Althouse: "Gov. Scott Walker has launched a new website touting the results of changes he pushed this year...

October 24, 2011

"Gov. Scott Walker has launched a new website touting the results of changes he pushed this year...

"... including his proposal taking away nearly all collective bargaining rights from most state workers.The website launched Monday comes less than a month before his opponents say they will start a petition drive to force a recall election next year. Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate accuses Walker of using taxpayer money to launch what he calls a campaign website."

Reports Channel3000.

Here's the website.

56 comments:

edutcher said...: "Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate accuses Walker of using taxpayer money to launch what he calls a campaign website."

Hey, GodZero does the same thing all the time.; 10/24/11, 12:06 PM
Curious George said...: Yes, when taxpayers see how the public unions have assraped them, and how Walker has stopped said assraping, I'm sure they will be up in arms over the website.; 10/24/11, 12:12 PM
Scott M said...: If Obama can run all over the middle east coast and call it supporting his jobs plan, not campaigning, I suppose Walker can get away with this.; 10/24/11, 12:19 PM
Brian Brown said...: including his proposal taking away nearly all collective bargaining rights from most state workers

Except his proposal did no such thing.; 10/24/11, 12:20 PM
garage mahal said...: Politifact sez out of 35 statements from Walker they analyzed, 5 were "True".

Wonder how many howlers factcheckers will find on this website? If form holds true there will be a shitpile of them.; 10/24/11, 12:25 PM
Curious George said...: "Jay said...
including his proposal taking away nearly all collective bargaining rights from most state workers

Except his proposal did no such thing"

It most certainly did. Which is why it is so awesome.; 10/24/11, 12:25 PM
Curious George said...: "garage mahal said...
Politifact sez out of 35 statements from Walker they analyzed, 5 were "True"."

Not sure where you got this from, but keep grasping for those straws!; 10/24/11, 12:40 PM
TosaGuy said...: Scott Walker: The sky is blue.

Politifact: The sky is not blue when it's dark out or when there are clouds in the sky -- then it is white or gray. Since the sky is these colors more than it is blue we rate Walker's claim Barely True.; 10/24/11, 12:46 PM
Calypso Facto said...: GM says, "I don't know anything about the website or what's on it, but I'm going to sling shit at Governor Walker anyways. It's what I do."

PS-number of Politifact "True" ex-Gov. Doyle statements? 0; 10/24/11, 12:47 PM
garage mahal said...: Not sure where you got this from, but keep grasping for those straws!

Click here.

This is from the MJS's own factchecking dept. And they endorsed Walker. Bet they feel stupid huh?

Crushing public sector unions = more private sector jobs?

Not in Wisconsin. Unemployment up from 7.2% to 7.9%

It's working!; 10/24/11, 12:49 PM
TosaGuy said...: Scott Walker: The sky is blue when there are no clouds and it's daylight. It has shades of white and gray when clouds are present and it is black at night.

Politifact: Clouds obscure the sky and do not show its true color. Night, by definition, is the absence of light from the sun. The clouds and lack of light do not change the actual color of the sky, it only prevents our eyes from seeing that natural state of the sky. We rate Scott Walker's claim as False.; 10/24/11, 12:51 PM
Curious George said...: Crushing public sector unions = no tax increases, balanced state and local budgets

YES in WI!; 10/24/11, 12:56 PM
Petunia said...: Politifact is not objective. Neither is the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.

Although they do have some good reporters. Which is more than any of the poor excuses for Madison media can say.; 10/24/11, 1:07 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: It should be called www.repeltheattacks.com.; 10/24/11, 1:14 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: Someone should fact check politifact's use of the word "fact".

wv= bushirwa =what Bush The Elder was known for doing; 10/24/11, 1:16 PM
TosaGuy said...: Mike Tator Tot doesn't have any Politifacts, but the WI Dem Party does.

ZERO true statements. Four Pants on fire statements.; 10/24/11, 1:29 PM
Matt said...: One change he made is to charge businesses a tax of sorts based on the earnings of each employee in a company doing business in WI. This is to offset all the Federal debt the state has accrued. It is not really a business friendly deal.; 10/24/11, 1:35 PM
Chip Ahoy said...: Tosa Guy, your link looks like this:

<a rel="nofollow">; 10/24/11, 1:36 PM
Original Mike said...: "Scott Walker: The sky is blue.

Politifact: The sky is not blue when it's dark out or when there are clouds in the sky"

Heh.; 10/24/11, 1:40 PM
Original Mike said...: "Conflicting edits", my ass. You (Google) screwed up. Own it.; 10/24/11, 1:41 PM
garage mahal said...: Just today, Walker turns to Reggie Newson, who worked under Doyle, to head Department of Workforce Development.

LOL; 10/24/11, 1:42 PM
Original Mike said...: "Just today, Walker turns to Reggie Newson, who worked under Doyle, to head Department of Workforce Development."

Why is that a bad thing?; 10/24/11, 1:55 PM
Curious George said...: "garage mahal said...
Just today, Walker turns to Reggie Newson, who worked under Doyle, to head Department of Workforce Development.

LOL"

Why is this funny? Newson is a long term executive in the State.

I think you don't really understand what the DWD does.; 10/24/11, 2:23 PM
garage mahal said...: Another of his initiatives, turning the Dept of Commerce into the partially privatized Department of Workforce Development, is yet another failure, on its 3rd Secretary.; 10/24/11, 2:54 PM
Mark said...: Boo frickin' hoo.

wv: "joyessed" -- somehow appropriate, I think.; 10/24/11, 2:56 PM
Steven said...: I agree with the Democrats that defending enacted policies should be considered an inappropriate use of taxpayer resources, but, as Scott M pointed out in the third comment, it's not exactly unusual. And I'm not sure where I would draw the line, if I were given that authority -- the government ought to spend money attempting to determine the results of its policies, and it ought to make the results public. There's a fine line between reporting information and advocacy.; 10/24/11, 3:07 PM
Calypso Facto said...: turning the Dept of Commerce into the partially privatized Department of Workforce Development...

Uh, no. The DoC became the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC). DWD is entirely different. By all means, don't let accuracy get in the way of your scorn though.; 10/24/11, 3:10 PM
Alex said...: garage posted the Politifact link and ya'll just handing back snark becasue ya'll got PWNED. Face it, Walker is a liar, liar pants on fire and we're gonna recall his FUCKING ass!; 10/24/11, 3:24 PM
Alex said...: For you right wingers, ask yourself why you reflexively defends Walker despite all the evidence that points to his lies and deceit. Is the conservative agenda only possible under a Trojan Horse?; 10/24/11, 3:26 PM
sorepaw said...: Wonder how many howlers factcheckers will find on this website? If form holds true there will be a shitpile of them.

The unit known as Garage has not been equipped with any fact-checking modules.

Hence it leaves all of the work to others.; 10/24/11, 3:26 PM
Alex said...: BTW looking at the Politfact site, it seems Republicans are always lying and Democrats are always telling the truth!; 10/24/11, 3:29 PM
Calypso Facto said...: Good comment, S. The policy auditing would normally be done by the Legislative Audit Bureau, but only as directed.

Emails from the new Reforms website go to Walker's Deputy Communications Director, so it appears Governor's Office built. I agree that it's tough to know where the appropriate line is between promoting the state and self-promoting the executive.; 10/24/11, 3:33 PM
Original Mike said...: "The unit known as Garage has not been equipped with any fact-checking modules."

Now that's funny.; 10/24/11, 3:44 PM
Curious George said...: "Calypso Facto said...
Good comment, S. The policy auditing would normally be done by the Legislative Audit Bureau, but only as directed." Actually, not so good a point. The vast majority of government entities effected by Walker's BRB are not state agencies, bot local governments, so the LAB would have say or idea the effects.; 10/24/11, 3:52 PM
Curious George said...: "Alex said...
garage posted the Politifact link and ya'll just handing back snark becasue ya'll got PWNED. Face it, Walker is a liar, liar pants on fire and we're gonna recall his FUCKING ass!"

Actually, garage's posts have had nothing to do with the post topic, and were just snarky shiny things to distract. His usual drive by as has been already mentioned.

As far as his recall:

Good.
Fucking.
Luck.; 10/24/11, 3:55 PM
m stone said...: I almost gave Garage and Politifact credit on this one until I read the windy Politifact assessments, ripe with bias and word interpretation (budget shortfall vs debt) and "statements by" and "stories mentioning" Walker all considered.

If I wanted a hit piece, I'd create one like this one: short on fact and long on innuendo and reach. Just enough to tantalize, but not fooling the discriminating reader.

Credit withdrawn.; 10/24/11, 4:05 PM
garage mahal said...: Calypso
You are correct, the WEDC, not the DWD. We regret the error!; 10/24/11, 4:12 PM
Calypso Facto said...: Actually, not so good a point. The vast majority of government entities effected by Walker's BRB are not state agencies, bot local governments, so the LAB would have say or idea the effects.

America's Politico, is that you? Your English is improving, but only slightly.

As to (what I believe to be) your point: The LAB can't study or report on local effects because it's a state office? Really?; 10/24/11, 4:23 PM
granmary said...: You mean he is running on taxpayer money, just like Obama? How dare a Republican do such a thing! And isn't it funny that the dems. who are for "equal treatment" throw that argument aside so easily? Makes you wonder if they actually believe what they say.; 10/24/11, 4:28 PM
Thorley Winston said...: I agree with the Democrats that defending enacted policies should be considered an inappropriate use of taxpayer resources, but, as Scott M pointed out in the third comment, it's not exactly unusual. And I'm not sure where I would draw the line, if I were given that authority -- the government ought to spend money attempting to determine the results of its policies, and it ought to make the results public. There's a fine line between reporting information and advocacy.

I agree with everything in this comment. I would add that it doesn’t seem that much different from some of the official websites of members of House or the Senate touting some of the initiatives that they support or some of the unsolicited mailings I get from my Representative using their franking privileges. These are also paid for by the taxpayer and while I don’t think it appropriate for taxpayer to fund any of it, it does show how engrained the practice has become.; 10/24/11, 4:48 PM
sorepaw said...: We regret the error!

Wel, I guess Garage's programmer does.

Do 'bots feel regret?; 10/24/11, 4:49 PM
Curious George said...: "Calypso Facto said...

America's Politico, is that you? Your English is improving, but only slightly.

As to (what I believe to be) your point: The LAB can't study or report on local effects because it's a state office? Really?"

Ha was multitasking and editing on the fly. And my posint was the LAB would have no idea of the effects on local budgets, nor would they care. Here, from their website:

"The Bureau conducts objective audits and evaluations of state agency operations to ensure financial transactions have been made in a legal and proper manner and to determine whether programs are administered effectively, efficiently, and in accordance with the policies of the Legislature and the Governor. The results of these evaluations are provided to the Legislature, along with recommendations for improvements in agency operations."

So they can see the effect of the BRB on the state...but not every county, local town and school board.; 10/24/11, 4:49 PM
sorepaw said...: *Well,* I guess....; 10/24/11, 4:50 PM
garage mahal said...: Do 'bots feel regret?

Do unfunny, tedious, and boorish commenters ever tire of stalking another commenter's every post? Sadly, no.; 10/24/11, 4:54 PM
Calypso Facto said...: Here's the rest of the LAB's mandate, CG: "conduct performance audits to determine whether programs are accomplishing their policy goals and program objectives" which includes "auditing any county, city, village, town, or school district", so I still don't see a structural problem.

But a LAB audit produces neither real-time nor readable results, so it wouldn't accomplish the advertising function the Governor would like.

Judging how much of that advertising is designed to showcase effective government (against the counter-advertising of vested interests) and how much of it is to promote the Governor, per se, is probably a good test for cynicism.; 10/24/11, 5:12 PM
Curious George said...: Calypso Facto said...
Here's the rest of the LAB's mandate, CG: "conduct performance audits to determine whether programs are accomplishing their policy goals and program objectives" which includes "auditing any county, city, village, town, or school district", so I still don't see a structural problem.

But a LAB audit produces neither real-time nor readable results, so it wouldn't accomplish the advertising function the Governor would like.

Judging how much of that advertising is designed to showcase effective government (against the counter-advertising of vested interests) and how much of it is to promote the Governor, per se, is probably a good test for cynicism."

I stand corrected. But I agree with the last point, an audit isn't the "plain English" report that citizens need, and would take forever, would only be a "snapshot", and would be a lot more expensive than this website.

I went to 'tosa, where I live, and see that the local schools saved $4 million. Now I already knew that, but not everyone does.; 10/24/11, 5:17 PM
Big Mike said...: This is silly. The public unions were on their way to destroying themselves (see, for instance, Rhode Island and Illinois), and Walker prevented them from so-doing.

The unions are now howling the same way a 2 year old would howl if you took the loaded gun out of its hands when all it wanted to do was play.; 10/24/11, 5:47 PM
Anonymous said...: http://www.channel3000.com/politics/29571399/detail.html

Redistricting plan not going too well either. The lawsuit against his redistricting plan will go forward. So how much has he cost this state in lawyer fees to date?; 10/24/11, 6:36 PM
SunnyJ said...: ...and those complaining are the same ones that complain if they can't sit at the table at every meeting and hear every word.

Websites are a form of "informing" the general public about their governments actions. Government is mandated to do just that...do you want the doors open or don't you? Well, then let them post the information about what has been done, how and why and what the results are so that you can be informed.

Just because you don't like the policies this time around doesn't mean being informed about them is wrong. And if said policies that have been inacted are not only disliked by you, but actually successful...even more reason to not want anyone to know, right? Wrong!

Find out about Project Veritas' latest video outing of academics colluding with political message groups to "kill" studies they paid for that disprove their agenda. It's a real hoot!; 10/24/11, 6:43 PM
Love said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 10/24/11, 6:44 PM
SunnyJ said...: Lawyers are on retainer, there every day...the actions are being brought and until they are confirmed or denied, hard to tell who's cost they are at this point.

But, I'd say this...if you think filing lawsuit after lawsuit and then blaming the victim of your lawsuit insanity for the costs is going to cut it in Wisconsin...you are sadly mistaken. The same unions that squeal with any demands that they "share" (usually a lovely term in their world) costs and give us the chicken little dance when it changes, raise millions of dollars to file these lawsuits. If they have that kind of money why don't they pay their share, support their schools and STFU? Just askin.; 10/24/11, 6:48 PM
Thorley Winston said...: Redistricting plan not going too well either. The lawsuit against his redistricting plan will go forward. So how much has he cost this state in lawyer fees to date?

I’m not sure how it’s necessarily the fault of the governor that someone who disagrees with a particular policy decides to challenge it in court. Unless of course you’re suggesting that Wisconsin adopt a “loser pays” system whereby the taxpayers would recoup the cost of defending laws that are unsuccessfully challenged in court.; 10/24/11, 7:44 PM
Martin L. Shoemaker said...: Hey, Chairman Tate, if you're so concerned about wasting taxpayer money, here's an idea: cancel your money-wasting recall campaign!; 10/24/11, 7:53 PM
Curious George said...: "Mitochondri-Allie said...
So how much has he cost this state in lawyer fees to date?in lawyer fees to date?"

Dunno. Less than the $3 billion he's saved the state.; 10/24/11, 9:26 PM
MadisonMan said...: As if anyone believes the number on the website.; 10/25/11, 10:16 AM
Crunchy Frog said...: BTW looking at the Politfact site, it seems Republicans are always lying and Democrats are always telling the truth!

That Alex thinks this is indicative of anything about Republicans says more about Politifact and himself than it does about them.

Oh by the way - how's it hanging with the boys on K Street?; 10/25/11, 1:56 PM