Sunday, April 29, 2012

The Biggest Attack Yet

There have been many accusations of Gubernatorial Candidate Kathleen Falk, whom I endorsed, going on the attack against Tom Barrett.  Kathleen Falk and her campaign have been accused of using her gender as a crutch (the reality is,it is an obstacle she has to overcome), being a campaign of insiders(in reality you do not run a campaign this big without seasoned political veterans) and now using Russ Feingold as a political prop(again reality is Senator Feingold gave Kathleen Falk a nice compliment and they used it never saying it was an endorsement).

One last side note on this, progressives love Senator Feingold for his independence(and rightly so) and strong voice for WI. If he had a problem with this ad he would have spoken up. 

MediatracKKKers is giddy with excitement the way that the Barrett supporters are relentlessly attacking Kathleen Falk. I do not use the term "giving aide and comfort to our enemies" loosely, but Mediatrackkkers are easily the biggest enemy to our state since Joe McCarthy.  Just ask local morning news anchor Rob Starbuck.

We can also get rid of the myth that Kathleen Falk is the only one on the attack and that Barrett wants to run a clean campaign.  Maybe instead of just taking millions from Rahm Emanuel's friends, Emanuel also taught him how to campaign "the Chicago way".

I personally think that the Barrett Campaign, knows what the Walker campaign knows, that Kathleen Falk is THE single best chance that the democrats have to beat Scott Walker on June 5th!

We have one week before the primary....Please support Kathleen Falk




53 comments:

  1. Again, I have to say that there needs to be a solid force behind whoever wins the primary. Walker has to go!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Kathleen Falk was a tough, fair Cty Exec, but she is not fit for the coming fight against Walker and his backers, even with the unions' support. I do hope both she and Barrett stay classy over the next week and a half. When Barrett takes down Walker on June 5th, he should send Cathy Stepp (Walker's political hack appointed as DNR Secretary) packing, post haste, and appoint Falk. She's just the person to lead an initiative to get a mining deal done without laying waste to Wisconsin's environment and protections, many of which she helped negotiate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "but she is not fit for the coming fight against Walker and his backers"

    what exactly do you base that on?

    ReplyDelete
  4. If this post represents innuendo that Barrett is running a dirty campaign it is as ineffectual as Falk's campaign has been. Your evidence is a link that Barret talked to Talgo? You think we don't click on your links?

    Then you sneer at Rahm? And "Chicago style politics"? WTF is that fellow clean campaigning democrat? It's bullshit is what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What the heck is this post saying? Which other candidate is attacking Falk? I don't see it in this post or in the links. I see only a repetition of an attack on Barrett for bringing a Democrat from Illinois to raise funds, which is a bit different from Falk going to Illinois to raise funds -- some from those who do politics the "Chicago way" -- but I'm fine with getting help from out of state.

    The issue is how the funds are spent, as Feingold also taught us. However, anyone who thinks that Feingold is going to insert himself into this campaign for any one candidate is misreading him badly -- but that's not the same as a candidate claiming that Feingold did so, is it?

    I don't get it. What is this post saying? With little more than a week to go, could we please have clear communication to be helpful? Or is this post an attack, too? On Obama's former Chief of Staff? How is that helpful to winning in Wisconsin -- in May, in June, and in November?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am still undecided and will need answers to these questions before I would consider voting for Falk:

    (1) How is Falk going to explain her decision to retire as County Exec mid-term right as the s--t was hitting the fan?

    (2) Can you convince me that there is not a ceiling on the support for a Falk candidacy? In other words, is there anyone who did not sign the recall petition who would be excited enough by Falk to vote for her? Because while Falk may be most aligned with my personal views, as the far-left candidate, Falk is going to struggle to attract any votes beyond the 1 million who signed the recall petition. And 1 million votes is simply not going to cut it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you say that? Is it such an outlandish idea that we vote for a candidate that will do more than change the name of the governor?

      Delete
    2. ANON,

      First off, I wish you guys would use at last pseudonyms so I know who I am addressing,but anyway.

      Who cares if she quit relly, she did it with a conscious. She did it in the way that would save the county the most money and make it so a her predecessor could be voted in, instead of appointed (which many politicians like to do). In the grand scheme of this election, this issue is somewhere around 1,835,659 in importance.

      Delete
    3. I don't think it's that low in importance, Jeff_simpson. It could be a problematic issue with voters. Fortunately for Falk, Walker probably would not use it, not directly, because of the parallel to a Republican -- Palin -- quitting midterm. But I bet that some Republican operatives are scheming as to how they would insert it into the campaign without Walker's fingerprints on it. He's good at that "who, me?" plausible deniability game.

      So the need is to be ready to not deny it, either, but to be ready to confront it. Since her primary opponents are not raising it, though, we cannot know -- but I'd be more reassured knowing that Falk is ready for it and has a good rejoinder?

      Delete
    4. The same could be asked of Barrett, who announced he no longer wanted to be mayor of Milwaukee four days before he was reelected.

      Delete
    5. Kevin KhatchadourianApril 30, 2012 at 11:09 AM

      . . . or Tammy Baldwin, or Kelda Roys, or Mark Pocan, or any number of politicians who run for higher office while holding current office. That's the norm, and that has never been considered on par with quitting mid-term. Seriously, capper, I really value your ideas and insights on this blog, but on the Falk issue, the level of spin has become Fox News-worthy.

      Delete
    6. Kelda roys and mark pocan and Tammy Baldwin are ALL ending their current terms and running for the next one.

      WHoever loses will not be an elected official next year...

      huge difference

      Delete
    7. Kevin KhatchadourianApril 30, 2012 at 10:33 PM

      Ok, so we need to look to politicians who serve more than a two year term. The 2008 candidacies of Senator Obama and Senator Clinton come to mind; I don't remember anyone criticizing them for "quitting" mid-term. Is the best argument you can make for a candidate who just threw her hands up and retired when things got tough at the County level? I could overlook it, but I doubt the same is true of the independent voters that Falk needs to draw in order to beat Walker.

      Delete
  7. It should be noted that the Feingold video came from Wisconsin for Falk and not from the Falk campaign itself.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Re: "knows what the Walker campaign knows"

    Instead of your hypothesis, a more plausible explanation of Walker's comment to Sykes re: Falk is that he was simply informing his brainwashed minions whom he would prefer to run against in the hope that they will perpetrate electoral mischief accordingly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So this anon, Scott Walker has not toldthe truth yet, he is being recalled because he is so unethical, and yet the one time he is telling the truth is when he is offering democrats advice on how to beat him?

      Capper, I didnt distinguish because the Barrett supporters are combining the two and I did not want it to seem like i was using a technicality.

      Delete
    2. Jeff, just because Barrett supporters want to blur the truth, we don't have to do that. Wisconsin for Falk and Falk's campaign are two separate entities. Let them take the cheap shots and lie if they must. We are above that.

      Delete
    3. It wasnt meant as a lie it was meant as a who cares what your attempting to make a big deal out of is not a big deal....

      Delete
  9. Why are you blaming Barrett supporters for things that are totally the fault of Kathleen Falk? Were the Barrett people the one who started the fake "Falk for Wisconsin" SuperPAC after it was clear that a lot of the recall movement is a recation to the disproportionate influence of big money and big interest groups? Did Barrett's people make Falk do the politically and pragmatically stupid stunt of threatening to veto the budget? Did Barrett's people make Falk claim the recall was "our" movement and play the gender card? Did Barrett's people cause the Falk SuperPAC to intentionally take Russ Feingold's out of context to give an impression that Feingold was endorsing Falk?

    No, they didn't. Barrett's people have been talking about Scott Walker and keeping their eyes on the prize of ending the Age of Fitzwalkerstan. Falk has blundered repeatedly in this campaign, and now supporters like Jeff are left shrilly whining and deflecting criticism that his candidate has earned.

    In fact, the whining and the projection and the persecution complex by Jeff and some of the Falk supporters is just so....Republican. Look, I'll vocally support Falk is she somehow wins in 9 days, but this type of act is why I would be shocked if she would win.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm really missing where Falk allegedly played the gender card. Was it because she dared to admit that she was a woman?

      Talk about hypersensitivity.

      I just don't understand why people think that if we do the same thing over and over again, the results will change.

      Delete
    2. Jake, I truly do respect your opinion, and read your blog and look forward to your comments on mine.

      However do you not acknowledge that there is a "war on women" by the republicans in not only this state, but in the country?

      In the same vein, do you not also think that Kathleen Falk has to overcome the obstacle of being a woman in a race like this? Do you not ackowledge that even a little advantage that Barrett has over her is being a white male?

      Delete
  10. Capper- how bout this passage in one of her recent emails: "These establishment politicians think that a woman from Dane County who is supported by progressive groups, the grassroots and labor cannot win."

    And I was a candidate forum 2 weeks ago where she said something along the lines of "With this War on Women, maybe it's time for a woman to be in charge." She knows what she's saying there, and as a man who is every bit in favor of women's rights, I find that to be offensive pandering.

    And I have no clue where you or Sly get off intimating that Barrett is the same as Walker. That's a stupid and incorrect comment and you know it, and it just make the Falk people look bad. You're better than that. You and I know that ANY Dem candidate will work to restore collective bargaining rights (and be forced by people like us to do so), but only one would do the self-destructive stunt of maintaining the Walker budget in order to pose for the holy pictures on the subject.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I wasn't saying he was the same as Walker. What I'm AM saying is he's got the same vulnerabilities as he did two years ago and some new ones. Yet he's running with the same strategy. Hell, he's even running commercials he ran two years ago. Sadly, they are better than the new ones he has run.

    And as far as the email goes, what is she supposed to say, she's a man? Geez, and you think I'm bad for Falk? You and Zach are doing your best to blow up Barrett from within.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Okay, capper, it was only half a gender card, and the other half was a Dane County card:

    "Tom Barrett has gone a different route and focused on winning the endorsements of many key elected officials across Wisconsin. These endorsements are based on one thing and one thing only — they believe he can win and I cannot. These establishment politicians think that a woman from Dane County who is supported by progressive groups, the grassroots and labor cannot win." -- Kathleen Falk

    (Of course, it wasn't a progressive card, a grassroots card, or a labor card, since progressive and grassroots groups and labor unions also support Barrett.)

    But both parts of the card, gender and Dane County, added up to yet another gratuitous attack on Barrett. Why? He has been my state legislator and Congressman and mayor for thirty years now that I have watched him closely, including regarding women's rights, and he always has voted for women's rights laws and acted for women's rights.

    So, no, it's not that Falk did not "dare to admit that she is a woman" (she still is, y'know). It's that she used her gender to imply that she deserves the job more than a man -- although Barrett is the one with the voting record for women's rights, since Falk has no legislative or Congressional experience or record at all, and their records are equal as mayor of the state's largest city or as county exec of one of the state's larger counties.

    Please. I'm a feminist. I want women in office. But not this way, because we need to back our good men, too. Suffragists knew that. We cannot forget that.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Barrett doesn't have one endorsement from a progressive or grassroots group. Furthermore, WPPA endorsed without contacting other candidates. That smells fishy doesn't it?

    I've watched Barrett too, including his coziness with the plutocrat Chris Abele.

    And if Barrett is so pro-women's rights, please explain why he actively fought against the paid sick leave bill which was sponsored by 9 t0 5 and was roundly supported by the people in a binding referendum.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The paid sick leave bill would have kept employers from relocating to Milwaukee at a time when the city desperately need to rebuild its employment base.

      Delete
    2. Funny, that's not how it worked in places like San Francisco, which had the same law. Your argument was the same one that MMAC and Charlie Sykes used.

      Delete
    3. How in the world would the paid sick leave bill keep people from relocating to Milwaukee? How does that even make sense?

      just an FYI: you will never be able to get back the time you wasted in your life to think up and type such foolishness!

      Delete
    4. Jeff, you do understand the difference between employers (which Milwaukee does not have a lot of) and people who need jobs (which Milwaukee already has plenty of), right?

      Delete
    5. You do understand that you're blowing smoke and telling lies, right? It's worked elsewhere and those cities are thriving. Try again, cupcake.

      Delete
    6. what does it have to do with allowing people to stay home when they have whooping cough and not be financially devastated?

      Delete
    7. Kevin KhatchadourianApril 30, 2012 at 10:12 AM

      Nah, it's really not worth bursting your bubble that SF -- which feeds off entrepreneurs from Stanford and Berkeley, and is in close proximity to Silicon Valley -- is nothing like Milwaukee -- which feeds off Marquette and UW, and is in close proximity to . . . [crickets].

      Delete
  14. Oh, you really, really don't want to get into discussion of unions that endorse without checking off all of the steps -- such as canvassing their own members. You really do not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, when has the unions ever canvassed their members on endorsements? That's why members get voted to things like AFSCME's PEOPLE committees.

      Delete
    2. K12 teachers in my family, members of WEAC, tell me that they have been canvassed about endorsements in past.

      They are not happy that they were not canvassed this time.

      That's what I know, from members of WEAC, and I think that you are not, in your job, a member of WEAC.

      Delete
    3. Really, they canvassed the tens of thousands of teachers for endorsements?

      Or do they have a committee like AFSCME's? I can find out readily enough. I know a lot of teachers that are fully behind Falk.

      Delete
    4. Yes, really; I do not think that my relatives lied.

      And I have been canvassed as a member of AFT (although I wasn't allowed to be in a union, by our state law, but I joined it to show my support, anyway). Once was online, I think; I do know that another time was by postcard.

      By the way, I don't doubt that you are truthful in knowing many teachers for Falk. For all I know, some may be my relatives, as the discussion was not about the candidate of their choice but about how the union chose her in their stead.

      Delete
  15. Falk is totally qualified to be governor and did a fine job as Dane County Exec. BUT, those Dane County roots are the problem----it's called electability: you guys need to get out of your
    Madison shell and fully realize how important a non Dane County candidate will be. In private conversations with one of the Senate Dem recall candidates, he says especially with Madison based Mitchell being the LG candidate, the top spot MUST come from outside of Madison to balance the ticket----and the polls showing Barrett strongly ahead of Falk reinforce this.
    I agree with 'anonymous's 'team of rivals' idea: Kathleen Falk will make a great DNR Secretary! She must be involved in the post Walker rebuilding effort....let's all keep our eye on the prize.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, Milwaukee has a worse standing upstate than Madison.

      But your "team of rivals" does have some merit. Barrett would make a great Secretary for DWD, and I'm sure Governor Falk would give him top consideration.

      Delete
  16. I hadn't thought of Mitchell being from Madison, too; thanks. Plus Tammy Baldwin for the Senate seat. That is a lot of Madison, isn't it?

    Interesting, too, to see a newspaper poll in Madison today -- not a random poll, but still -- with almost 5,500 votes already, and Barrett is 'way ahead of Falk. And he's way ahead of everyone else, including Walker!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yet, Madison politicians have a by far much better track record than Milwaukee politicians.

      And really? That's the best you got, an online poll that Team Barrett spent the day clicking on?

      Delete
  17. No legit polling has Falk even within 10% of Barrett. Barrett only lost to Walker by 4% to Walker in 2010 in a national (and statewide) Republican wave election. Waves come in, waves go out.

    I predict Obama for America will, under the radar, provide a big GOTV effort in June.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is the worst thing that could happen! We don't want or need Obama here. It would only serve the right's argument that Obama is interfering with our state's politics.

      Or is it that you know Barrett wouldn't win without outside influences?

      Delete
  18. Jeff- I don't think Falk's gender is a barrier at all, and in fact may be a minor help given the War on Women that the GOP is doing. There is a very legit argument that we need more women in power given how badly male-dominated legislatures have acted.

    But the playing of the gender card by Falk and supporters like you strikes me as lame and desperate, and I think it is more likely to backfire than help, because I'll put Barrett's record on "women's issues" up with anyone in this race.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Well Kathleen Falk, if you have talked to her or heard her campaign, has plenty of stories about questions that she gets asked that men do not get asked.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course, she gets questions that men do not get, just as happens to every woman politician (or businesswoman or many other women) -- and no matter the party; I well recall the ridiculous questions that Engeleiter got and that Kohl did not get in running for Senate. Even in mostly liberal Madison, Falk must have had this happen before in her political career? She did run statewide before, after all.

      But that's a case of others playing the gender card. Surely you see that there is a difference: what others say vs. what Falk says.

      Delete
    2. So,what you're saying is that because it's happened before, it's OK now? My, isn't that rather hypocritical? It wasn't OK then, and it's not OK now. Why are you trying to defend it?

      Delete
    3. No, of course that is not what I'm saying. Cute rhetorical trick you tried -- unless you really cannot comprehend what I wrote?

      If the latter, then let's try again:

      It was not okay for anyone -- man or woman -- to play the gender card in past, and it is not okay for anyone -- man or woman -- to play the gender card now.

      So you and Falk should stop doing so, and you certainly should stop trying to defend that you are doing so -- if only because, yes, it is "rather hypocritical" to do so, whether it is you doing so or Falk doing so.

      Of course, you may try to defend your doing so, but if so, you only dig yourself in deeper, and you only do a disservice to your candidate. We have noticed that she is a woman. And we women know that many women as well as men will notice that and be influenced by that, some to her detriment -- but some of us who do not see her gender as a detriment at all also do see playing the gender card as detrimental not only to her but also to us.

      So there is no upside to doing so, and there is only a downside. Read: women's history.

      Delete
  20. Tom Barrett the misogynist? This wont play well with the talking points this year.

    http://mediatrackers.org/2012/04/30/barrett-discriminates-pays-women-17k-less-than-men/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or, you could point out that Barrett hires far more women than men in his office. But whatever rocks your racist boat. . . .

      However, I don't think that info is reliable, as I know a woman who works for him -- and is highly paid -- who is not on the list.



      And, of course, for the information to be useful, it could use context and comparates, so we will await MediaTrackers' similar analysis of Falk's staff as a county exec -- and Walker's staff as governor.

      I do think that we cannot expect Barrett or Falk to have hired anyone comparable to Walker's staffer who worked for Hooters. I bet that he pays her a LOT.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, its not reliable because it doesn't make your point. And isnt pointing out one of Walkers staffs previous jobs an attack on women? What are you trying to say about Hooters waitresses? Frankly if they would have put one of them up in front of congress asking for free birth control they may not have met as much resistance. But I am sure my humor is lost on you. Your probably to angry to laugh.

      Delete
  21. No, hon, I'm not too angry to laugh at you:

    Hooters girls go to Congress to speak for feminists!

    You bet that feminists deplore such work for women. Get this through your brain:

    Hooters. Girls. Are. Not. Waitresses.

    They may bring your burger to the table, but that's not what they're hired to do for you.

    And no, try to read again and comprehend why I wonder about MediaTrackers' "reporting." It's not about my "point." It's about the point that MediaTrackers is trying to make, but if the list is incomplete, what's the point? Got it?

    ReplyDelete
  22. To be fair, mediatrackkkkers is the most ridiculous racist hate website in wi

    ReplyDelete