54% of Wisconsin Voters against Recall

[drsmith1072]

I repeat post #247...

Repeating your troll does nothing to address or substantiate your arguments.

You made a claim, I questioned you on that claim and instead of backing up that claim you came at me personally and have continued to do nothing but troll.

Since it obvious that you can't back up your claim or else you would have already I have to ask why are you so afraid of admitting that you can't substantiate your argument?

which claim NOW are you whining like a butt-fucked pig about?

Are you admitting that there are multiple claims that you haven't been able to back up?? LOL

Furthermore, why should I repeat anything when you ran away from them in the past and will likely do the same now?? Why should I waste my time reporting them when you lack the integrity to respond with anything other than namecalling and profanity?

 

[Conservative]

Repeating your troll does nothing to address or substantiate your arguments.

You made a claim, I questioned you on that claim and instead of backing up that claim you came at me personally and have continued to do nothing but troll.

Since it obvious that you can't back up your claim or else you would have already I have to ask why are you so afraid of admitting that you can't substantiate your argument?

which claim NOW are you whining like a butt-fucked pig about?

Are you admitting that there are multiple claims that you haven't been able to back up?? LOL

Furthermore, why should I repeat anything when you ran away from them in the past and will likely do the same now?? Why should I waste my time reporting them when you lack the integrity to respond with anything other than namecalling and profanity?

Hardly. I am asking you to specify any claim you say I made, and then I'll back it up 'again'.

Well, you 'wasted your time' reviving this thread, didn't you?

 

[drsmith1072]

Walker signs bills to ease regulatory burdens on businesses - BizTimes
Walker signs bills to ease regulatory burdens on businesses

Gov. Scott Walker today signed into law two bills that he said will improve Wisconsin’s regulatory environment to help businesses create more jobs.
Walker signed Senate bill 111 and 138.
Today is also the first meeting of the Small Business Regulatory Review Board. The board will meet at 2 p.m. in the Governor’s Conference Room.
“As I’ve talked to job creators across the state, I’ve heard over and over that Wisconsin’s regulatory environment holds our small and mid-size businesses back,” Walker said. “The legislation I signed today help bring a little more sense to the state’s regulations. I want to thank Representative Jim Ott and Senator Leah Vukmir for their work passing SB 111 and SB 138.”

thanks for the op-ed from a noname bizdaily and no author which looks like a walker campaing press release. LOL

Walker to unveil new job training program - WSAU News/Talk 550AM 99.9FM

Governor Scott Walker will announce a new job training program in Schofield this afternoon.

The governor will make an appearance at Norlen Incorporated. The visit follows a similar stop that he will make at Pacal Industries in La Crosse.

In a related move, Walker signed two bills into law today that will improve the state’s regulatory environment.

And the Small Business Regulatory Review Board is meeting for the first time in Madison. A bill Walker signed in November gives businesses more of a voice in state government and removes representatives from eight state agencies.

WOW more talking points out of a less than 100 word "article" LOL Funny but I don't see any specifics in either article thus far to suppor tthe claims made. Where is the substance??

Assembly to pass bill limiting voucher expansion - Leader-Telegram: Daily Updates

The state Assembly plans to pass a bill Tuesday that would curtail further expansion of Wisconsin's school voucher program, fulfilling a promise made last year to close a loophole in the state budget.

The bill has previously cleared the Senate and is supported by Gov. Scott Walker.

Bill sponsor Rep. Robin Vos said Wednesday the bill should pass Tuesday.

The measure also has broad support from education groups, state Superintendent Tony Evers, and others who say it's needed to prevent vouchers being allowed anywhere beyond where they have already been approved.

Why did you leave out the last line

Vouchers previously had been limited to Milwaukee city schools, but last year's budget allowed them to expand to Milwaukee County and Racine. Other cities, including Green Bay, were close to qualifying, which drove the push to close the loophole.

Seems to me that they were planning to open up the voucher programs to other areas so how is that a loophole and why is walker against vouchers for those outside of milwaukee city?? Are they not as cost effective as the right would like people to believe?? Here it seems that walker it curtailing expansion of the voucher program because they are claiming it's too costly to the budget.

this all sounds great for WI.

If you are gullible enough to buy the hype then yeah I am sure it does. LOL

 

[MolochSolomon]

who cares about wisconsin?

 

[drsmith1072]

which claim NOW are you whining like a butt-fucked pig about?

Are you admitting that there are multiple claims that you haven't been able to back up?? LOL

Furthermore, why should I repeat anything when you ran away from them in the past and will likely do the same now?? Why should I waste my time reporting them when you lack the integrity to respond with anything other than namecalling and profanity?

Hardly. I am asking you to specify any claim you say I made, and then I'll back it up 'again'.

Well, you 'wasted your time' reviving this thread, didn't you?

I already did ask you specifically and you turned tail and ran away from your own words by responding with personal attacks instead of backing up your own claims.

This is just more of the same.

Initially you ran away from them calling me names as you went, I called you out for your continued avoidance, then you ask that I repost them, I take the time to find and repost them, you run away again and engage in personal attacks again and the cycle starts over. I am not playing the game.


If you had any integrty you would respond to them but it's obvious that you don't so keep on avoiding that and spamming the board with propaganda is apparently all that you have to offer. LOL

 

[drsmith1072]

And lefties want to whine about activist judges???

Wisconsin judge who blocked photo ID law for April 3 vote signed petition to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

A Wisconsin judge on Tuesday granted a temporary injunction to stop the state’s controversial new voter identification law, but Republicans immediately questioned it after records showed the judge signed a petition to recall GOP Gov. Scott Walker.

Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan’s decision to stop the contentious law from taking effect for the state’s April 3 presidential primary election was criticized by the state’s Republican Party following a report that Flanagan signed a recall petition dated Nov. 15. It also lists his wife, who circulated the petition.

Janine Geske, a professor at Marquette University’s law school and a former state Supreme Court justice, said Flanagan should have revealed to both parties that he had signed the petition. As a private citizen he has every right to sign the petition, Geske said, but the question is whether doing so could cause people to question his impartiality.

So what does that have to do with the fact that an activist judge actually acted to expand the responsibilites of the GAB to include what were walker's responsibilites as challenger of the petition and in accordance with WI law prior to the judges interferrence and legislating from the bench?

BTW what was the reason behind flanagan's decision and can you prove that he was being an activist judge and that his judgement was activist?? Where is the substance to support your claim that he was being an activist by granting the temptorary injunction? You do have proof don't you?

 

[Conservative]

And lefties want to whine about activist judges???

Wisconsin judge who blocked photo ID law for April 3 vote signed petition to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

A Wisconsin judge on Tuesday granted a temporary injunction to stop the state’s controversial new voter identification law, but Republicans immediately questioned it after records showed the judge signed a petition to recall GOP Gov. Scott Walker.

Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan’s decision to stop the contentious law from taking effect for the state’s April 3 presidential primary election was criticized by the state’s Republican Party following a report that Flanagan signed a recall petition dated Nov. 15. It also lists his wife, who circulated the petition.

Janine Geske, a professor at Marquette University’s law school and a former state Supreme Court justice, said Flanagan should have revealed to both parties that he had signed the petition. As a private citizen he has every right to sign the petition, Geske said, but the question is whether doing so could cause people to question his impartiality.

So what does that have to do with the fact that an activist judge actually acted to expand the responsibilites of the GAB to include what were walker's responsibilites as challenger of the petition and in accordance with WI law prior to the judges interferrence and legislating from the bench?

BTW what was the reason behind flanagan's decision and can you prove that he was being an activist judge and that his judgement was activist?? Where is the substance to support your claim that he was being an activist by granting the temptorary injunction? You do have proof don't you?

you really do take yourself WAY too seriously. And you're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

The judge who signed a recall petition for Walker (as is his right) should NOT be the judge deciding on a case involving suspending a law Walker signed. It's a conflict of interests, and even someone as breathtakingly stupid and partisan as you knows it.

it is now painfully obvious that you are utterly incapable of rational thought or discussion, and would rather just listen to yourself talk and then pat yourself on your back for all the pretty words that come out.

be my guest.

 

[drsmith1072]

And lefties want to whine about activist judges???

Wisconsin judge who blocked photo ID law for April 3 vote signed petition to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

So what does that have to do with the fact that an activist judge actually acted to expand the responsibilites of the GAB to include what were walker's responsibilites as challenger of the petition and in accordance with WI law prior to the judges interferrence and legislating from the bench?

BTW what was the reason behind flanagan's decision and can you prove that he was being an activist judge and that his judgement was activist?? Where is the substance to support your claim that he was being an activist by granting the temptorary injunction? You do have proof don't you?

you really do take yourself WAY too seriously. And you're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

The judge who signed a recall petition for Walker (as is his right) should NOT be the judge deciding on a case involving suspending a law Walker signed. It's a conflict of interests, and even someone as breathtakingly stupid and partisan as you knows it.

it is now painfully obvious that you are utterly incapable of rational thought or discussion, and would rather just listen to yourself talk and then pat yourself on your back for all the pretty words that come out.

be my guest.

So you have no proof that he was being an activist judge and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove his decision was biased and that he wasn't being impartial then why should he recuse himself? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that he was an activist judge, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.
You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.
That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

 

[daveman]

Every poll i`ve seen has walker stasticaly tied with his possible opponents. Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%. that ranks wisconsin 49th in job creation. All he did was take benifits from working people and gave the money to tax breaks for his wealthy donors.

...but it's okay when Obama does that, right?

 

[Annie]

Yep, the more that comes out about this 'recall' and the powers that be, the less the citizenry is to like it. Wisconsin has had a rarefied legacy about clean government and these jackasses are ruining it:

http://patterico.com/2012/03/07/lef...voter-id-law-in-scott-walker-recall-election/

Links at site:

3/7/2012
Lefty Wisconsin Judge Rejects Voter ID Law in Scott Walker Recall Election
Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:21 am

But that’s not the craziest part. The craziest part is that he made this ruling despite the fact that he signed a petition to recall Scott Walker:

Nearly four months before he signed off on the poorly edited order granting a temporary injunction against Wisconsin’s new voter identification law, Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan scribbled his name on another important legal document:


A petition urging the recall of Republican Gov. Scott Walker.

Walker signed the voter ID legislation last year and is a defendant in the current case.

“The very fact that Dane County Judge David Flanagan signed a petition to recall Governor Walker calls (Tuesday’s) court proceedings regarding Wisconsin’s voter ID law into question,” said Republican Party spokesman Ben Sparks in a statement.​

The petition to recall Walker that the good judge signed was being circulated by his wife.

So, I’m a judge in your lawsuit, and I have signed a document trying to have you recalled from office. And I rule that the law passed to protect against voter fraud in your election cannot be enforced.

How do you feel I am acting in that situation? Pretty fair, right?

But, but, it’s not like the judge is just a partisan hack, right? I mean, his ruling is still quality legal scholarship, isn’t it? Replete with careful citations to the applicable laws and sound arguments?

Eh, not so much:

Statehouse staffers spent Tuesday afternoon counting the mistakes in Flanagan’s 11-page order on voter ID.

The most notable is Flanagan’s reference to “Justice William Scalia.” That would be U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

Several sentences in the decision are garbled.

Flanagan refers to the wrong section of the state Constitution when he says it “sets forth explicitly the requirement for eligibility to vote, Art. I, Sect. 2 (4).”

The article and section cited by Flanagan deals, instead, with the prohibition of slavery. He meant to refer to Article III.

Cullen Werwie, spokesman for the governor, took note of the discrepancies: “Our legal team is still trying to locate Justice William Scalia.”​

A person more cynical than I am might say that this is absolute hackery. That it’s abuse of a position to win by any means possible.

And that person would be right.

Why, even William Scalia would agree.

 

[Uncensored2008]

it is hard to deny Walker wasn't insincere while running for governor and in this case may be the politicians undoing, and in Walkers case deservedly so.

To save time, please state which Union you're posting for.

SEIU is assumed, but you could be part of the elite 7-figure California prison guard union...

 

[Uncensored2008]

who cares about wisconsin?

Who cares about Nazis?

I'm just sayin.....

 

[Conservative]

So you have no proof that he was being an activist judge and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove his decision was biased and that he wasn't being impartial then why should he recuse himself? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that he was an activist judge, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.
You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.
That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

So you have no proof that i made a claim I cannot back up and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove I made a claim that I didn't back up then why should I reprove it? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that i made a claim I cannot back up, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.

You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.

That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

 

[drsmith1072]

So you have no proof that he was being an activist judge and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove his decision was biased and that he wasn't being impartial then why should he recuse himself? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that he was an activist judge, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.
You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.
That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

So you have no proof that i made a claim I cannot back up and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove I made a claim that I didn't back up then why should I reprove it? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that i made a claim I cannot back up, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.

You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.

That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

How can you "reprove" something when you failed to prove it inititally? You made a claim that he was an activist judge and provided nothing of substance to back it up. Do I really have to quote your post from last page even thought I quoted it in my response??

Then when you did try to defend said statement your only argument was your own opinion that he must have been biased because he signed a recall petition even as you fail to show how is reasoning for being against the new law was biased.

However here is your initial post.

And lefties want to whine about activist judges???

Wisconsin judge who blocked photo ID law for April 3 vote signed petition to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

A Wisconsin judge on Tuesday granted a temporary injunction to stop the state’s controversial new voter identification law, but Republicans immediately questioned it after records showed the judge signed a petition to recall GOP Gov. Scott Walker.

Dane County Circuit Judge David Flanagan’s decision to stop the contentious law from taking effect for the state’s April 3 presidential primary election was criticized by the state’s Republican Party following a report that Flanagan signed a recall petition dated Nov. 15. It also lists his wife, who circulated the petition.

Janine Geske, a professor at Marquette University’s law school and a former state Supreme Court justice, said Flanagan should have revealed to both parties that he had signed the petition. As a private citizen he has every right to sign the petition, Geske said, but the question is whether doing so could cause people to question his impartiality.

So where did you prove that he was an activist judge?? You asked for it there it is now show where your proof is?

Or was your alleged proof here,

you really do take yourself WAY too seriously. And you're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

The judge who signed a recall petition for Walker (as is his right) should NOT be the judge deciding on a case involving suspending a law Walker signed. It's a conflict of interests, and even someone as breathtakingly stupid and partisan as you knows it.

it is now painfully obvious that you are utterly incapable of rational thought or discussion, and would rather just listen to yourself talk and then pat yourself on your back for all the pretty words that come out.

be my guest.

where you offered and unsubstantiated opinion that he was an activist judge because he signed the recall petition? Face it you have proven nothing except that you are a dishonest hack who tried to claim he backed up his claim when the fact is that he did NOT.

Your failure to back up your claims and short term memory disorder have no bearing on me.

 

[Conservative]

So you have no proof that he was being an activist judge and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove his decision was biased and that he wasn't being impartial then why should he recuse himself? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that he was an activist judge, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.
You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.
That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

So you have no proof that i made a claim I cannot back up and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove I made a claim that I didn't back up then why should I reprove it? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that i made a claim I cannot back up, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.

You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.

That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

How can you "reprove" something when you failed to prove it inititally? You made a claim that he was an activist judge and provided nothing of substance to back it up. Do I really have to quote your post from last page even thought I quoted it in my response??

Then when you did try to defend said statement your only argument was your own opinion that he must have been biased because he signed a recall petition even as you fail to show how is reasoning for being against the new law was biased.

However here is your initial post.

And lefties want to whine about activist judges???

Wisconsin judge who blocked photo ID law for April 3 vote signed petition to recall Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker

So where did you prove that he was an activist judge?? You asked for it there it is now show where your proof is?

Or was your alleged proof here,

you really do take yourself WAY too seriously. And you're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

The judge who signed a recall petition for Walker (as is his right) should NOT be the judge deciding on a case involving suspending a law Walker signed. It's a conflict of interests, and even someone as breathtakingly stupid and partisan as you knows it.

it is now painfully obvious that you are utterly incapable of rational thought or discussion, and would rather just listen to yourself talk and then pat yourself on your back for all the pretty words that come out.

be my guest.

where you offered and unsubstantiated opinion that he was an activist judge because he signed the recall petition? Face it you have proven nothing except that you are a dishonest hack who tried to claim he backed up his claim when the fact is that he did NOT.

Your failure to back up your claims and short term memory disorder have no bearing on me.

I'm sorry... did you say something?

 

[drsmith1072]

So you have no proof that i made a claim I cannot back up and even though you made the claim you can't PROVE it? Got it.

If you can't prove I made a claim that I didn't back up then why should I reprove it? You've got nothing and pretend that you have something.

You made a claim that i made a claim I cannot back up, failed to substantiate it and ended up personally attacking me AGAIN.

You had your opportunity right there to show that you have integrity and back up your claim or admit that it was not true and you failed miserably.

That is why I refused to waste my time to go back and find your previous arguments only to have to avoid them and produce a similar outcome.

Once again you make a claim but then fail to back it up.

How can you "reprove" something when you failed to prove it inititally? You made a claim that he was an activist judge and provided nothing of substance to back it up. Do I really have to quote your post from last page even thought I quoted it in my response??

Then when you did try to defend said statement your only argument was your own opinion that he must have been biased because he signed a recall petition even as you fail to show how is reasoning for being against the new law was biased.

However here is your initial post.



So where did you prove that he was an activist judge?? You asked for it there it is now show where your proof is?

Or was your alleged proof here,

you really do take yourself WAY too seriously. And you're nowhere near as smart as you think you are.

The judge who signed a recall petition for Walker (as is his right) should NOT be the judge deciding on a case involving suspending a law Walker signed. It's a conflict of interests, and even someone as breathtakingly stupid and partisan as you knows it.

it is now painfully obvious that you are utterly incapable of rational thought or discussion, and would rather just listen to yourself talk and then pat yourself on your back for all the pretty words that come out.

be my guest.

where you offered and unsubstantiated opinion that he was an activist judge because he signed the recall petition? Face it you have proven nothing except that you are a dishonest hack who tried to claim he backed up his claim when the fact is that he did NOT.

Your failure to back up your claims and short term memory disorder have no bearing on me.

I'm sorry... did you say something?

LOL that's what I expected to see. You are shown to be a dishonest hack who can't even stand behind his own words or back them up and when questioned about it you turn tail and run away from your own words.

Thanks for the laughs. lol

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Every poll i`ve seen has walker stasticaly tied with his possible opponents. Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%. that ranks wisconsin 49th in job creation. All he did was take benifits from working people and gave the money to tax breaks for his wealthy donors.

Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%.

Plus his job disapproval rating is 47%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.8% before Obama and now is at 8.3%.

You're right, doesn't look good for Obama.

 

[drsmith1072]

Every poll i`ve seen has walker stasticaly tied with his possible opponents. Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%. that ranks wisconsin 49th in job creation. All he did was take benifits from working people and gave the money to tax breaks for his wealthy donors.

Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%.

Plus his job disapproval rating is 47%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.8% before Obama and now is at 8.3%.

You're right, doesn't look good for Obama.

If you want to talk about jobs, recently walker was touting the job numbers in WI over his first year in office. The problem with that was the fact that jobs increased for the first 6 months he was in office but decreased over the last six months of his first year in office. The only reason walker could claim a positive number was because the jobs numbers gained in his first six months were higher than those in his last six months.

So basically after his policies started taking affect people lost jobs but now he is promoting programs that will bring them back and even thought no specifics were provided conservative posted links to press releases claiming that it "sounds great for WI."

LOL

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Every poll i`ve seen has walker stasticaly tied with his possible opponents. Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%. that ranks wisconsin 49th in job creation. All he did was take benifits from working people and gave the money to tax breaks for his wealthy donors.

Plus his job disaproval rating is 52%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.4% before walker and now is at 7.3%.

Plus his job disapproval rating is 47%. Add that to the fact that the unemployment rate was 7.8% before Obama and now is at 8.3%.

You're right, doesn't look good for Obama.

If you want to talk about jobs, recently walker was touting the job numbers in WI over his first year in office. The problem with that was the fact that jobs increased for the first 6 months he was in office but decreased over the last six months of his first year in office. The only reason walker could claim a positive number was because the jobs numbers gained in his first six months were higher than those in his last six months.

So basically after his policies started taking affect people lost jobs but now he is promoting programs that will bring them back and even thought no specifics were provided conservative posted links to press releases claiming that it "sounds great for WI."

LOL

If you want to talk about jobs

I thought I just did.

The only reason walker could claim a positive number was...

Was because he has a positive number.
Obama's is still negative.

 

[Conservative]

LOL that's what I expected to see. You are shown to be a dishonest hack who can't even stand behind his own words or back them up and when questioned about it you turn tail and run away from your own words.

Thanks for the laughs. lol

that should have read as follows...

LOL that's what everyone expected to see. I am shown to be a dishonest hack who can't even stand behind his own words or back them up and when questioned about it I turn tail and run away from my own words.

Enjoy the laughs at my expense. lol