GOP Freak Show Is On, Ignorance and Corruption Lead

Wisconsin has joined the list of states prohibiting the use of the terms, climate change and global warming, in a government Board on state land management (Ivey, Capital Times).

This is a crazy policy, and is representative of the grotesque and diverse freak show coming everywhere Republicans rule in government.

The religious right's continuing attack on gay Americans is SOP for the GOP. (Ford, ThinkProgress and Jenkins, ThinkProgress)

The success of ObamaCare in helping lower income Americans can gain healthcare is a crime for Republicans. (Krugman, NYT)

Then there is the Republicans' most despised phenomenon in American life—even more than gays, blacks, women and the science behind climate change—Medicare and Social Security.

Medicare and Social Security are still pronounced as "unsustainable" by Paul Ryan and the GOP that has been trying kill these programs for decades. (Schaaf, Racine Journal-Times) (Krugman, NYT)

Ryan and the Republicans will be saying this until the day they retire on taxpayer-financed pensions.

Crazy policy on behalf on the Koch brothers and other special interests.

To beat the plutocrats, all progressive Democrats have to do is come out not only in defense of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security but propose expanding these earned social insurance plans for all Americans.

The idea has been around for years but only a handful of politicians and writers are pushing the idea. (Krugman, NYT)

Republicans hate the idea that blacks and other minorities get something, get anything despite a lifetime of work.

If Republicans were honest, gays, blacks, Latinos would just go (self-deport or die) and leave America for whites.

If voters ask Hillary Clinton her position on expanding Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, the terms of the 2016 presidential campaign will be set and the sensible center can slaughter the freak show.

New Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau Propaganda on Suffrage

Update: A reader notes the discovery of phantom "additional qualifications" for voters in the Wisconsin Constitutions is consistent with GOP voter obstruction efforts in Kansas and Arizona where as the Washington Post notes:

NOTHING FRIGHTENS today’s Republican Party quite like the voters. Before the 2012 elections, GOP lawmakers in statehouses across the country tightened voter identification laws with one goal in common: to suppress turnout on Election Day among likely Democratic voters, especially minorities and the poor. It didn’t work.

Now, harking back to the days of Jim Crow, they are at it again. In Arizona and Kansas, GOP officials are moving to adopt a two-tiered voting system, the effect of which would be to disenfranchise thousands of voters. The ploy relies on requiring birth certificates, passports and other documents that establish proof of citizenship in order to register to vote in state and local elections. Such documents are not necessary to register for federal elections.

"Additional qualifications" to vote are not in the Wisconsin Constitution, but just the same are derived from the text, say the GOP and Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau in a new theory intended to disenfranchise African-Americans, college students, the poor, the elderly and homeless, disaffected veterans.

The Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau's (LRB) Bruce Hoesly, Revising Attorney/Code Editor, is spouting new Republican propaganda again.

Not content to parrot the disingenuous Republican line in its use of the declining-in-judicial-currency Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008) decision, the LRB has launched more partisan spin in its new page on Wisconsin's Constitutional voting rights webpage, Suffrage.

The Republican Party propaganda states as settled law, the interpretation of a Wisconsin appellate court panel in May 2013 rejecting a facial challenge to the Wisconsin Photo Voter ID law, Act 23.

Wisconsin citizens' right to vote in jeopardy by the GOP's Act 23 face a law that:

• Remains enjoined
• Is under appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court
• Is under challenge in two federal cases set for trial for November 4, 2013

The pro-voter and anti-voter advocates, the contending parties, will not even present intermediate appellate constitutional interpretations as settled law in Wisconsin Voter ID cases, but the GOP line is good enough for the LRB.

The LRB adopts GOP-friendly constitutional positions, though its reference in its new Suffrage annotation is anything but settled.

The annotation reads from a 1856 case:

Cothren, State ex rel. Knowlton v. Williams, 5 Wis. 308, contains a general rule for election law cases addressing constitutionality under a facial 'additional qualifications' challenge: whether the challenged requirement or procedure allows election officials 'to ascertain whether the person offering to vote possessed the qualifications required.' The legislature may impose such requirements or procedures because the legislature has a legitimate interest in preserving the integrity of elections. The general rule is made especially clear in the Cothren court's statement that the legislature may demand 'such proof' from potential voters 'as it deems requisite' for this purpose. League of Women Voters of Wisconsin Education Network, Inc. v. Walker, 2013 WI App 77, ___ Wis. 2d ___, ___ N.W.2d ___, 12-0584.

To translate, the LRB is asserting that the government has the authority to enact laws that are additional constitutional qualifications that are not listed in Section 2 of ARTICLE III - SUFFRAGE of the Wisconsin Constitution.

The LRB is ignoring that the League case is under appeal in state and federal court, is enjoined; and anyway, Cothren, State ex rel. Knowlton v. Williams reads in part: "an act of the legislature which deprives a person of the right to vote, although he [sic] has every qualification which the constitution makes necessary, cannot be sustained."

Surly, 100,000s of qualified, registered voters not being able to present GOP-crafted IDs demonstrates an undue burden, just as GOP intends.

The GOP did not attempt to present a wide array of acceptable IDs that almost every citizen has (as some states do) when they narrowly crafted the range of IDs in 2011 to defeat the specter of in-person voter fraud, though the legislature cannot point to one case of in-person voter fraud out of millions of votes cast.

The Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB) is not intended as a Republican Party propaganda outlet. But this is the new Wisconsin, agencies serve the Party and favored citizens should have an easier time when voting than non-favored.

The LRB page states, it is a "nonpartisan, professional, and confidential bill drafting, legal publishing, research and library services to the legislature and the public."

Reads a brief LRB history:

Since its establishment as the first professional, nonpartisan drafting and research services agency for a state legislature, the LRB has been committed to maintaining high standards of quality and to providing thorough and expeditious drafting and reference services for the Wisconsin State Legislature.

Each chief has seen the bureau through the changes that are inevitable with the passage of time. However, each has also maintained continuity with the past, holding fast to the traditions of quality, efficiency, and nonpartisanship that were established with the agency more than 100 years ago.

Not anymore.

Incidentally, Wisconsin appellate Justices Lundsten, Higginbotham, and Blanchard in the League opinion that Hoesly presents as settled law do not relate the text of Act 23 to the 100,000s of Wisconsin citizens like 86-year-old Ruthell Frank who would report to the polls as Frank has for over 60 years in Brokaw, Wisconsin and now be told she is not qualified to vote under Act 23, because she does not have the additional qualification of a driver's license or other GOP-prescribed ID.

Under this reasoning if the GOP legislature and GOP Governor pass a law that says photo IDs are now too easy to forge, in the interests of preserving the integrity of elections, a law stating a third party in your voting district has to attest to your identity and residence would survive a facial Wisconsin Constitutional challenge, though the hypothetical law would not be an amendment to Section 2 of ARTICLE III - SUFFRAGE of the Wisconsin Constitution.

The League opinion notes the following in a footnote as well:

In the same vein, given the League’s limited arguments in this case, we make note of, but see no reason to discuss further, the United States Supreme Court’s split opinion addressing a facial challenge, under the federal constitution, to an Indiana law requiring photo identification to vote.  See Crawford v. Marion Cnty. Election Bd., 553 U.S. 181, 187, 189, 200 (2008).  Crawford involved allegations that the Indiana law “substantially burdens the right to vote in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment [of the U.S. Constitution]; that it is neither a necessary nor appropriate method of avoiding election fraud; and that it will arbitrarily disenfranchise qualified voters who do not possess the required identification and will place an unjustified burden on those who cannot readily obtain such identification.”  Id. at 187.  A plurality of the Court concluded that the evidence in the record was insufficient “to support a facial attack on the validity of the entire statute.”  See id. at 189.

Hey, you note that Crawford was argued alleging a federal constitutional violation, not a Wisconsin constitutional violation, so what again is its relevancy?

Ask around. Justices Lundsten, Higginbotham, and Blanchard blew this opinion in its hard-right decision (apparently written by a GOP law clerk) that is political and one in which the justices apparently self-consciously take the GOP line in an effort to write an opinion that the four GOP Wisconsin Supreme Court justices can use, if they have no sense of shame.

Thankfully, federal court may now offer protection for Wisconsin voters from the GOP voter obstruction project, and perhaps Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), and Jones et al v. Deininger et al (Case 2:12-cv-00185) will become landmark federal voting rights cases.

Altering of online Wisconsin Constitution; Is LRB Going GOP?

Updated - New LRB page on Suffrage.

Updated - I was surprised to find in the online Wisconsin Constitution's webpage on Suffrage (Section III, aka voting) changes have been made to support the GOP's Wisconsin Attorney General-GOP's position on photo voter ID.

Weird to find annotations in the Constitution to a federal voting rights case directly refuting the clear language on the Wisconsin Constitution.

So, this morning I spoke with Bruce Hoesly, Revising Attorney/Code Editor at the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB).

Hoesly says he updates the website for the Wisconsin Constitution.

Hoesly has worked at the LRB for 22 years, he said.

Hoesly appeared not very well-versed on the Wisconsin Constitution this morning on a phone call.

Background

The following misleading sentence has been added to the online Wisconsin Constitution's Voting Section, III: "An Indiana statute requiring citizens voting in person on election day, or casting a ballot in person at the office of the circuit court clerk prior to election day, to present photo identification issued by the government did not violate constitutional standards. Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181, 128 S. Ct. 1610, 170 L. Ed. 2d 574 (2008)." (emphasis mine) [The webpage reads "Current through May 21, 2013" at the bottom of the page.]

This appears a naked display on what used to be a non-political webpage on the Wisconsin Constitution maintained under the auspices of the Wisconsin Reference Bureau (LRB). 

Hoesly

So I asked the LRB's attorney Hoesly why the page has been altered to reflect AG Van Hollen's ludicrous spin that Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (a federal case relying on a reading of the U.S. Constitution) should be added under the online Wisconsin Constitution's text, with its broad guarantee to vote vis a vis the United States Constitution.

Van Hollen's office had issued a press release dated July 19, 2012 reading in part: "Voter identification helps ensure election integrity.  It is a measure that protects the right to vote. And similar election integrity reforms have been upheld as constitutional by the United States Supreme Court."

After Hoesly denied anything partisan is afoot, I asked Hoesly should he not adopt some "rigor" into adding editorial comment under the Wisconsin Constitution's text on voting rights, in light of his inserted language about Crawford.

Hoesly said, "no," adding, "I don't believe it (editing the text of online Wisconsin Constitution) deserves more rigor."

I asked Hoesly, the relevancy of Artcile III of the Wisconsin Constitution to the federal case, Crawford.

Hoesly replied, "I'm not an expert on Article III (of the Wisconsin Constitution)," adding that he thought of the Crawford language "that it might be useful to readers."

I pointed out to Hoesly that Crawford relies on the U.S. Constitution while the ruling currently enjoining Wisconsin photo voter ID relies on the Wisconsin Constitution guaranteeing the right to vote.

Hoesly's response is babble.

So, why the Republican spin in Hoesly's language on a page that is supposed to be the online text of Wisconsin Constitution? 

Corruption is my guess. 

The GOP-added sentence to Suffrage is misleading for several reasons. Here again is a summary:

1. Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008) is a federal case based upon a facial challenge (a law asserted to be illegal or unconstitutional on its face) to an Indiana state law obstructing voting.  
Crawford relied upon the weak warrant to vote under the United States Constitution, not the Wisconsin Constitution. And the Crawford case included no social scientific evidence as was presented in
Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker (Case 11CV5492) (2012).

2. The Wisconsin Constitution—the topic of the Wisconsin Constitution's webpage—includes a strong, affirmative right to vote under ARTICLE III, Suffrage vis a vis the United States Constitution. (Hence, U.S. Reps. Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Keith Ellison's (D-MN) Right to Vote Amendment, explicitly guaranteeing Americans' right to vote in the U.S. Constitution." Hey, Rep. Sensenbrenner (R-White People), still waiting for your support of the Right to Vote Amendment in light of your unshakable commitment of voting rights.

3. The Wisconsin Constitution explicitly specifies the type of laws that may be enacted to regulate elections, enumerating the specific conditions under which the qualifications of voters (electors) may be changed by the enactment of laws under Section 2, and only Section 2. Anything outside this scope and the legislature has to change the Wisconsin Constitution.

This GOP pretension that the federal case, Crawford, controls Wisconsin state voting rights case is a disingenuous political talking point, hawked by Wisconsin's GOP Attorney General, J.B. Van Hollen and other GOP politicos.

As Judge David T. Flanagan writes in striking down the GOP Photo Voter ID bill in July 2012 in Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker (Case 11CV5492):

The Crawford decision has very little application to the dispute now before this Court, however, for three primary reasons. First, this case is founded up the Wiscosnin Constitution which expressly guarantees the right to vote, while Crawford was based upon the U.S. Constitution which offers no such guarantee. Second, the Indiana law is less rigid than Act 23, and noted by the U.S. Supreme Court, offered alternative voting opportunities to voters who lacked the Photo ID. Finally, Crawford came to the Court based upon a flawed factual record, lacking the substantial evidence that has been offered by the plaintiffs in this action. This case is based on a claim that Act 23 violates the Wisconsin Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution. The people of Wisconsin may choose to assure to themselves rights under their own constitution that differ or exceed those guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution, State v. Doe, 78 Wis 2d 161, 172 (1977). The question of what is permitted and what is protected by the Wisconsin Constitution is the issue before this court and that issue was not before the U.S. Supreme Court in the Crawford case.

This is not the first time Van Hollen and the Republican Party have lied about federal law and federal case law in order to obstruct voting rights on the state level.

See Van Hollen's and the GOP 2008 efforts at voter suppression in which Van Hollen's similarly ridiculous effort was tossed out of court.

In the 2008 case, (J B Van Hollen vs. Government Accountability Board (GAB) et al) Van Hollen tried to create a new Wisconsin constitutional qualification to vote by fiat: A perfect match of the spelling of voters' names in state bureaucracies, after assuring fellow Republicans he would commence this frivolous legal action at the 2008 Republican National Convention held in Minneapolis, as first reported by WisPolitics in a scoop that includes audio.

Several former judges serving on the GAB Board would have failed Van Hollen's new constitutional standard proposed in 2008, as this GOP effort drew wide ridicule.

"Nothing in state or federal law requires that there be a data match as a prerequisite for a citizen's right to vote," Judge Maryann Sumi said in dismissing Van Hollen's lawsuit that tried to use the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) as a voter suppression tool.

Our corrupt attorney general, up for reelection on 2014, will not give up his Party's project of denying the voting rights of Wisconsin citizens; and neither will the Republican Party now holding sway in the gerrymandered state legislature, and it would appear in the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB). 

Non-GOP-fixed Section III on the Wisconsin Constitution on Suffrage - Voting 

GOP Legislature Altered Wisconsin Constitution Webpage; Changes Mislead on Voting Rights

Updated - New LRB page on Suffrage.

See the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB)'s response.

The Wisconsin Legislature Reference Bureau webpage on Suffrage, voting, has been changed while under GOP control since 2011.

The following misleading sentence has been added: "An Indiana statute requiring citizens voting in person on election day, or casting a ballot in person at the office of the circuit court clerk prior to election day, to present photo identification issued by the government did not violate constitutional standards. Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181, 128 S. Ct. 1610, 170 L. Ed. 2d 574 (2008)."

This is the first time such a naked display of partisanship has been on display on what used to be a non-political webpage on the Wisconsin Constitution maintained under the auspices of the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB). The URL is:  http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/wiscon/_12 .

Any Wisconsin document, record, history and archives should be examined to ensure that they have not been cleansed by the Republicans in Wisconsin government in the manner of a Soviet-based authoritarian regime. 

I have been told of other cleansing efforts that I cannot reveal for fear of GOP recrimination against whistle blowers holding appointed positions.

The GOP-added sentence to the Wisconsin Legislature's webpage on Suffrage is misleading for several reasons. 

1. Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008) is a federal case based upon a facial challenge (a law asserted to be illegal or unconstitutional on its face) to an Indiana state law obstructing voting.  

Crawford relied upon the weak warrant to vote under the United States Constitution, not the Wisconsin Constitution. And the Crawford case included no social scientific evidence as was presented in
Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker (Case 11CV5492) (2012).

2. The Wisconsin Constitution—the topic of the Wisconsin Constitution's webpage—includes a strong, affirmative right to vote under ARTICLE III, Suffrage vis a vis the United States Constitution. (Hence, U.S. Reps. Mark Pocan (D-WI) and Keith Ellison's (D-MN) Right to Vote Amendment, explicitly guaranteeing Americans' right to vote in the U.S. Constitution." Hey, Rep. Sensenbrenner (R-White People), still waiting for your support of the Right to Vote Amendment in light of your unshakable commitment of voting rights.

3. The Wisconsin Constitution explicitly specifies the type of laws that may be enacted to regulate elections, enumerating the specific conditions under which the qualifications of voters (electors) may be changed by the enactment of laws under Section 2, and only Section 2. Anything outside this scope and the legislature has to change the Wisconsin Constitution.

This GOP pretension that the federal case, Crawford, controls Wisconsin state voting rights case is a disingenuous political talking point, hawked by Wisconsin's GOP Attorney General, J.B. Van Hollen and other GOP politicos.

As Judge David T. Flanagan writes in striking down the GOP Photo Voter ID bill in July 2012 in Milwaukee Branch of the NAACP v. Walker (Case 11CV5492):

The Crawford decision has very little application to the dispute now before this Court, however, for three primary reasons. First, this case is founded up the Wiscosnin Constitution which expressly guarantees the right to vote, while Crawford was based upon the U.S. Constitution which offers no such guarantee. Second, the Indiana law is less rigid than Act 23, and noted by the U.S. Supreme Court, offered alternative voting opportunities to voters who lacked the Photo ID. Finally, Crawford came to the Court based upon a flawed factual record, lacking the substantial evidence that has been offered by the plaintiffs in this action. This case is based on a claim that Act 23 violates the Wisconsin Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution. The people of Wisconsin may choose to assure to themselves rights under their own constitution that differ or exceed those guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution, State v. Doe, 78 Wis 2d 161, 172 (1977). The question of what is permitted and what is protected by the Wisconsin Constitution is the issue before this court and that issue was not before the U.S. Supreme Court in the Crawford case.

This is not the first time Van Hollen and the Republican Party have lied about federal law and federal case law in order to obstruct voting rights on the state level.

See Van Hollen's and the GOP 2008 efforts at voter suppression in which Van Hollen's similarly ridiculous effort was tossed out of court.

In the 2008 case, (J B Van Hollen vs. Government Accountability Board (GAB) et al) Van Hollen tried to create a new Wisconsin constitutional qualification to vote by fiat: A perfect match of the spelling of voters' names in state bureaucracies, after assuring fellow Republicans he would commence this frivolous legal action at the 2008 Republican National Convention held in Minneapolis, as first reported by WisPolitics in a scoop that includes audio.

Several former judges serving on the GAB Board would have failed Van Hollen's new constitutional standard proposed in 2008, as this GOP effort drew wide ridicule.

"Nothing in state or federal law requires that there be a data match as a prerequisite for a citizen's right to vote," Judge Maryann Sumi said in dismissing Van Hollen's lawsuit that tried to use the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) as a voter suppression tool.

Our corrupt attorney general, up for reelection on 2014, will not give up his Party's project of denying the voting rights of Wisconsin citizens; and neither will the Republican Party now holding sway in the gerrymandered state legislature.

Iron County Judge and DA Are Focus of New Citizen Scrutiny

Madden faces accusations he had an affair
with an alleged crime victim while presiding
over the 1997 trial of the defendant,
the former live-up boyfriend of the alleged
crime victim. Madden's legal career is on the line
A supporter of a victim of Madden's said of
Madden, "the little prick's time is up soon,"
referring to Madden's 27-year reign as Judge.

Updated - A reader writes: "(Judge) Madden should have recused from the (Miller) case without a doubt. Note, in the interview transcript (between Judge Madden and Stephen Williams) (Madden) said he would recuse from any further proceedings to do with Don (Miller) but, some 6 months after the interview he then presided over the September 2012 post-conviction hearing. Very naughty. Any further action on Don's case he will not preside, he will be in the witness box answering to several affidavits attesting to the fact he had a relationship with the alleged victim before, during and after trial. After the judicial complaint is lodged after the next course of action he will likely become the 4th judge ever permanently removed from the bench in the entire state (of Wisconsin). That will make 2 out of 4 of them from Iron County."

No branch of government should be above public scrutiny. The case of Don Miller in Iron County Wisconsin is an object lesson on why this principle remains a bulwark in a constitutional democracy.

There's criminal corruption in Iron County, and to paraphrase an Iron County worker: Wake up and smell the roses.

Iron County (Wisconsin) Judge Patrick J. Madden and District Attorney Martin Lipske remain the focus of an escalating investigation by a group of supporters of an innocent man convicted in 1997 on allegations (now recanted, and then last year repeated) by his then live-in girlfriend, who became in embroiled in a multi-year affair with the presiding trial Judge, one Patrick Madden.

Disappearing evidence, no DNA evidence, a sexual liaison between judge and (alleged) victim, a sitting District Attorney taunting a man in prison serving a 42-year sentence: Welcome to Iron County Wisconsin, population 5,900.

The case has been taken on by the University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School's Innocence Project as law students and lawyers involved with the case have made numerous 270-mile treks by car from Madison, Wisconsin up to the north woods of Wisconsin to find out what the heck is happening up in Iron County.

Supporters of freeing Don Miller say they expect this isolated county to see Innocence Project staff this week. The case is State of Wisconsin v. Donald R. Miller [Case Number: 97 CF 60]. And this case stinks to high heaven.

Specifically, law students and lawyers are looking into why allegations (and I hesitant to specify what they are, but you can follow this link) that have been recanted by the alleged victim have landed Miller in prison to serve a 42-year sentence. Miller has been incarcerated since 1997.

The alleged victim is Connie Vargovich.

Iron County (Wisconsin) Judge Patrick J. Madden presided over the December 4-5, 1997 trial of Miller. The verdict was reached one day later by the jury who didn't take very long to deliberate.

Now, Madden faces new allegations he had an ongoing affair with Vargovich after the trial of Miller (other allegations place the affair before and during the trial).

Sources in Iron County, supporters of Miller, tell me several depositions placing Madden and Vargovich together at local bars and sex clubs include one witness stating under penalty of perjury in a new deposition that Madden and Vargovich once disappeared into a tavern bathroom together for approximately one-half hour.

Madden, say sources in this small community, was not happy, when these and other allegations were revealed on the website, Anatomy of a Wrongful Conviction.

Madden has been a judge in Iron County since 1986, and was appointed by Gov. Tony Earl. Prior to the judicial appointment he served as District Attorney for two northern Wisconsin counties, including Iron County.

DA Lipske who succeeded Madden as District Attorney after Madden was appointed to Iron County judge, was reportedly urged by Madden to run for DA, some three years after Lipske's license was suspended for misconduct in Minnesota and Wisconsin.

Lipske is an incredibly capricious and vindictive figure for a sitting jurist, and one who has the highest rate of criminal cases overturned or dismissed on appeal of all of Wisconsin's 72 counties, according to the 2008 study by the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Department of Journalism.

In the future, sooner than Lipske knows, a wider audience will know why.

Secrets often don't remain secrets for long in small towns.

During the trial of Miller's, Madden was observed in the courthouse hallway, hugging and whispering, and visibly reassuring the alleged victim, Vargovich, whom several say was involved in an affair with the Judge.

"When (Madden) noticed that he was being watched he quickly slipped back into his office," reads several affidavits filed at the Anatomy of a Wrongful Conviction site.

Stay tuned.

For sale

Give me, give me, give me, says the GOP.
You got it, say rightwing billionaires

"We’re helping (Scott Walker), as we should. We’ve gotten pretty good at this over the years. We’ve spent a lot of money in Wisconsin. We’re going to spend more." - David Koch (Singer. Palm Beach Post; February 20, 2012)

Koch, it was revealed last year, also boasted of siphoning money into the campaigns of Wisconsin GOP senators as well.  

Republicans have gotten pretty good at being the post-Citizens United party of billionaires, grabbing up money in a period in which concentration of wealth is worse than in the Gilded Age.  

Republicans maintain their alliance with the religious right and Catholic Church out of practical political necessity. The same with gun manufacturers. (See today's Homeowner Shoots and Kills Teen Who Entered Wrong Home After Party.)

But GOP hearts are where they get their money—rightwing billionaires like Christopher Cline of Cline Research and Development (Mining), the Koch brothers, Diane Hendricks, and rightwing forces such as Sheldon Adelson, and assorted other billionaires funneling money into Super PACs.

For Republicans, Wisconsin, the United States, public land, the public school system, anything they can get their hands on are for sale.

One Wisconsin Democrat, Sen. Lena Taylor (Milwaukee) has her hands out and wants to suck in some of the anti-public school, rightwing money as Taylor apes her GOP colleagues.

Let's hope Taylor is an aberration. We know Scott Walker, Paul Ryan and hacks such as Pennsylvania Republican Governor Tom Corbett are the norm.

GOP Scams Are Bad Politics, You Know

Fun in Florida in March for Scott Walker
at $5,000 per-person fundraiser

When former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson finally acceded to GOP pleas to run for the U.S. Senate in 2012, many GOP politicos were pleased.

The race between Thompson and now Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) became a toss-up, instead lean-Democratic race.

Wisconsin, with a Democratic ticket that included Baldwin, President Obama and many other progressive forces mobilized voters, and easily beat the national voter turn-out of 58 percent with Wisconsin's turnout at 70 percent, near the top of the nation.

Wisconsin GOP forces of course want that 70-percent figure lower.

Baldwin decisively beat Thompson, 51 percent to 45 percent.

Baldwin won her race with a campaign that stressed her long career of public service; and a long career on the part of Thompson who morphed dramatically into a tool for huge-moneyed, anti-public interests.

"Tommy Thompson: He's not for you anymore," became the defining theme of the campaign.

Thompson had in so many words turned: Corrupt and hypocritical ... there's Thompson and his black limo in D.C., living it up as a lobbyist and making $Millions.

It's no stretch to see that the national Republican Party, Scott Walker, Paul Ryan and the Wisconsin Republican Party are equally corrupt.

Tammy Baldwin - (In These Times; Dec. 28, 1992)
- One month after first being elected to
the Wisconsin State Assembly. -
In the 2012 US Senate race, Baldwin hammered
GOP champ, Tommy Thompson as corrupt

Look for this message to get through.
Take Scott Walker.

In rejecting $4 billion in federal Medicaid money, Scott Walker actually said: "I care too much about the people of this state not to empower them to control their own destiny." (Stein. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Feb. 13, 2013)

Okay then, Scott Walker.

You will be rejecting all tax-payer-financed money paying for your family health plan, your pension, meals, transportation and your housing.

Yes? We're sure you don't want to disempower yourself with all this public assistance.

Retroactively, we can assume, you will be paying back public money to the state of Wisconsin and Milwaukee County, for the past 20 years, correct? And not from your campaign fund; we'll take it from you checking account, please.