaign $5 million, and with continuing fundraising difficulties, she lent another $6.4 million in trying to beat back Obama in Indiana and North Carolina.

Now please note there is a Second Loop Hole in the campaign finance laws - Candidates don't have to actually lose the money they put into their campaigns, they can simply LOAN the money as Clinton did, and PAY THEMSELVES BACK with later contributions.

With Clinton's poor showings in North Carolina and Indiana, the political pundits have all but written off her chances of winning the nomination, especially as the math is against her possibility of getting enough pledged delegates to close the gap with Obama.

Many pundits are debating as to just why Hillary is still campaigning so hard, when it appears her chance of victory is somewhere between slim and none.

The pundits talk about her future political career, possible vice president aspirations, and the possibility of behind the scenes deals with the Super Delegates, as being her motivation.

I believe you simply have to FOLLOW THE MONEY !

Hillary does not want to eat her contributions --- she wants other folks to pay the bill.  After all, that has always been the Clinton Way !

By continuing her campaign, Hillary will continue to collect contributions.  But future contributors should not be too surprised to find that instead of using their money to continue the campaign, it may just be going back to Hillary's pocket !!!

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?  PLEASE LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW !

As the results from the Indiana Primary showed, the Bubba vote that Hillary was so hotly pursuing in the recent weeks, did not come to her aid for a big win.

After Barack Obama made his comments about Small Town America:

"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years, and nothing has replaced them, and it's not surprising they get bitter. They cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them, and it goes on--or anti-immigrant sentiment, or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

The Clintons tried very hard to make the case that Obama was an "elitist" who was out of touch with the working class, such as these comments that Bill Clinton made while campaigning for Hillary:

It's "not by race or even income," he said. "It's by those who think they are better than everyone else and think they should play by a different set of rules. In West Virginia and in Arkansas, we know that when we see it."

I find no lack of wonderment that Hillary is trying to appeal to the working folks as one of their kind, when her life was growing up in Park Ridge, Illinois (read very wealthy Chicago suburb) --- going to elite schools, and making a ton of money representing big special interests in Arkansas, such as Wal Mart and Tyson Chicken, as a lawyer who happened to be married to the sitting governor (funny how much money such a lawyer can make with that kind of connection).

Perhaps the height of the Clinton's duplicitous new found love for the working class, is exemplified by their acceptance of help from their political "pit bull" James Carville, in regards to Bill's many unwanted advances upon  "working" class women who happened to cross his path. 

Carville demeaned anyone who criticized his patron and once famously characterized a clerical worker in Arkansas state government as "trailer trash" when she truthfully told her humiliating story of Governor Clinton's inexcusable sexual advances.  

"You drag a dollar bill through a trailer park, and you never know what trash might turn up".

I give the Indiana voters credit for seeing beyond Hillary's new "shot and a beer" persona, and for seeing who she really is. 

Not so very long ago, Indiana was the birthplace of the Klu Klux Klan - but the people of Indiana, with their votes,  have shown that this is a New World in which Color of someone's skin will not necessarily be the sole criteria they vote on --- even when being subtlety and not so subtlety reminded of the race issue by the White Rich Woman Candidate.

Much has been said about the ability of Barack Obama to win over Independents and Undecided Voters ...... which will bode well for whichever Democratic Candidate faces off with John McCain.

McCain has a strong attraction to Independent Voters who do not necessarily vote a straight party line, but who look at the individual candidate's attributes. 

Politicians like McCain (and Obama) who have shown a willingness to work with the Party on the other side of the Aisle, are very attractive to Independents who are tired of the Same Old Politics and Political Polarization in our government.

One of the reasons that Barack Obama has done so well against Hillary Clinton, is that Clinton has long been seen as one of the Polarizing Politicians and is often a turn-off to Independent Voters and even Declared Democrats who are looking for Real Change.

 

As I noted in my previous posting, I believe the Media is portraying the Underwhelming Clinton win in Pennsylvania as an upset --- to keep the race going, along with the viewership of the News Shows and Media Advertising Sales that benefit from the continuation of the Race.

Clinton was forecasted early on to win Pennsylvania by 20 points or more, and her less than double win of 9 point some percent, showed that Obama was able to Whittle Her Lead by More than Half  ---  And among Registered Democrats ONLY !!! 

My Question of who won the Independent Voters in Pennsylvania was a TRICK QUESTION --- INDEPENDENTS COULD NOT VOTE IN EITHER PARTY PRIMARY --- AS THEY ARE ALLOWED TO DO IN WISCONSIN !!!

Under Pennsylvania's system, a Voter must declare their Party Affiliation at least a Month Before the Election, and those who declare Independent, CANNOT vote for either a Republican or Democrat.

 

Would the ability of the Independents to vote for one of the Democratic Candidates been of benefit to Barack --- would it have put him over the line for the win ??? We will never know for sure, but based upon the effect of the Independent Voters in other races, it is a Very Probable Scenario that their ability to vote in the Democratic Contest would have been a Straight Win for Obama !!

And going on to the General Election --- the Independents will play a Very Big role in deciding between McCain and the Democratic Candidate. 

If the Independents do becoming the deciding factor in deciding our next president --- as they have had in every election since 1992 --- the Democrats will need Obama to be a Viable Alternative to McCain --- a role which Hillary, with all her Polarizing Baggage, cannot fulfill.          

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?  YOUR COMMENTS ARE WELCOME !

It has been very obvious that Shorewood has not been enforcing its ordinance regarding the clearing of walkways of snow and ice.  Despite all of our tax money spent on advertising Shorewood as a Walkable Community --- the Village Administration has truly fallen down on the job of actually making Shorewood Walkable.

Two of the Shorewood Trustees who have touted Shorewood as a "Walkable" Community, and who have voted to spend our tax dollars advertising Shorewood as Walkable, have not cleared their own sidewalks in front of their houses.

Taken yesterday (Sunday) at about 5:00 Pm are pictures of Trustees Hickey and Phinney's ice covered sidewalks.

These 3 pictures are of the sidewalk in front of Trustee Hickey's house.

The following pictures are of Trustee Phinney's sidewalks

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?

I have been astounded by the lack of concern for dealing with the Snow and Ice and making Shorewood a Truly WALKABLE Community.

I have to admit that I was becoming discouraged about the lack of response and discussion to my postings on the subject, until Suzanne Rosenblatt added a posting to her blog about the dangers in trying to navigate Shorewood this winter, and the indifference that the Village Administration has shown.

I then met Suzanne and her husband at Schwartz's yesterday --- and after reading her posting, and knowing they had to walk down the middle of the streets to get there as the sidelwalks are Not Walkable --- I knew that this issue has to be pursued further.

(To read Suzanne's posting click here on Thin Ice)

Reading about the Official Indifference by the Village Administration in Suzanne's blog, I wondered just how conscientious the Members of the Shorewood Board of Trustees  are in following the laws they set. 

There are 6 Trustees, and 2 of them have sidewalks covered with Treacherous Ice -- that makes them all but impassable.

To be more than fair, I waited until 5 PM today (Sunday), just in case they needed the weekend to get their salt, ice melt, or just get out there with an ice chopper.  I then took pictures of the offending walks to document their condition.

 To complete my Due Diligence, I am going to cross reference the addresses on the tax records, to ensure I have not taken a picture of a house that someone no longer lives at, or was listed in error on their address listing. 

 After the double check of ownership of the properties, I will post the photos and the names of the Trustees here tomorrow.

WHAT DO YOU THINK ?

As the Wisconsin Primary is coming soon and the Candidates increase the attention they are giving to the Dairy State --- it is very possible that as Wisconsin Goes --- so Goes the Nomination !  McCain is the Presumptive Candidate for the Republicans -- and based upon his "Independent" Leanings and willingness to work with the other side of the aisle for the Better Good --- even with our own Russ Feingold, McCain is the candidate I favored from the Republican Field.

On the Democratic side, it is "tooth and nail" between Clinton and Obama .... a race that may not be ultimately decided until it goes to the Convention Floor !  For the record, I am very supportive of Obama.

Ironically our very own Shorewood and the North Shore Communities could be the deciding battleground here in Wisconsin.  At least looking at the money flow --- more donations from Whitefish Bay went to Barack -- while more donations from Shorewood went to Hillary. 

It would be very interesting to more closely look at the demographic differences between the Bay and Shorewood, as polls have shown that older women lean to Hillary, while Barack gets more of the younger folks.  On the Sixty Minutes program on 2/10/08, it was very obvious that Hillary has built in a lot of subtle ques that would make women her general age, identify more with her.  However I did not see Barack using some ques to play towards the Black vote.  CLICK HERE TO SEE 60 MINUTES INTERVIEWS:

Looking at the Aging Demographics here in Wisconsin --- Hillary went back to Bill Clinton's playbook in 1992, when he ran ads in the Florida Primary,  that falsely said his opponent Tsongas was going to cut Social Security Benefits for the elderly.

As noted in an article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel    by Craig Gilbert cgilbert@journalsentinel.com posted on February 15, 2008 --- Hillary's negative campaigning attack ads against Barack Obama used the same theme her husband used, in an attempt to scare Older Voters !

HERE IS AN EXCERPT

 Feuding extends to stepped-up TV ads

By CRAIG GILBERT

Posted: Feb. 15, 2008

"Then Clinton upped the ante Friday, charging Obama with "hiding behind false attack ads" and - mining a theme that Democrats usually save for Republicans - suggesting Obama "might raise the retirement age and cut benefits."

The Clinton campaign said this was based on Obama's saying on ABC last year that "everything should be on the table" when it comes to Social Security reform.

"Obama has said repeatedly he does not want to cut benefits or raise the retirement age," the Obama campaign said."

Milwaukee, Milwaukee County and the Milwaukee suburbs will play a major part in the primary

 Following are Postings on my other Blog I have made over the past few weeks on what was then a very Global Issue -- but is now a very Local Issue.

February 8, 2008

Hillary Clinton's Loan of $5 Million to Her Own Presidential Campaign Fund is Same Old Way to Get Around Campaign Finance Laws that Bill used in 1992.

A loophole in Campaign Finance Laws that is big enough to drive a Mack Truck through, is that the Candidate is not restricted in the amount they Give or Loan to Their Own Campaign !

That is why we see so many Rich Folks running for Office.

An added bonus for any politician who is in an office and who can attract a lot of Political Donations is that they can Lend Themselves Money Now --- and Pay Themselves Back Later from more than Willing Lobbyists, PAC Funds, and Those Who Want To Buy Influence.

In 1992 when Bill Clinton's campaign was neck and neck with Paul Tsongas, they both pretty much depleted their campaign war chests by the time of the Florida primary.

But Clinton, being the Sitting Governor of Arkansas was able to get an "unsecured" loan of $ 3 million for his Campaign from an Arkansas Bank --- Worthen National. With Fresh Money, he was able to bury Tsongas in Political Ads !

Much has been made of the fact that there was a lot of foreign intrigue involved in the Worthen loan --- but regardless of who owned or controlled the bank, and whether or not Clinton later paid off with political favors --- it was a very safe loan for the bank to make.

When you make a loan to a Sitting State Governor for political purposes, you know that whether they win or lose the race, they can hold fundraisers after the race (and a governor attracts a lot of political campaign funds) to pay off the loans.

So the question becomes --- Is Hillary Betting $5 Million that she can win the Nomination ? If She Loses the Campaign, does She Lose Her Money ?

My guess is that as a Sitting Senator from the State of New York --- Win or Lose --- Hillary can quickly Pay Herself Back through Future Fund Raisers.

Her $5 Million is as safe as being in the bank.



 

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Clinton Increased the Use of the Death Penalty Despite the Racial Imbalance of Its Application

As the Clinton's continue their Two for One campaign to get Hillary elected, it should be remembered that their prior Two for One Presidency dramatically increased the Death Penalty, despite the overwhelming bias against Blacks in its application.

Race influences . . .
A 1990 U.S. General Accounting Office report revealed "a pattern of evidence indicating racial disparities in charging, sentencing and imposition of the death penalty." In its 1997 call for a moratorium on executions, the American Bar Association concluded that "racial discrimination remain[s] in courts across the country."

. . . who gets charged
The local District Attorney (D.A.) makes the decision to pursue a death sentence. A 1998 Death Penalty Information Center report reveals that 98% of the D.A.s in death penalty states are white.

On the federal level, the pattern of racial bias in capital prosecutions is striking. A recent Justice Department study of federal capital cases from 1995 to 2000 found that 74% of the defendants were people of color. Upon release of the study, Attorney General Janet Reno said she was "sorely troubled" by such stark racial disparities.

. . . who gets a death sentence
Over half of those on death row are people of color. Black men alone make up over 42% of all death row prisoners, though they account for only 6% of people living in the U.S..

. . . who gets executed
Nearly half of those executed since 1976 have been people of color, with blacks alone accounting for 35%. All told, 82% have been put to death for the murder of a white person. Only 1.8% were white people who had been convicted of killing people of African, Asian, or Latin descent. Meanwhile, people of color are the victims in more than half of all homicides.

Congress and the President
Congress and the President also have refused to remedy the racism inherent in death penalty sentencing. Though the Racial Justice Act (RJA) has been introduced four times, Congress has yet to pass it. The RJA would allow prisoners to challenge their death sentences using standards normal in civil racial-discrimination cases.

Thanks largely to the Congressional Black Caucus, a weak version of the RJA was passed by the House in 1994, but the measure never reached the Senate. A final bill signed by President Clinton expanded the federal death penalty from two to 60 crimes and established procedures for resuming federal executions.

Then, in 1996, Congress passed and Clinton signed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The law drastically limits federal court review of death row appeals. At the same time congress gutted public funding of legal aid services for death row prisoners - which, for most, offer their only legal representation.

 
Source:
Equal Justice USAA project of the Quixote Center
http://www.ejusa.org/moratorium_now/broch_race.html

 

Was Bill Clinton Really a Friend of Black Americans -- part one

I find it very interesting that Bill Clinton has somehow convinced many Black voters that he has an affinity with them --- and by osmosis, so does Hillary. In a delicate balance, it appears that Bill is the Black Hat with the job of bashing Obama --- while trying to inject Race while appearing not to inject Race, while Hillary sits above the fray.

In what may have been the most cynical political act ever, then candidate Bill Clinton, while in the middle of his presidential campaign in 1992, went back to Arkansas to Officiate over the Execution of a Mentally Incompetent Black Man.

Conventional Wisdom is that Clinton wanted to show that he was tough on crime to get crossover votes from conservatives, especially in the south.

Following is a recounting of this from Expedia:

Rector was subject to a unique overlap of controversies in 1992 during his execution in Arkansas. A question of the morality of killing someone who was functionally retarded. An oft-cited example of his mental insufficiency is his decision to save the dessert of his last meal for after his execution.[1] In 2002, the U.S. Supreme Court banned the execution of people with mental retardation in Atkins v. Virginia, ruling that the practice constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Rector was African-American, adding to racial questions relating to the death penalty.
By 1992, Bill Clinton was insisting that Democrats "should no longer feel guilty about protecting the innocent" and took a position strongly supporting capital punishment. To make his point, he flew home to Arkansas mid-campaign to affirm that the execution would continue as scheduled. Some considered it a turning point in that race, hardening a soft public image.[citation needed] Others tend to cite the execution as an example of what they perceive to be Clinton's opportunism, directly influenced by Michael Dukakis and his response to CNN's Bernard Shaw when asked during a campaign debate on October 13, 1988 if he would be supportive of the death penalty were his wife to be raped and murdered.
Rector was executed by lethal injection. It took medical staff, with Rector's help, more than fifty minutes to find a suitable vein. The curtain remained closed between Rector and the witnesses, but some reported they could hear Rector moaning. The administrator of the State Department of Corrections Medical Program said "the moans did come as a team of two medical people that had grown to five worked on both sides of his body to find a vein. That may have contributed to his occasional outbursts." The state later attributed the difficulty in finding a suitable vein to Rector's heavy weight and to his use of an antipsychotic medication.
Rector was the third person executed by the state of Arkansas since Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972), after new capital punishment laws were passed in Arkansas and that came into force on March 23, 1973.
Bill Clinton's critics from the anti-capital punishment left have seen the case of Rector as an unpleasant example of what they view as Clinton's cynical careerism. The writer Christopher  Hitchens, in particular, devotes much of a chapter of his polemical attack on Clinton, No One Left to Lie To what he regards as the immorality of the then Democratic candidate's decision to condone, and take political advantage of, Rector's execution.[2]

Monday, January 21, 2008

If Hillary becomes president -- will it still be all about Bill ?

The campaign news seems to be more about Bill attacking Barack, than about Hillary.

If Hillary were to become president, would she still rely on Bill for protecting her ?

If Iran's president says bad things about her, will Bill hold a press conference defending her ?

It just seems that Hillary is not able to fight her own battles --- which is one good reason to vote against her --- another, perhaps better reason --- is so we don't have to keep listening to Bill.

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

Tears Make Hillary Human -- They Made Muskie Weak

It is really ironic that the New Hampshire Primary brings a tear to the eye of a candidate. Is it the cold  Arctic air --- or the cold reality that competing to be President of the United States takes a physical and emotional toll on all the candidates.

In 1972, Edmund Muskie showed some emotion --- and that was the end of his aspiration to be President. The common consensus was that if a little thing like a hard campaign with all the slings and arrows it unleashes on the participants could bring a crack to his composure --- how was he going to hold up as President of the United States, which has to be the most demanding and hardest job in the World ?

Now we have Hillary in 2008 who comes to the brink of tears. A show of emotion that many of the pundits are crediting for her saving a little bit of her lead over Barack.

The show of emotion for a Muskie, as man, was a sign of weakness, but for Hillary, as a woman, it is a sign that she is actually human after all.

There are more than a few cynical pundits, who think that Hillary's display of emotion, was really a calculated ploy to reach out to the woman voters, many of whom she lost to Barack in Iowa.

It may seem perfectly plausible that Hillary was putting on an act, seeing how in the past, she has not let anything deter her ambitions, or break her implacable demeanor.

Over her "35 years of experience" (whatever that may mean) the constant affairs of her husband, the numerous scandals of her business dealings, and the whole humiliation of the Monica Lewinski dalliance, couldn't break her composure, or her laser guided political ambitions.

In fact, we can only imagine how many women Hillary brought to tears, when she joined with her husband and political loyalists, in characterizing his illicit conquests as being "those loose women who seduced the poor man past his the limits of his inner strength".

Normally of course, an avowed liberal feminist like Hillary, would never have condoned the condemnation of the subordinate female employee by a powerful boss such as the president of the United States. But in the past, it seems, such Meaningless Emotion had no place in Hillary's relentless march to the rhythm of Her Own Political Ambitions and Agenda.

What do you think ?

Real Emotion and Tears --- or a Sure Nomination for Best Actress ?

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Is Hillary the Cop Out Liberal Vote Against the Black Man

Back in 1970 or thereabouts, I was at a symposium on Civil Rights.

Noticeably at this symposium was a strong representation of Feminist Speakers, who were espousing that Women needed Civil Rights recognition, programs, incentives and advantages --- as much as Blacks did.

The New Feminist Movement was already a few years old and getting well established, but this was at a time when they were actively attaching their movement to what had been predominantly a Civil Rights movement against discrimination (and worse) against Blacks.

Leaving the symposium, I happened to be talking with a Black guy I knew from other such events. I was stunned when he said to me   something to the effect that: "With all the Feminists jumping on the Civil Rights Movement --- so much for advancement for the Black Man "His statement hit me like a bolt of lightning, and I have remembered it all these years.

Of course I asked him what he meant, as I regarded the Feminist Movement as being a neutral force, at worst, in regards to Black Civil Rights.

He explained that in his opinion, as the Feminists' movement gained traction, it would become an alternative for employers and other institutions, and allow them to proclaim they were being Tolerant, Diverse, Equal and Affirmative in their hiring and promotion practices, because they were doing so for the Women as a Minority --- while at the same time, doing very little for the Advancement of Black Men.

Although I could see his point, I didn't think it would come to that. I actually thought the inclusion of Feminists in the Civil Rights mainstream, would be like the fabled "rising tide", which would raise all boats.

Over the past 37 years, however, I regretfully have to say I was wrong and he was absolutely right. Every study I have seen in the past several years show that unemployment is worse for Black Men th