There was this Planned Parenthood rally. It looked like this:
That's Hulsey standing in front just behind the woman in the white jacket. (Enlargement here.) That's Risser in the red hat just below the speaker's upraised fist. Hulsey noticed Meade. Meade waved at him and he looked away. A bit later, Hulsey was talking to some women who had come to the rally. And Meade was video-recording. Actually, this was a set-up photo-op, and Meade positioned himself so he had the ideal vantage point. Then, when Hulsey starts walking back toward the Capitol, Meade calls out in the hope of finally getting a few words....
Suffice it to say: The conversation is aborted.
Posts
236 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 236 of 236My God.
These bottom of the blog comments are stark raving mad.
Doesn't the craziness of this shit make you guys worry about whether you're losing your grip?
~~~~~
Let the record show after being beaten into submission in this thread, shoutingthomas is only left w/irrelevant deflections.
As Trooper "tries" to make it all about me. ;)
'nuf said!
Dental Hygiene Man:
I pointed out that Tweed was a Democrat only since it was so silly for you to group him with Walker. Believe me, the Republicans have not been squeamish about using the power of government to benefit their supporters either. The corrupt use of tax money to benefit electoral supporters, all out of proportion with actual public needs, is not a Democrat monopoly.
The point is that this has to stop. We can't afford it any more. There is squealing when the government worker gravy train is challenged. There will be squealing when we raise taxes and means test social security, which we will have to do to some degree or other to dig out of the financial hole.
Kloppenberg may win the judicial election. Republicans in Wisconsin may get push back in 2012. Perhaps that's part of the process in the long debate that's going to be necessary to solve our financial mess. But the mess is not going away. Temporary avoidance is easy, but sooner or later the reckoning will be unavoidable.
I grew up in Pittsburgh, scene of union battles that make Madison look like a church picnic. The unions were a force for great improvement for a long time. They gave voice and power to people who were being badly exploited.
No longer. The public employees of Wisconsin are not an exploited group. They are now entrenched power, fighting desperately and rather effectively to preserve their prerogatives. The unions in Pittsburgh did the same when they became powerful. They were successful, or so they thought. But their power and intransigence became an important factor in the death of the steel industry in Pittsburgh, and of the loss of all of those great union jobs.
The changes are coming. Our politicians have overpromised and overspent in order to get themselves reelected. There is a strong constituency for this benefit or that, a weak constituency for restraint and fiscal care. But that is changing, because it has to. The longer we wait to really change this pattern, the worse it will be when we run into the financial wall.
It will be an awful moment in our history.
I was struck by all that pink. It's like the color was some kind of code...
How can *anyone* argue, if this day of obvious budget crisis, that funding Planned Parenthood is a legitimate function of government? I mean, all cutting funding would do is say, "You want an abortion, you pay for it yourself." Why are people willing to fall on their swords for something so obviously *not* an important mission of government?
Yes, we all know the answer.
I was struck by all that use of the color pink. It's like some kind of code...
Like purple for preemies.
Nicely put, David.
Very amusing to watch an independent "lone wolf" whose single observable instinct seems to be creeping through a blog-pasture of "sheep"... and can only manage to point a (left) paw and say" Hey, you're a sheep!"
No fangs, no claws, no ideas. No one is smarter for it, no one's ideas are challenged, no opinions offered. Point and howl.
Call me ignorant, but my understanding of history is that union busting of the old school was orders of magnitude greater than anything we're seeing in ANY state of late, not withstanding the histrionics of the unions.
Call me doubly ignorant, but my understanding of history is that civil service protections currently in force create quite a different baseline than unions had to work from in the wild days of union busting.
Public and private unions are simply different beasts all around.
Unless my history is REALLY ignorant.
Heck, if we're going to talk history, back then Planned Parenthood was run by genocidal maniacs. They'd smile if they knew the proportion of Blacks currently killed before birth. Oh, and that historical period had the NRA defending Blacks' Constitutional right to arm themselves for protection against Democrat lynch mobs.
Unless my history is really screwed up, that is.
Is there some double-secret Wisconsin law that requires
1) public figures
2) in public places
3) give their "permission" before they can be videotaped, which may then only be performed by
4) a "professional journalist"?
Wow, I had no idea. I wonder how many times Hulsey has harrumphed and pontificated about "the public's right to know" and "freedom of the press" when he's toadying to some group for support. The next time he comes around begging for citizens' votes, this video ought to be playing in every home.
Hulsey's arrogant & disdainful attitude, plus his outright lie about the legal necessity of "permission" to film him, is indicative of a sea-change in America: the widespread knowledge that objective, disinterested journalism is essentially dead in America. While even 20 years ago such a performance would have gotten him roasted on the local news, that Hulsey said what he did in the way he did it means he knows he's safe from exposure by a pet media. He knows just as well as I do that there is no such thing as an unbiased press today. He knows that the journalists are just another part of the Democrat team, which will take care of other team members. And that no Wisconsin media outlet will ever run his "Great Escape".
You know, this (Meade's dogged pursuit of Hulsey) is the kind of thing news people used to do routinely, regardless of party. It breaks my heart to see American journalism descend to the level of that of a 50's banana republic.
Could you possibly also ask him where he got a customized jacket with "Assemblyman Hulsey" printed across the back?
kthx
Democrat Legislators are indeed liars, thieves and whores. Brett Hulsey you are an arrogant lickspittle piece of garbage.
Planned Parenthood is a liberal fascist, nazi death camp.
C4, interesting. You ignore all signs of public union corruption, including their links to known criminals and criminal behavior and their endorsement and support of violence, including death threats, against Republicans and observers like Althouse.
Why will you not condemn public employee unions for making death threats and vandalizing businesses? Why do you go on and on and on about irrelevant historical events while ignoring the real crimes being endorsed, supported, and committed by Wisconsin public employee unions and the Obama Party?
What kind of moron walks around wearing a jacket with *his own name* embroidered on it? We ought to identify people with this kind of ego early in life so we can send them out on an ice flow.
What a great illustration and argument for term limits. Thanks.
What a great illustration of the need for term limits.
"Alex, when was the last time AA put up a GOP bashing post."
A funny question, when looking two posts below this one (of course, you will argue she wasn't "bashing;" I'll counter that she wasn't exactly helping). It's like looking at Baghdad Bob claiming there are no American troops in Baghdad when they are clearly visible in the distance behind him.
I didn't know abortions were so conducive to womens' health.
And about this whole "reproductive rights" rhetoric...doesn't that imply reproduction...as in "not abort"?
Would I call smokers' rights "non-smokers" rights?
The last part was classic as Hulsey walks away from a constituent.
Maybe if Meade stopped acting like a stalker? He's just being creepy now
Not ready for primetime
Wow.
All these damn comments and I hadn't even taken the time to watch the video of Meade stalking his assemblyman.
Very unprofessional, Meade (as well as intrusive, browbeating and rude). No wonder you add the gratuitous modifier "citizen" to that self-bestowed title.
Sorry to say this, Mr. Althouse, but the bit at the end makes you sound like a creepy stalker boyfriend. :(
Anyway, here's the thing I don't understand: Meade pursues Hulsey to request an immediate interview, and when he's denied the immediate interview, he claims "viewpoint discrimination." Why does Meade think he's entitled to an interview on demand?
Because I observed at least 3 protesters and/or lobbyists -who did not live in Hulsey's district - drop by his office for impromptu meetings with the assemblyman.
Question for you, I Heart Willard:
Why do you refer to me as "Mr. Althouse"?
Because I observed at least 3 protesters and/or lobbyists -who did not live in Hulsey's district - drop by his office for impromptu meetings with the assemblyman.
Nevertheless, isn't it entirely up to Hulsey to decide when he's willing to be interviewed by a reporter?
Why do you refer to me as "Mr. Althouse"?
Oh, I suppose you know that in the past women have been identified by the surname of the men to whom they are married. I see no reason to be bound by that convention, especially in the context of the world of the Althouse blog, where the Professor rules the roost and, whether or not you like it, you are the subordinate partner.
Of course, if you object to being referred to as Mr. Althouse, I won't do it again.
@Heart Willard
That's blatant sexism and you know it. Your reasoning makes no sense within any political ideology. It's just bullshit abuse that you've stooped to.
You don't have to stop because Meade doesn't like it. We just want to reveal YOU for what YOU are. It's perfectly clear. Nothing more for you to do.
Have a nice day.
That's blatant sexism and you know it.
Actually it's not sexism, Professor, and I doubt other readers will be won over by your "and you know it" logical fallacy.
Your reasoning makes no sense within any political ideology.
My reasoning isn't based on political ideology. Perhaps that will help you determine where you made a wrong turn in understanding my comment.
It's just bullshit abuse that you've stooped to.
You are entitled to your opinion, of course. However I've always been polite to Meade, so there's no foundation for your notion that I'm trying to abuse Meade.
Incidentally, I have no doubt that Meade can speak for himself in these matters, and if he feels abused, I am sure he can and will defend himself.
You don't have to stop because Meade doesn't like it. We just want to reveal YOU for what YOU are. It's perfectly clear. Nothing more for you to do.
Oh Professor, you know this is complete nonsense. You and your readers interpret remarks in whatever way suits you. Facts and objectivity rarely get in the way of analysis at Althouse.
Regarding my statement to Meade that I wouldn't continue to refer to him in a way that he might find offensive, the decision is his to make, not yours. Meade can and should decide for himself--unless, of course, you believe his feelings are less important than his value to you as a blog prop.
Have a terrific week, Professor.
By the way, I'm still waiting for Meade's response to the following question:
Why do you believe Hulsey should be expected to submit to interviews by reporters on demand?
You've outed yourself as a sexist, Willard.
Own it!
Willard, why do you feel entitled to an answer to your questions?
Willard, why do you feel entitled to an answer to your questions?
Meade, if you don't care to answer the question, that's fine.
Hulsey's unwillingness to submit to interviews on demand is at the heart of your complaint. As a reporter, I would have thought you would make a good faith effort to explain your position.
I suspect that, if it weren't for your relationship with the Professor, the Professor would claim that your unwillingness to engage openly reveals YOU for what YOU are. o_O
Have a good day, Meade. If you feel I treated you unfairly, I apologize.
You've outed yourself as a sexist, Willard.
Own it!
Nonsense, Professor, and you know it.
Thank you, though, for the attention.
Post a Comment