October 12, 2014

On the Table Bluff segment of the Ice Age Trail.

Yesterday, in Wisconsin:

Untitled

Untitled

Untitled

12 comments:

khesanh0802 said...

Ann;

Lovely 'shroom shot!

Carol said...

gah..what are those things..

Anonymous said...

Scott Walker just got busted for lying again, this time about receiving an endorsement from Pro-Life Wisconsin. Can't wait to hear all the excuses his loyal followers will come up with in order to spin this one away.

khesanh0802 said...

@madisonfella You're stretching on this one.

Anonymous said...

@khesanh0802

Granted, it isn't as vile as his massive amounts of plagiarism but it is yet another indicator of Walker's overall dishonesty.

Kieth Nissen said...

I read this blog for the photos. They're good.

Ann Althouse said...

"Scott Walker just got busted for lying again, this time about receiving an endorsement from Pro-Life Wisconsin."

Okay, I had to do my own research, and I can see why you didn't want to include a link. Scott Walker has been endorsed by Pro-Life Wisconsin in his past two elections, and he's now saying "I am proud to have been endorsed by Wisconsin Right to Life," which is therefore factually correct. It doesn't specify that he declined to fill out their questionnaire this time and is thus ineligible for an endorsement.

Mother Jones reports: ""Scott Walker did not complete our 2014 candidate survey and therefore is ineligible for an endorsement," wrote Matt Sande, director of the Pro-Life Wisconsin Victory Fund PAC, in an email. "His campaign manager stated in a letter that 'our campaign will not be completing any interest group surveys or interviews.'""

So… don't coordinate with interest groups… is that not the policy the John Doe investigators are incentivizing?

Anonymous said...

he's now saying "I am proud to have been endorsed by Wisconsin Right to Life," which is therefore factually correct.


Is it typical for candidates to list endorsements from previous election cycles in current election literature? Seems very dishonest and extra slimy. I can't recall it being done before. Can you? Maybe it is typical behavior for many politicians, in which case I'll retract my objection about Walker being extra slimy and instead say he is just being the usual slimy.

And of course you'll give him a free pass on this (and everything?), but it begs the question: How far back can a politician go to use old endorsements that haven't been received since? You're obviously ok with the previous two elections, but what if the endorsement came 5 years ago? A decade ago? 20 years ago? It would still be "factually correct" to say "I have been endorsed..." if the endorsement occurred 50 years ago, even if the candidate has completely changed their opinion, yes?

So are endorsements considered a lifetime achievement, and thus once received a politician can still claim them in election-after-election-after-election without ever again seeking them? Again, you may see nothing wrong with such a practice but it still smells like a big pile of bullshit to me.

Ann Althouse said...

@madisonfella It's clear that you feel a lot of hatred toward Scott Walker, and this is an occasion for you to scenery-chew in the Theater of Hate.

I don't like that sort of thing. I think it's undignified and not credible. I don't talk like that about anyone, even candidates I vote against and would like to see lose. Even murderers, come to that. We are all God's children.

Anonymous said...

Nice job of pivoting away from the issue and attacking the messenger instead. Uncle Alinsky is probably pretty proud of you right now.

Lawyers can talk about things being "factually correct" until they are blue in the face. Everyone else knows bullshit when they smell it and Scott Walker is spewing bullshit.

Ann Althouse said...

@madisonfella

You emit toxicity. I distance myself from you.

Anonymous said...

You are so cute when you're pouting.

:)

When something is too much for even the most ardent worshiper of St. Scott to find a spin, then it is obviously it stinks to high heaven.

But please do let us know if you ever find an example of other politicians trying to pass off endorsements from years past in their current literature. Because if it truly is the usual practice that you are implying it is then I will apologize for calling Walker extra-slimy.