Vote for Wangaard (Again)...It Only Makes CENTS

Mirror, Mirror, Show Me Truth. Reveal the Lies the Unions Spew!

I was recently reading a by Heather Rayne Geyer, a local Patcher. Despite being a fairly melancholy guy, her editorial nearly popped a blood vessel with the distortions and outright lack of substance that existed in the article. I decided to parody the article, to a degree, and instead reveal the "misguided" facts this Patcher has unfortunately been subjected to.

I will attempt to keep this as professional and strictly fact-based as possible, and at no time do I intend it to appear as an attack on a fellow Patcher. My target is her presumptions and the heart of her argument, not her as an individual. As a beautiful, intelligent citizen, and obviously very passionate, I respect her opinion. I am passionate as well, so at the end of the day, I'd love to get some BBQ with all of my liberal counterparts down at Oh, Dennis! For now, SMASH!

So here we go... tit for tat.

Divided We Still Stand…in Shoes We ALL Wear–

Please unionistas, stop dividing us by elevating and identifying a particular class. We all wear the same shoes. Those who run faster and longer deserve the pay.

First of all, Van Waangard was not the “final vote” on SB 202 in November, 2011. They all voted at the same time, and everyone knew it would pass on party lines. It should be noted that Wanggaard wasn't even a co-sponsor on the bill, he merely voted for it with his caucus. As far as the actual Act itself, repealing it merely cleaned up unnecessary legislation that piles on the mountainous bookshelves of useless and redundant laws passed by patronizing politicians.

“Why repeal a bill which was doing no harm or costing any money?”

First, substantiate your claim it doesn’t cost any money, or cause any harm.
Second, why complain about repealing a bill which was doing no good and accomplishing nothing? Touché….

Geyer forgot to mention that in the three years since the Pay Equity Act was passed by WI Democrats and Governor Doyle, NOT A SINGLE CASE HAS BEEN TRIED UNDER IT. She’s literally making an argument for an unneeded law. Why would she want to advocate for useless legislation that expands our bureaucracy and, if used, would tie up our own local courts prosecuting federal cases?

The federal law, which it intended to facilitate, has been beyond adequate, and the pre-2009 law is the only recourse the legal system clearly needed to address a single – or any – discrimination case that occurs in Wisconsin. Besides, Wisconsin has redundant discrimination laws as well to protect anyone (not just women!)suffering discrimination, so repealing the “Pay Equity Bill” (Read: “Pandering-to-the-media-meme-it-creates Bill) is not an attack on women, and since it’s NEVER BEEN UTILIZED IN THREE YEARS, it’s a useless regulation, and a pointless talking point for liberal women.

Oh, by the way, women aren’t paid less than men for equal work.

Wait... Unless you work in the White House with Barack Obama. *Crickets*

Cheap, Ma’am, Just Cheap –

“Well, this is a recent development that even the biggest pessimists may not have anticipated.”

Really? REALLY? So making a controversy out of a non-issue that Van has no obligation to answer for and making a straw-man argument for it constitutes “may not have anticipated?”  Something tells me people were ecstatic – not pessimistic – to get this info from the dirt-digging unions.

Then their euphoria blinded their ability to see that there was nothing racist about the ad, there was nothing controversial about the message, and there was nothing obligating Van to denounce it. Certainly nothing “creepy.” 

“Some may call it racist….” WHO?! Nice one. Lehman was the only one who said, "The whole idea of using a black hoodie on a very black background plays on recent news, and sort of has a racist overtone to it."

If anything.... JOHN LEHMAN IS PLAYING THE RACE CARD, pre-emptively, and that’s disgusting. So is the pandering comments by his supporters. If I were all of you, I'd drop it, and be “classy.”

Hello? Does Anyone Care? –

“One of John’s greatest assets is his incomparable accessibility.”

I agree. I’ve met him myself. I’ve been to his house, and spoken with him at length walking the streets. I’ve done the same with Van. Van’s number is published as well, he’s on Facebook, and his email is accessible.

I would like to see folks get hold of Lehman so easily if millions of union dollars, thousands of paid or unemployed protesters and vicious, agenda-bearing forces were knocking on his door or filling his voicemail on a daily basis.

Do yourself a favor, file an FOIA records request and check the content of the emails Van receives and then come back to Patch demanding that he respond to each one. By the way, I get constant emails and updates from my Senator I voted to represent me for 4 years, per the Wisconsin Constitution. I have no trouble reaching him, because I don’t hate his guts and lie about him. I'd appreciate if you'd allow OUR Constitution to work for me and you. You're subverting it for Union power.

So.... I don't care if your obvious baiting doesn't get you a callback. I can reach my Senator anytime I want because I don't throw verbal jabs, or dump beer on him.

Your Job is to Do Your Research –

I agree that no one can deny that one of the most evident causes for the loss of America jobs is the fact that they NEED to be shipped overseas to maintain a profit and grow their base of operations. It is estimated that regulation costs American businesses at least $1.75 TRILLION a year. All corporate taxes in 2009 equaled only $1.49 trillion. The math shows that regulations supposedly intended to help American jobs actually cost more than the revenue every company brings in. Imagine the tax base (and jobs) the government could generate by getting out of the way? 

The author claimed that:

“John Lehman did his part in attempting to stop those policies with his authoring of The American Jobs Act.”

He authored no such act.  Rather, he worked to PASS an ASSEMBLY Act 136 (2009) called “the American Jobs Act” which didn’t encourage job creation in Wisconsin, but instead demanded that the State Executive branch only use companies with operations in the U.S. That’s a regulation that increased costs and reduced competition on behalf of taxpayers only, without lowering the actual cost of companies who actually prefer to have operations here to begin with, which is what Van Wanggaard worked to pass in early 2011 with FORWARD-FOCUSED legislation, not restrictive law intended for a hopeful reaction.

The bill he DID author, Act 20 (2009) was the bill repealed by SB 202 this year. He’s apparently very mad about it. But the lies surrounding the repeal of it is illogical at best, as we discussed earlier.

This bill did NOTHING to increase jobs in the state, so it’s pointless to tout it, as Lehman does.

Jobs are jobs. And right now, $20,000 a year is better than $0, and I know a few friends living with others that would like to get hired, if not for the lousy economy discouraging corporate expansion here in Wisconsin and nationwide. Lehman only added to that useless regulation companies pay lawyers to dig through so they know what they're wading into when they come here.

Star Tech –

“But I have heard from several different reliable sources that RUSD and Gateway were already working on a similar program (without the need for legislation)”

First, cite the sources please. This anonymity only feeds blog news, not real hard evidence. The “reliability” of previous statements is already doubtful as it is.

Nonetheless, writing legislation to encourage the creation of educational tools that allow more people to get degrees and higher learning, and opening up dollars to do so isn’t a bad idea. You just don’t like that it’s Van’s method, and not John’s.

“…Before Van went along with party lines and voted to cut funding to Gateway by 33 percent and public education by billions.”

These two previous statements don’t belong in the same sentence. But, even then:

1.) Wisconsin was in a deficit. $3 billion + How do you suppose we balance it? By passing another temporary tax that a future repeal can allow Democrats to claim is a "tax break?" ;)

2.) Money was freed up in other areas to help local education.

3.) Public education was allowed to get it’s $1.2 billion back through negotiations and budgetary flexibility.

Prove your numbers, I can prove mine. If schools lost so much money, why did they lower the property tax levies in most Wisconsin districts? Why would they choose to take in less if they needed more? Hmmm?

Van Wanggaard championed for a program that helped his constituents get degrees of higher learning through local colleges. Period. Rhetorical flourish and mocking analogies only dilute one’s credibility.

A Mind is a Terrible Thing to…WASTE –

Why is it so hard to get liberals to understand simple math?

Good people, with sharp minds…. which stop working when it comes to budgeting for government.

This is all about WASTE, NOT "funding."

I think it takes merely 5 pages of FA Hayek or Milton Freidman to understand how money works, and how tax revenue is generated from growth. Rather, it would take 5 minutes in the accounting department of JI Case or SC Johnson to understand how wealth is generated, and "redistributed" to the masses most effectively.

“Wanggaard has shown us that his priorities are different as he has given $2.3 billion in tax breaks to corporations and the very wealthy.”

That is a complete and unproven lie about the budget, tax income, tax credits and where loss of revenue would be found.  It’s almost a quote from OneWisconsinNow, and their spin machine. (I wonder if this counts as one of those "reliable sources" cited by the author)

TRUTH: This figure is NOT a “tax break” to the wealthy. It is refusing to DOUBLE TAX corporations and individuals who make money outside the state. Even the Federal Government refuses to do this. Wisconsin is unique in this tax we imposed a few years ago, and it actually RAISED taxes from 2008 to 2009 to plug a hole Doyle created with his rampant spending.

OWN is directly distorting the issue by using a 10-year number of $2.3 billion regarding the elimination of a tax that was RAISED two years ago, and saying it’s a tax BREAK. B.-stinkin-S.  HARLEY-DAVIDSON ALONE WAS FORCED TO LAYOFF WORKERS during the recession because of a sudden RETROACTIVE $22 million charge this law created.  Anyone remember all the talk 3 yrs ago regarding Harley possibly leaving the State?

One could argue John Lehman eliminated good UNION jobs at Harley Davidson.

But I won’t bother.

The math speaks for me, and so does logical deduction.

I’d like to know why RUSD spending increased more than 20% during 2005-2011, despite enrollment dropping by 14% in K-12?

If Racine Unified is going to grow its resources, it needs to change how it spends money. That is Wanggaard's goal, and it is my goal. And it should be yours. We all wear the same shoes after all!

Do our community a huge service and please vote for the same man you voted for 18 months ago on June 5.

Van Waangard is making the hard choices that are already paying off. Don’t let the unions boss you and your neighbors around.

This 18-month recall circus isn’t “democracy,” folks… this is union oligarchy.

FIGHT IT.