April 11, 2012

Falk and Barrett — rivals in the Wisconsin recall primary — are debating tonight.

Says the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which doesn't say where or when. There's absolutely zero information that would give us a chance to see this debate, in a post that's been up for more than 3 hours.

In the comments: "Nice writing JS, you might want to put a where or when in your story." And: "The debate will be at 7PM tonight at the Clocktower motel in Rockford,Il." Ha ha ha.

Here's the Cap Times. It says the debate will be at the Madison Concourse Hotel. I still don't know what time.

42 comments:

Rabel said...

"The debate is scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m."

Hurry. You can make it if you try.

Rabel said...

It's lonely in here.

I guess everybody went to the debate.

edutcher said...

If they told you where or when, you might go see it and decide to vote for Walker in the recall.

Dan from Madison said...

At the Concourse?! Expecting a HUGE crowd I see.

Curious George said...

Falk will argue why she would be a great governor of Madison. Barrett will have a corned beef sandwich and a beer and then take a nap.

Kathleen Vinehout will stay under her bridge in Pepin County.

Christamd morning and nothing under the tree coming soon!

Kit said...

The State Journal also left out the time and place, though they did mention it was sponsored by the Democratic Party of Dane County. I then went to their site for that info. Wish I could go, but have another obligation.

ddh said...

Who, what, when, where, why, and how?

See, that's not that hard.

David said...

Madison? At least there will be no hard questions and no math.

Mike and Sue said...

I want a full report, agent Althouse.

garage mahal said...

After some soul searching, I have decided to give my endorsement, and vote, for a Republican in the May 8th primary. A real Republican that is. A sample:

“First, I don’t consider myself a fake Republican, I want to take the party back to its roots. The Republican party was founded in Wisconsin as a pro labor, abolitionist party and I plan to run on that platform. Source.

Now that's grass-roots!

“On the subject of fake candidates, Scott Walker is the fake Republican.

Indeedy.

David said...

Thank God, Garage, that we finally have a candidate who will deal with the unresolved issue of slavery.

Your candidate needs to do a little more reading on the labor issue. The 1860 Republican platform said this about labor: That, while providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interest of the whole country; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the working men liberal wages, to agriculture renumerative prices, to mechanics and manufactures an adequate reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence.

Translation: free labor instead of slave labor, high tariffs to protect American enterprise and prosperity to independent farmers, artisans and businessmen.

The sense of "pro-labor," in the modern liberal sense of favoring labor over capital, was not the program.

Anyway he seems like a sweet kid and maybe he will win.

Craig said...

Wasn't Rockford the state capital when Capone was in charge?

Wally Kalbacken said...

Yawn.

Michael said...

My votes are going to Walker.

Michael Haz said...

The Republican candidates for US Senate (except Tommy Thompson who is in DC) are also debating tonight.

I'm not at either debate. I'm in my cabin in far northern Wisconsin, fireplace blazing, good Malbec at hand, listening to Buddy Miller on Pandora.

Sometimes the politics just need to be put aside for a few days.

By the way, Buddy Miller's album Midnight and Lonesome is brilliant. American roots music at its finest.

bagoh20 said...

The kids at the Sentinel need to step up their game if they ever want to make the big time like the NYT. The Times would give you all the W's and tell you who won in advance.

TCB-n-a-Flash said...

Like they want anybody to see their fist full of unity.

purplepenquin said...

The sense of "pro-labor," in the modern liberal sense of favoring labor over capital, was not the program

You never heard President Lincoln's remarks on the subject, have ya?

Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."

Tho, personally, I tend to agree more with another great Republican President, Teddy Roosevelt, who said "Capital organizes and therefore labor must organize."

To me, it is just a matter of fairness. I don't understand how one can rationally beleive that capital should be allowed to organize (via corporations) but labor (via unions)should not...and vice-versa.

C R Krieger said...

Let us not be picking on Rockford.  Almost Wisconsin.  Don't Democrats of all stripes hold meetings there?

Regards  —  Cliff

AllieOop said...

Garage, Arthur Kohl-Riggs is going to primary Walker? Hysterical!

James said...

Garage Mahal assurred us that Scott Walker will be primaried:

>>garage mahal said...

Arthur Kohl-Riggs is going to primary Walker. So he will be on the ballot. (I'm assuming. He only needs 2000 sigs).
4/6/12 3:00 PM <<

Today the GAB announced that Kohl-Riggs turned in less than the 2,000 signatures required to challenge Walker.

Since for now there are no primary opponents for Walker this opens the way for Republican voters to cross over and vote for Falk in the Democrat primary. :)

So Republicans can help defeat Barrett in the primary since Falk will have little appeal outside of Dane County.

garage mahal said...

@James
Riggs has until Friday to affidavit some dates on his forms. He will be on the ballot.

Republicans are signing and getting fake Democrats on the ballot. It's a low bar bar dude.

James said...

From Wispolitics:http://wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=266846


"n the governor's race, two Republicans failed to meet the threshold to qualify for the ballot. Michael Mangan, who called himself a Lincoln Republican, turned in just 303 signatures, while Arthur Louis Kohl-Riggs, who has been a fixture at Capitol events videotaping them, turned in 1,813, according to the GAB.

Brookfield physician Hari Trivedi, an independent who ran ads on Milwaukee TV during the Super Bowl, turned in sufficient signatures to qualify for the ballot, however. "

garage mahal said...

Agitator gets enough names to challenge Wis. gov. You would think our liberal media would name Walker as the agitator. But whatever! Keep crying wingers, we know your patriot and eagle avatars will always be pulsing the good fight.

A. Shmendrik said...

Hari Trivedi must be the Edmund Hou-Seye (or the Harold Stassen, if you will) of the New Millenium.

Chuck66 said...

They will try to out pander each other. The Walker folks need to get this on tape so they can use it in commercials.

David said...

PurplePenguin:

Who is saying that labor can not organize?

Your Lincoln quote is from the First Inaugural. Interestingly, it is a much shorter version of lengthly remarks Lincoln gave to the Wisconsin Agricultural Society in Milwaukee in 1859. See http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom.org/Library/newsletter.asp?ID=51&CRLI=131

Lincoln had given much thought and voice to this subject, though his take on it had little to do with the point that you and other liberals try to make with the quotation. The statement that labor precedes (and indeed creates) capital was and is indisputable. Value is created by work (and innovation, which is a species of work). The first money, and thus the first capital, could never have existed without someone with an idea and the will to execute it creating some value.

If you look at Lincoln's 1859 Wisconsin speech and his other writings on the matter, you will see that he believed that the most important player was neither the wage laborer or the capitalist who has accumulated and lives from investment. He believed in the farmer, the artisan, the shopkeeper, the innovators and creators. He believed these people to have been the basis for American progress, and the key to progress in the future. He specifically referred to them as people who both labored and created and invested capital. In other words, he was a strong supporter of the creation of wealth by free enterprise.

Lincoln never saw American life as a war between capital and labor. He valued labor, but also saw that because the people had become educated, they could and should move beyond wages to a more independent and creative activity.

It's really quite fascinating how deeply he thought on so many subjects. Lincoln on this subject was far more than a sound byte for your pet points. He clearly saw the relationship between political freedom and economic freedom, and that was the point he was making.

purplepenquin said...

Who is saying that labor can not organize?

Act 10 made it illegal for many workers in the State from being able to collectively bargain as a labor union, and the law also severely restricts the ability of other labor unions to organize if they represent people who work for the State/City/County/School District.


As for the quote from Lincoln, I never said he viewed the relationship between capital & labor as a "war". (Do you view it as such?) His words, however, do make it clear that you're incorrect to assume that "favoring labor over capital, was not the program", 'cause Lincoln flat-out says which he considers to be the more superior.

But like I said, it is Teddy's words I agree with more than Abe's. In order to have a strong economy both capital and labor should be allowed to organize & act as a collective unit. I don't view one as superior to the other, but rather equally important in the grand scheme of things.

Our gov't also does the same thing - as an employer, the State is a collective unit. (There ain't no one "boss" for the State) Seeing how the employer is using the advantages of being a collective unit, then it is only fair that the workers also be allowed to do so.

Jon Burack said...

Can't resist weighing in on Lincoln. David has it right. Lincoln meant by "labor" the effort by any human being to create anything useful. It had nothing to do with a class over and against any other class. Lincoln was as upwardly mobile a go-getter as there ever was. He was a lawyer for the railroads who comes as close to the Horatio Alger myth as it is possible to come -- farm boy who got the h out of Kentucky, never looked back, and boosted himself all the way up from there. He put up with all the rail-splitter campaign hoopla, but when he jumped those rails he kept on going all the way.

Jon Burack said...

Garage,

What exactly is it you want the real "abolitionist" Republican Party to abolish?

purplepenquin said...

So when Lincoln mentions "labor" in the context of "labor and capital", he ain't actually talking about workers?

Interesting theory, but I think I'll have to respectfully disagree. Keep in mind that the one point he said he wanted to address with his speech to Congress was "the effect to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor, in the structure of government." He then goes on to make it pretty clear how he feels about that idea.

*shrug*

David said...

He did not give a speech to Congress, Penguin. The President sent written reports then. You should actually read it, rather than just parroting the quote that you think makes your point.

It's ok to use tidbits of history to make your contemporary political points. Lots of people do it. But history is more instructive if you actually get into what was going on then, without trying to relate it to some current dispute.

Read his talk to the Wisconsin Agricultural Society in 1859 that I linked. It's fascinating.

You are not entirely wrong about Lincoln's views, Purple. But by not understanding them in their context, you really misapply them to the contemporary world. The midwestern distrust of the east (which was where capital was controlled) did not begin or end with Lincoln. It's a major strain in American history. But Lincoln was a top railroad lawyer (big capital) and very pro capital and pro business. Jon Burack said it well above: Lincoln meant by "labor" the effort by any human being to create anything useful.

purplepenquin said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
purplepenquin said...

He did not give a speech to Congress, Penguin

Several sources say it was a speech given to a joint session of Congress...but I wasn't actually there myself, so I ain't 100% sure.

You are not entirely wrong about Lincoln's views, Purple. But by not understanding them in their context, you really misapply them to the contemporary world.

When Professor Merrill Peterson said that Lincoln was the "best friend labor ever had in the White House", was he also referring to simply any work done by anyone or was he just not understanding things in context?

Your original comment indicates that the current GOP's policies/stances towards labor are not much different, if at all, than how the party was back-in-the-day. Have those viewpoints really remained unchanged all this time? Do you beleive that Lincoln would have supported what Walker&Co have done in regards to labor in our state?


All that aside, I would appreciate an answer to this question I asked: You said that "Lincoln never saw American life as a war between capital and labor" even tho nobody in this thread said anything at all about a "war." In fact, I clearly stated that both capital and labor are needed in order to make our economy great, so I'm kinda confused as to why you'd go there...which is why I asked: Do you view it as a "war"?

Rusty said...

To me, it is just a matter of fairness. I don't understand how one can rationally beleive that capital should be allowed to organize (via corporations) but labor (via unions)should not...and vice-versa.



define "fair"

Issob Morocco said...

Maybe with budget cuts in the Mainstream Media, they have cut out, along with objectivity, the when and where of the Journalistic foundation (Who, what, where, when and how)

David said...

Penguin, your most recent out of context quote is from Peterson’s book “Lincoln and American Memory.” The book is in significant part (to use Peterson’s own words) about “the perils and pitfalls of using the Lincoln symbol as a scepter and guide in contemporary politics.”

You and others who like to use this quote as a touchstone ignore the entire text of Professor Peterson’s observation. Immediately after the passage you quote Professor Peterson wrote “Nevertheless, he was no prophet. Imprisoned in the Democratic-Capitalist ideology of 19th century America, he believed the free laborer toiled up from poverty to become a capitalist in his own right. Individual opportunity, not class struggle, was his message.”

Someday you should try reading the books from which you quote.

Do I believe Lincoln would approve of what Walker has done?

Lincoln was an early proponent of the right to strike, but I am not aware that he had any positions on unions in general or public employee unions in particular. He might have found it curious that incompetent teachers are protected, and that the union could compel its members to buy insurance from its more expensive captive. Most likely he would agree with Professor Peterson that his mid 19th century views should not be a "sepctre and guide" to the issues of contemporary politics.

Rusty said...

Dave is a buzzkill.

EMD said...

I didn't see the debate, but can someone tell me which one promised to spend most of your* money?

* - Not from Wisconsin.

David said...

It was a tie, and Penguin is confident Lincoln would approve.

Leo said...

http://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/?eventGroupId=4570

Have you all seen the odds on the primary and the recall election?

mischy said...

Mortgage Brokers Kwinana


Hi Ann. I hope Barett will win in his brawl with Falk. He is more promising to me.