Samuel McClain and what you can do about it.

I'm back a few days earlier than I expected. My break from the blogosphere has been a good one and I have lots of thoughts on the happenings of the last two weeks. Surely if you listen closely you can hear the legions of Capitol staff, lobbyists, and legislators waiting with bated breath for what will come in the near future. Patience, my children. In the meantime, Ragnar Mentaire has singlehandedly shredded most all of you over the holidays, and I mean that. When you whack everyone from Jim Doyle to Michael Serpe in two weeks, you've pretty much covered the whole spectrum. By the way Ragnar, the only thing I love more than your truthful and bile-filled invective is your crafty use of visual stimulus. Those graphics are fantastic. Keep 'em coming.

Oh, but I digress. The real reason I write is to comment on the beating of Samuel McClain and to offer praise to one of our own, a woman who posts under the pseudonym "Jessica McBride." What? That's her real name? Sure, and Dennis York is a cop in Lawrenceville, Illinois, and I really supervise a friggin' playground for a living. Although maybe I should, apparently the pay isn't too bad.

As I have been away for two weeks and have no desire to do catch up posts, the audience has suggested "stream-of-consciousness" as today's narration style. I'll try to remember to bracket the voice next to the voice in my head that writes this blog.

Sometimes I think the fair Jessica spends a little too much time talking about her husband's AG race [it's all lost on me, I'm voting for our next governor, Kathy Falk], but her post on the Samuel McClain beating is why you should read her blog. It'd be worth reading 100 posts on Xanga to get to read something so observant and intelligent and well-written [death to Xanga].

You're a journalist, Jessica, I suppose we should expect this caliber of work from people like you. [But your old colleagues never write like this.] Anyway, Jessica's post on the McClain incident is now the official position of the Playground. Read it here. [In honor of BCS week, we'll just say that it's the "Playground Politics Heisted Take of the Week, Presented by Jessica McBride."]

The response to the McClain beating has been entirely predictable and entirely disappointing. On the one hand, we have the liberal apologists telling us that this is all society's fault - that the people responsible for this heinous crime are just antagonists in the play of life, acting their role, unable to change the outcome. On the other hand, we have the Boots and Sabers crowd, who are ready to throw on the white sheets, strap on their concealed weapons, and hop on their horses to take care of this once and for all. Ask any kneejerk conservative: the obvious and speedy solution to the permanent underclass is more cops, vigilante justice, the death penalty, and charter schools. Hell, I'm sure Tom Reynolds has that one in drafting right now. Nothing quite rings in the new year like the deafening sound of white, middle class backslapping and self-congratulation as suburban and exurban Milwaukee has once again blogged a solution to a problem it knows nothing about. [By the way, Waukesha County, if you put the four dollars you're going to save with the repeal of gas tax indexing together with the two bucks Dan Vrakas saved you on your property tax bill, the Little Caesar's large pepperoni pizza carryout deal is almost within your reach. Damn that insidious sales tax!]

[Who else thinks Jenifer Finley got pissed off and quit because she actually thought she was county executive all those years her husband was in office?]

Would better parenting solve a lot of the problems in the inner city? Of course. Problem is, if life was a game of no hold 'em, some of these kids are playing 2-7 off suit - no father, mom is either absent or dead. Tell me how far "better parenting" is going to get you in that case. Even worse, these kids don't get to fold and hope for a better hand next time. There is no next time. You get one hand and you're all in. And if you're a black male in the inner city, you better hope that the flop is good or you're screwed.

[Poker analogy courtesy of the 40 hours of World Series of Poker I've watched in the last two weeks on ESPN - the Entertainment and SportsCenter Programming Network. Note I didn't say "sports." ESPN doesn't show sports anymore, just poker, spelling bee, SportsCenter, and original, sports-based drama.]

What can you, my loyal reader, do? Well, you can read Eugene Kane's column from Thursday and think about it a little. [OMG OMG OMG OMG did you really just say that? Sorry, those Xanga blogs are insidious.] Kane is absolutely right to remind us that good things are happening in what we might otherwise reflexively think is a place where only bad things happen. And if you've got some money or some time [odds are if you're reading my blog that you have both in relative abundance], maybe you should think about helping a community organization like the Boys & Girls Club that provides at-risk kids with a positive influence in their lives. Instead of pointing out the problem, be part of the solution. What happened to Samuel McClain isn't a sign that we need these organizations less. It's a sign that we need them even more.

You can donate online to the Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Milwaukee by clicking here. You can even earmark your donation for the Daniels-Mardak branch, which is just a block away from where McClain was beaten. Perhaps your name will be next to mine on the donor list: first name Recess, last name Supervisor.

It might not take a village to raise a child if the kid has two loving parents at home. It might, however, take a whole nation to fix what's gone wrong in America's cities.

Happy New Year everyone. It's been a long December, and there's reason to believe maybe this year will be better than the last.

And St. Nick is in a good mood too, because he's going on vacation

Thanks for reading, everyone. It's certainly been great to interact with so many new faces in the blogosphere in the last few months. However, the Supervisor is shutting down the playground for a few weeks to go on a much-needed vacation, one in which cell phones will not be answered and politics will not be discussed. Unlike Owen at Boots and Sabers, however, I have not arranged for any guest bloggers.

In the meantime, I would encourage you to check out many of the fine blogs located in the right-hand column. There are lots of people over there with interesting, insightful, and worthwhile things to say. They deserve your readership and support as well.

Until the new year, Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

St. Nick is in a giving mood today.

The Capitol Curmudgeon has put me in the holiday spirit. In that spirit, I too will try to say a few nice things about the Republicans. They receive the brunt of my criticism, largely because they run the show in the Legislature. However, good deeds and good people deserve acknowledgment as well. And while I happen to think that the anti-gay, pro-gun zealotry the Curmudgeon hails is what will ultimately lead us back to the minority, there are members of the legislature that I certainly find praiseworthy. I'll try to hit as many as I can before all the niceties make me violently ill:

• John Gard and Dale Schultz both deserve credit for recognizing that at the end of the day, it is important to allow legislation to be voted on regardless of one's personal opinions. With both the repeal of gas tax indexing and ethanol, it was clear that there was support in each house for both bills. And Gard and Schultz recognized, wisely, that while it is the job of a party's leader to do just that - lead - it is irresponsible to use one's power to obstruct, even if you personally have reservations about the bill. Regardless of the merits of either the indexing repeal or ethanol, both bills have support in both houses. So schedule the bills, have the debate, take the vote, and move on. That's what democracy is about. It's not about one man acting as a human logjam in the democratic process. And contrary to what some in southeast Wisconsin think, neither Gard nor Schultz is a RINO. Both have worked tirelessly to recruit and elect Republican candidates to public office and recognize that you have to have a big tent if you want to govern. Small tent party building and targeting moderates under your own roof is what made Democratic majorities in both houses of the Legislature vulnerable in the late 1980's.
  

• Mark Gundrum took a lot of heat for his proximity to Steven Avery (I've got photos here somewhere...). However, the fact remains that the substance of the bill developed by the Avery Task Force is quality legislation that will dramatically improve Wisconsin's criminal justice system. True, Mark does like the media, and perhaps is too socially conservative for the tastes of many. He is also, however, very intelligent and a hard worker who looks to build consensus on many issues. Unfortunately, we are all sometimes guilty of judging someone by their high profile actions without evaluating the body of their work.
  

• Should Brett Davis lose in November 2006, it's too bad the Assembly can't trade one of its lesser members and spare him instead. Anyone who has talked to or worked with Davis knows that he is among the brightest legislators in the Capitol. It's too bad that because of the political makeup of his district he will be resigned to fight a Rick Skindrud style holy war every two years just to keep his job. Surely there are some lazy backbenchers who deserve that kind of hell more than Davis, but we're staying positive here so I won't name names.
  

• Steve Wieckert has quietly gone from quirky to credible in the last few years, earning a reputation as a hard-working, bridge-building legislator who avoids bomb throwing and has an earnest desire to get things accomplished. There were rumors last fall that Wieckert was approached to run for leadership. Many were also saddened that he elected to pass on a chance to run for Mark Green's soon-to-be-vacant congressional seat. While Wieckert's reasonableness might get him in trouble in parts of the state governed by talk radio, it's the same trait that has made him a valuable asset to the Republican team.
  

Surely there are others worth mentioning as well, it's just I can't say any more nice things without yacking on my keyboard. But you get my point. As with any group effort, you have to take the bad with the good sometimes. And while Republicans surely do some stupid things at times, Wisconsin is better off with Speaker Gard and Majority Leader Schultz than with Speaker Kreuser and Majority Leader Robson.

Assembly Late Night

The Supervisor had to call in sick today so as to build up enough rest to listen to this marathon session in the Assembly. But before we cover the day's happenings, why is it that these clowns on the floor, half of whom couldn't form a coherent argument in the middle of the afternoon following lunch, insist on beginning debates after midnight and on an empty stomach? It's like listening to the Napoleon Dynamite Debate Society. Gosh!

According to various sources, here's the sort of thing you have to look forward to when Wisconsin Eye goes on the air:

• Mark Pocan has politely reminded Brett Davis in his speech tonight that his career as an Assemblyman, if it hasn't been ruined by leadership's unwillingness to give the guy anything to run on, will most certainly be ruined by a vote in favor of concealed carry. Davis has successfully amended the bill in a blatant attempt to buy himself political cover for voting for the bill. Davis and Andy Lamb are the two likeliest casualties in a southeast Wisconsin appeasement strategy that seems to have taken hold in the Assembly. Dear conservative nutjobs of the Milwaukee suburbs, you will not get anything passed through the Legislature after we lose people like Davis, Lamb, Hahn, Loeffelholz, and are back in the minority. While you continue to try and create the Republican equivalent of the Aryan race, you continually put outstate Republicans and vulnerables in increasingly tenuous positions. Just thought you'd like to know what's going out here in the rest of the state, you know, the part that revolves around Waukesha County.
  

• Speaking of issues that help outstate Republicans, ethanol is on the Assembly calendar for Thursday, after weeks of hemming and hawing by Assembly Leadership. Now, mind you, ethanol polls at similar levels of support as gay marriage, TABOR, and concealed carry. The only difference is that there's no Mark Belling or Charlie Sykes in Medford or Prairie du Chien to scream at Republicans and tell them to harrass their legislators. Your car will run just fine with ethanol and you won't really be spending any more at the gas station. The only difference is that someone in Wisconsin might benefit from your purchase as opposed to someone in Oman. Is that really so bad? This will be a chance for southeast Wisconsin Republicans to show that they are willing to be on the receiving end of the same sort of populist sentiment they successfully drummed up in pushing the gas tax indexing repeal - a nut that I will not give that blind squirrel Tom Reynolds credit for stumbling into. Also, keep your eyes open for John Gard's vote on ethanol. He has the potential to fall into the Gabe Waffelholz trap and vote against a bill he cosponsored, that his district loves, and that vulnerables like Davis, Lamb, Debi Towns, Gene Hahn, and Karl Van Roy are all signed onto.
  

• Phil Montgomery is playing solitaire.

• Robin Vos is playing Party Poker on his state-issued computer. Apparently single guys dig poker and birth control. At least he's not on Match.com looking for another white or Latino woman to go skinny dipping with him or enjoy a thunderstorm or some erotica. You listed all those as turn-ons, right Robin?
  

• Most of the Southeast Wisconsin GOP contingent is on cruise control, sitting in the parlor and screwing around. Obviously without Mark Belling awake to pull the strings on the marionettes they can do nothing but sit around lifelessly in the parlor.
  

• Carol Owens is clearly asleep. Is anyone surprised?

• Sam Kerkman is sleeping in the back with her baby. Between her and Jennifer Shilling, how soon until we have to have an Assembly rule on breastfeeding in the chamber? And will the social conservatives in the GOP caucus attempt to block such a gratuitous show of skin?
  

• Speaking of, Gary Hebl is babysitting Jennifer Shilling's baby. Undoubtedly he is rehearsing more ways to fluster Sheryl Albers in meetings of the Assembly Committee on Property Rights and Land Management, also known as the Committee on All of Sheryl Albers' Bills and Nothing Else.
  

• The only people really paying any attention are Dave Zien and the concealed carry supporters.
  

Man, it's amazing what anyone can see from the gallery, watching through the lobby doors, or at home on their computer, for that matter. Now I know why they're all terrified of Wisconsin Eye.

By the way, Belling was totally wrong today when he said that it's better to call a legislative office than email. Imagine your workday if people did nothing but call you and interrupt your actual work to express an opinion. It'd probably piss you off after awhile, right? Maybe you'd just turn the ringer off and stop answering the phone. It takes legislative staff three seconds to print your email, then put it in a bill folder that your Senator or Representative probably takes up to the floor. It takes them two minutes to write down your name, address, phone number, and message. Email is just as effective as a phone call and it has the positive effect of not making legislative staff absolute loathe your existence for wasting their time. Believe it or not, staff actually has other things to do than listen to you tell them something you could have said just as easily via email.

Me, I'll be joining Carol Owens now. Someone just push my button for me if there's a vote and wake me when the whole thing is over.

I did it all for the Tookie.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on Tookie Williams these days. If you don't know who Tookie Williams is, I'm not explaining it to you. Buy your clue here. In any case, he's slated for execution in California on Tuesday, barring an intervention by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R - Österreich). Jessica McBride puts her two cents down on Williams getting clemency, while Jenna over at Right off the Shore offers up the standard conservative line for marching Williams off to the gas chamber.

Now, I oppose the death penalty on moral grounds, but we'll leave that argument aside. Arguing the morality of the death penalty is like arguing the morality of abortion. Everyone gets all hot and bothered, nobody's opinion changes, and everyone is pissed off when it's all said and done.

Instead, I will advocate a purely utilitarian approach - just as I did with Chuck Chvala. The question should not be "does Tookie Williams deserve to die?" Rather, the question should be "does Tookie Williams serve a greater use to society alive or dead?"

If someone out there wants to argue "dead," that's great. I will not be the one doing it, but diverse viewpoints are always welcomed here. However, as a ground rule (I get to make those because it's my blog), you first must account for the following two facts:

1. Why do non-death penalty states have lower homicide rates than death penalty states?
2. Why do Western European nations without the death penalty have homicide rates 3-5 times lower than ours?
   

You are also not allowed to use a moral argument, as I will be abstaining from those myself.

Four people may have died at the hands of Tookie Williams. Maybe they didn't. A jury found him guilty once upon a time. Mind you, the prosecutor in the case was later called out by the Supreme Court of California for his abusive use of racially motivated peremptory challenges - in the Williams case, the prosecutor removed every African American from the jury pool with peremptory challenges. So there's a Batson claim in there, and how that's ruled on really depends on the judges who are hearing it - a majority on the 9th District court dismissed it, though not without a sharp dissent from nine of the sitting judges. Who knows how another court might rule?

There's an economic term for the four victims: a sunk cost. Let's face it - whether Williams did or did not do the crime, the fact is that those four people aren't coming back. That's unfortunate. It's also woefully bad social policy to allow sympathy for the families of the victims to determine the course of justice. Besides, there isn't even unanimity among the families on how the matter should be handled.

Like any good Republican, I don't believe we should be in the business of making decisions based on what's good for a small handful of families or groups - unless, of course, it's agricultural policy or another giveaway bill to veterans. In that case, give them all the money they want, to hell with the taxpayers. That's another post for another day.

Williams has done a lot of work in the last decade trying to reach out to inner city kids and educate them on the dangers and pitfalls of gang life. I don't care what his motivation is for writing those children's books or doing all the phone conferences with schoolkids. Maybe it's sincere. Maybe it's Machiavellian. Makes no difference to me. People with impure motives do good things for society all the time. Heck, Dale Schultz voted to repeal gas tax indexing. Exhibit A, ladies and gentlemen.

Lots of celebrities have shown up as of late, advocating clemency for Williams. That includes the ultimate race-baiter and media whore extraordinaire, Jesse Jackson. I would almost like to see Williams killed just to piss Jesse Jackson off. But I digress.

So is there greater future value in keeping Tookie Williams alive or having him killed?

I believe the answer, in this instance, is that there is far greater value in keeping him alive. And locked up. And continuing to do the work he is doing by reaching out to an extremely hard-to-reach and at-risk audience and educating them about the perils of gang life.

Now, if what some prison officials suggest is true - that Williams is still coordinating gang activities from behind bars - then that probably changes the equation. However, those are also charges that need to be proven, and to date, that hasn't been accomplished.

If the goal of a correctional institution truly is to correct, then it would appear that, at least superficially, it seems to be doing a pretty good job with Tookie Williams. I would think that society stands to benefit far more from Williams' continued work in gang prevention than it does from killing him on Tuesday and holding his funeral a week from now.

Killing Williams accomplishes nothing other than serving up revenge disguised as justice. Our correctional system and the punishments it hands out should be based on what is ultimately best for society. Revenge can't be very high on that list.

So I'm with McBride on this one, but for different reasons. She seems to think that Gov. Schwarzenegger will grant clemency out of political expediency. And again, that might be true. But like I said earlier, the action often matters more than the motive. However, I'd like to think that clemency will be granted because at the end of the day, Schwarzenegger will realize that it's the right thing to do - not for Williams, not for the victims, but for society.

Not quite Jesus, but close: Chvala sent to die for sins of Legislators everywhere

Today we've been treated to the softer side of Chuck Chvala - the side that invites the Capitol janitor to have some pizza, the side that sets up scholarship funds and is nice to puppies and kittens. Of course, it's all an attempt by Chvala to convince Judge David Flanagan that jail time isn't an appropriate punishment for the two felony counts Chvala pleaded guilty to.

Anyone who works in or near the Capitol knows that the fallout from the caucus scandal hasn't changed a thing, as least for legislators. Staff does a better job of keeping its collective nose clean, but that's largely because their bosses can't breathe down their necks anymore and order them out into the fields in October of every even-numbered year.

Want proof that everything is SNAFU? A few nights ago, John Gard mentioned in his remarks a conversation he had with Sen. Tom Reynolds in which Reynolds promised his vote on the budget in exchange for action on the gas tax indexing bill.

Hello? That's logrolling. Perhaps one of the lazy journalists in attendance that night might wish to follow that up with some investigative reporting. I know it's much easier to just print the news releases verbatim, but really, earn your paycheck. Trading a vote for a political favor isn't legal in Wisconsin - even if it does happen all the time under the dome.

All in all, over 100 pages of leniency appeals were submitted on Chvala's behalf. Really, it's all summed up in a few sentences from Chvala's attorney, James Olson:

Community service has a public benefit. Incarceration in this case has no public value... Incarceration would not deter any conduct that has not already been deterred by what has happened to Chvala. The public is protected by the punishment that has already been extracted from him.

Let's be honest about the entire situation. Chuck Chvala will lose his law license and is financially in shambles. Isn't this a lot more frightening to the average person than a few months in a minimum-security prison somewhere? The guy's got $420,000 in legal bills pending and a second mortgage on the house. He's going to spend the rest of his life paying for what he did. What's the gain in spending taxpayer dollars to lock up a remorseful, intelligent, non-violent individual?

There is no public value in sending Chvala to jail, or Burke or Jensen or Foti, for that matter. Nothing has changed at the Capitol. Legislators still wheel in by car, have their staff hand papers to them, and drive off three minutes later, claiming their $88 per diem for showing up to work. Votes are still traded. Campaigns are still discussed and plotted in leggie offices with the doors closed.

Ragnar is right on in his November 29th post about how nearly everyone's hand is in the cookie jar. He sums it up best when he says "Should bad timing really be the major reason that some people end up in jail and others end up as Ambassador to Norway?"

I believe the answer is no. The saddest thing is that lots of legislators try to do the things that Jensen, Foti, Burke, and Chvala have been accused or convicted of. They just fail because they're too stupid to be effective. In essence, we're letting them off the hook because they're too dumb to succeed. Which is worse?

By sending the valedictorians to jail we leave ourselves with the stupid idiots who were too dumb to shoot straight in the first place. I'll tell you this much: when you swap Mickey Foti for Joel Kleefisch, you're not moving up the intellectual food chain. Some might argue that the place is more ethical without Foti, Burke, and Chvala, but I can also tell you that it's a hell of a lot dumber as well. Call me crazy, but I'd rather have a pair of ethically compromised, Machiavellian geniuses like Jensen and Chvala running the show than John Gard, Jim Kreuser, Dale Schultz, and Judy Robson, whose idea of intellect is peeling the stickers off the Rubik's Cube and rearranging them so as to make it appear as though they've actually solved something.

Clearly, jail time or the threat thereof isn't a deterrent. One only need to observe the Legislature to understand that. And if it's not a deterrent, why should our tax dollars be spent to provide guys like Chvala with room and board?

Kapanke Votes Against Repeal of Gas Tax Indexing: Belling Vows More Checks to Mark Meyer

Hey Belling, still looking for an explanation on why you gave all that money to Mark Meyer back in 2000. Maybe it's because you knew deep down that Dan Kapanke would oppose gas tax indexing five years down the road?

Anyone who followed today's Senate debate on the elimination of the automatic increase in the gasoline tax can only come to only two conclusions:

1. The entire Senate Republican Caucus is full of RINOs. And that's a great thing for Wisconsin. It means that when push comes to shove, politicians can actually be responsible.
2. Dale Schultz, in losing the battle, wins the war by exposing Tom Reynolds as a hypocrite.

For weeks, Senate Majority Leader Schultz has been pilloried by conservatives as well as Democratic campaign financiers like Mark Belling for not being more assertive in scheduling Sen. Tom Reynolds' (N - West Allis, the N is for "Nutjob") bill for a vote. Then today, in the middle of the debate, Schultz introduced Senate Amendment 6 to Reynolds' bill, which actually would have ended automatic indexing a year sooner than Reynolds' bill. This is, of course, great news for tax-cutting conservatives, right?

Not for "tax-cutting conservatives" like Tom RINOlds, who worked aggressively to kill the amendment, ensuring that your relief will come a year later than it could have.

Schultz's amendment would have blown a $38.6 million hole in the transportation budget by the middle of 2007. But hey, we could've found the savings somewhere, right? Isn't this the argument we've heard from people who support repeal of indexing for months? "If the state wants more money for roads, it can cut spending elsewhere." Well, that's exactly what Schultz proposed on your behalf - cut the tax a year sooner and find the $38.6 million to cut.

And what did Senator RINOlds say? No thanks. Raising taxes in 2006 is just fine with me.

There's another word for RINO that people who aren't the political equivalent of six-year-olds will use:

prag·ma·tism n. A practical, matter-of-fact way of approaching or assessing situations or of solving problems.

But since everyone else in the blogosphere acts like a six-year-old on this issue, the Recess Supervisor will hop in the sandbox with you.

Do I personally fault RINOlds for moving to kill the Schultz amendment? No. It was the smart thing to do. It was the pragmatic thing to do. It also has the practical effect of telling the conservatives who are frothing at the mouth to gut government like a deer carcass that they don't need tax relief sooner. They need it later. Haven't you guys been complaining that Republicans have been doing this to you for years? Well, congratulations. Tom RINOlds just sold you out too.

If Doyle signs this bill, the extremists damn well better be cursing Tom RINOlds' name next year every time they fill their tank. At least, that's what they'll do if they're ideologically consistent. They'll be paying about a dime in extra money to the state every time they fill their tank because of RINOlds. Or maybe deep down, they're the same sort of RINOs/pragmatists that we all are in our everyday decisionmaking and just don't want to admit it. Already I see people out there talking about how 2007 isn't perfect for repeal but it's better than noting. You know what? If you say that, you're settling. You're compromising. That makes you a RINO too.

Conservative bloggers can whine about Schultz all they want. The fact remains that while Dale Schultz might be a little long-winded sometimes, he can also be a shrewd and masterful politician. Today's maneuvering was nothing short of brilliant, showing everyone that Emperor RINOlds has no clothes either.

Sen. RINOlds gets a thumbs up for recognizing and killing a poison pill amendment to a bill that can't muster a veto-proof majority. And Sen. Schultz gets an even bigger thumbs up for exposing the hypocrisy of the pro-repeal contingency in the Senate and then siding with them on the final vote.

All around, even if I disagree with the outcome, what a great day of Wisconsin politics.

Pro-Life Wisconsin Decries Aniston's Assertion of Right to Privacy

Today, Pro-Life Wisconsin announced in a scathing release that it would aggressively fight for the publication of topless photos taken of Jennifer Aniston.

The photos of a topless Aniston sunbathing in her secluded backyard are believed to have been taken by a photographer with a telephoto lens stationed over a mile from Aniston's residence. According to the release, PLW believes the right to privacy Aniston is asserting does not exist constitutionally and was created instead by "activist, left-wing judges who are intent on destroying the bedrock moral values this nation was founded on."

"This is a natural extension of the right to privacy the Supreme Court invented in Griswold," said Matt Sande, legislative director of PLW. "First it was birth control, then abortion. Now women are using Griswold to allege men don't have the right to view a woman's heaving bosoms from long distances using the most sophisticated technology. As the only 100% pro-life lobbying organization in the state, PLW is putting its foot down. This privacy nonsense has to stop. How many more unborn children must die before I can see Jennifer Aniston's ta-tas?"

In 1965, the court ruled in Griswold v. Connecticut that a Connecticut law banning access to birth control by married couples was an unconstitutional violation of their right to privacy. That ruling was subsequently cited in Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion.

Peggy Hammill, PLW State Director, concurred. "This has nothing to do with hooters," said Hammill. "We believe that allowing the world to see Ms. Aniston's tan and shapely breasts is the first step to creating a world where innocent babies are no longer slaughtered."

Aniston has threatened legal action against any individual or entity that acts to publish or disseminate the photos. PLW has promised to offer pro-bono legal assistance to any defendant in such an action, and will file a friend of the court brief outlining the organization's position.

Sande also mentioned that work is almost completed on the new all-glass house that he and his family are constructing in the Town of Waukesha. "There is no constitutional right to privacy, and what better way to live up to my own beliefs than by allowing the whole world to watch my family laugh, love, and procreate," Sande said. "God would have wanted it this way. He told me so last year."

GOP insiders expressed qualified support of PLW's position. "You know, it's strange, but for once I actually hope PLW wins a battle." said a high-ranking GOP Assembly staffer. "Normally their lobbyists stop by and waste our time talking to us about whatever veto fodder their members are paying them to peddle this week. I mean, they're never gonna win the abortion battle - half the women at those clinics are Republicans. But I definitely wouldn't mind seeing what Jen Jen's got under that sweater. I've been thinking about that since the second season of 'Friends'."

Rich Suburbanites Finally Realize "Rural Estate" Means "Near Farms"

An article in today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel raises the ever-present issue in rural Wisconsin of how to reconcile the needs of dairy farmers with the desires of suburban families who move into the shadows of these farming operations.

In this case, a group of citizens in Centerville have realized that a big dairy operation, Tod Leiteritz's Maple Leaf Farms, is sometimes smelly and dirty, and they don't like it one bit.

Unfortunately for the neighbors, the 1995 amendments to Wisconsin's right to farm law, passed by the geniuses in the Wisconsin Legislature, basically give farmers the right to be absolute jackasses. In essence, the law makes it nearly impossible for anyone to successfully file a nuisance lawsuit against an agricultural operation. To succeed in filing against a farm, the plaintiff needs to prove two points:

1. He didn't "come to the nuisance." In other words, his presence in the area must predate the farm's operation.

2. The farm must pose a threat to public health and safety.

It's the latter point that creates the biggest divergence from standard nuisance law, which declares that a nuisance exists if one is unreasonably and substantially prevented from enjoying one's property.

Perhaps the most problematic aspect of the law is that it allows a small farming operation to become an enormous farming operation (with a much bigger impact footprint), all the while tying the hands of the neighbors in terms of objecting to the expansion. The farming operation doesn't even have to be consistent. If you buy a house next to a corn farm, only to see that corn farmer go into the dairy business five years later, you're screwed, provided the agricultural use is continual. I think most reasonable people would see this as a much different scenario than expansion of a consistent use, yet the law treats them identically.

How is this troublesome to you and me? Well, it ends up being a big waste of our tax dollars. The only recourse these citizens have is to try and call the farm out on every minute environmental regulation under the sun.

Let's be serious. These neighbors aren't wound up about a few dead fish here or there because of runoff. They're pissed off because they bought houses on the lake and now have the smell of fresh manure wafting over their properties if the wind blows the wrong way. So lawyers are paid for, bureaucrats are busied, and all and all, we as taxpayers are forced to spend way more money evaluating this matter than if the aggrieved parties could simply go to court and settle this privately.

What is also troubling is the quote from Andrew Hanson, the lawyer for Centerville Cares, the community group organized to oppose expansion of the farm in question. According to the article:

Leiteritz's expansion plans are on hold for now. But he has moved forward with a large construction project next to his farm that could accommodate thousands of additional cattle.

He said he prefers "slow, steady growth," but if he continues to be challenged, "we will go faster."

This troubles Hanson, the lawyer for Centerville Cares, because he sees large dairy farms as the next step to vertically integrated agriculture, where large corporations control all facets of production.

"Who can afford to take that over?" he asked. "It's Land O'Lakes (the large Minnesota-based cooperative) and Kraft."

Leiteritz bristles at such talk. He said he is merely trying to build a business.

So what we really have in Centerville is a group of people who don't like the smell of farms teaming up with a lawyer who doesn't like the economic model the farm is pursuing. This, unfortunately, has become a common strategy on the left: sue a business because it's big.

Frankly, I can't see why anyone would want to move to the country anyway: it's smelly, it takes forever to get anywhere and there's nothing to do. But those who do settle in the boonies are creating some interesting conflicts with those who work in the boonies. And unfortunately for politicians, there are no easy answers to this one.

Got Milf? New Mom Garner Signs Blockbuster Deal With WI Milf Marketing Board

One day after giving birth to a baby girl, actress Jennifer Garner has signed a long-term deal as chief spokesperson for the Wisconsin Milf Marketing Board (WMMB), state leaders announced today.

"I'm happy to say that we think we've found just the thing to put Wisconsin back on top," said James Robson, CEO of the WMMB. "Jennifer Garner is a major ass-kicker on Alias, but yet has that wholesome look milf lovers really prize."

Robson added that he hopes a high-visibility celebrity like Garner will help Wisconsin reclaim its #1 ranking in milf production from California. The WMMB has been struggling to regain its footing ever since it was caught off guard by the California Milf Advisory Board's "Happy Cows" campaign.

The 33-year-old Garner will be joining fellow celebrities Whoopi Goldberg, Kristi Yamaguchi, and the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, who have already been signed to similar deals. The latter will be featured throughout the country in the targeted campaigns, "Got Chocolate Milf?", "Got Soy Milf?", and "Got Strawberry Milf?" It has also been rumored that Calista Flockhart will be signed to pitch skim milf. Robson, however, says those claims are inaccurate, and that the WMMB has not approached Flockhart. Robson also noted that Flockhart's child was adopted, "so that doesn't really count."

Garner issued a statement from an undisclosed hospital in Los Angeles expressing her enthusiasm for the new endeavor. "While I'm sure motherhood will be great," Garner said, "nothing warms my heart like knowing that millions of my fans are once again thinking about me daily while having sex with their wives or girlfriends. But this isn't about me. I hope to inspire the women of Wisconsin. It's time for them to tame their big hair and ditch their cut-off jean shorts and make Wisconsin the milf capital of America once again."

The Funniest Post Ever

I myself thought about writing something about Doyle's sham hearings decrying capitalism, but all my sentiments are ensconced in Dennis York's latest post, along with some of the funniest satire I've read in ages.

Doyle Subpoenas A&W Root Beer Bear
The bear ate Rod Nilsestuen. Hilarious.

Mark Belling: Putting His Money Where His Big Mouth Isn't

Since Mark Belling and his acolytes are always ranting about this person or that person being a RINO (Republican in Name Only) for not supporting measures to reinstate slavery or strap gay people into dunking stools, I thought it would be interesting to see if Belling puts his money where his mouth is.

There appears to be a big problem with that. It looks as though Mark Belling, rather than supporting Republican candidates or even keeping his wallet closed, actually puts his money where is mouth isn't: in support of Democrats.

Back in 2000, State Representative Mark Meyer (above) faced a strong challenge from Republican Dan Kapanke in the 32nd Senate District, after Sen. Brian Rude decided against re-election. After a late-game media blitz spearheaded by Chuck Chvala's campaign machine, Meyer managed to narrowly defeat Kapanke by about 1,600 votes out of 78,000 cast.

Of course, television and radio spots don't buy themselves. You need money to do that. And here's where it gets hairy.

According to records available from the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign (WDC), ultra-conservative radio host Mark Belling was helping to finance Chvala's campaign machine. That is, unless there's another Mark Belling working at WISN Radio. Here's a record of Belling's contributions to the Meyer campaign:

6/26/2000 Amount: $125
10/23/2000 Amount: $300

Belling had also contributed $850 to Meyer in his previous Assembly campaigns. In fact, up until that Senate campaign in 2000, Belling was Meyer's third largest contributor, behind the candidate himself and Mathy Construction, one of the evil roadbuilding firms that Belling accused John Gard of being owned by on Wednesday's radio show. Does this mean that Mark Meyer was owned by Mark Belling? And if so, why didn't Belling get more bang for his buck?

More importantly, note the timing on that last check in 2000. That's right. Belling was emptying his wallet as Meyer was scrambling to pay for those last-minute media buys and get out the vote calls two weeks before the election.

The WDC website shows no other reported contributions from Belling to candidates of either party. But it doesn't have to. Meyer is bad enough. If Chuck Chvala was the devil to Republicans, Meyer was Lucifer's son.

So what's worse, Belling? Being a RINO or actively funding Democratic contenders in contested races? I'll bet that John Gard and Dale Schultz didn't give money to Chuck Chvala. But for all intents and purposes, you did. Your money helped the Democrats pick up a Republican Senate seat and retain control of the Senate. You, Mark, knowingly aided and abetted Chuck Chvala in his efforts to keep his position as Senate Majority Leader.

Perhaps all your talk is nothing more than overcompensation. Because while you judge the words of others, it would appear through your actions that the biggest RINO in the room, Mark, is you.

To quote lovable imp Michelle Tanner,

Mark Belling needs a pacifier.

I usually listen to Charlie Sykes, when I can. I respect his intelligence. I usually avoid Mark Belling for the same reason I avoid Rush: raving megalomania doesn't really appeal to me.

Charlie writes books. I dig that. Belling would be lucky if he could develop a bumper sticker.

Today, John Gard appeared on both shows to discuss the issue of gas tax indexing, and how that fits into a broader scheme of transportation funding in Wisconsin.

You want a good interview? Listen to the Sykes interview. Charlie obviously disagrees with Gard, but like a good host, he lets the interviewee do most of the talking. He asks good questions. He makes intelligent points and makes them once. He treats his audience like they're intelligent. I have nothing to say about it other than that I think it's good radio.

Belling's "interview" with Gard, however, is an entirely different type of media spectacle. (Thanks to BadgerBlogger for archiving the interviews online.)

In the interest of full disclosure, I don't really care for either Gard or Belling. John Gard has an often ham-handed leadership style and a floor demeanor that is more reminiscent of Napoleon Dynamite than that other Napoleon of similar stature. Mark Belling sounds like a ranting idiot 98% of the time. He is an arrogant bully who is completely out of control, a man who thrives on beating his chest and throwing his weight around. In other words, he's like that tired old drug addict he fills in for nationally.

Put those two together and what do you get? Fifteen minutes of radio that would make any objective listener feel bad for the Speaker for subjecting himself to such rudeness and abuse from a radio host.

Gard's position on gas tax indexing is completely reasonable to anyone who will bother to give him a chance to finish a sentence. He says that he supports repeal of indexing if it's included as part of a plan that stabilizes and ensures adequate funding for transportation projects that have already been authorized. Last I checked, making sure you can pay for what you buy is a conservative position.

Belling, the conservative radio hack that he is, is completely incapable of appreciating any degree of nuance in a debate. Either that, or he just plays an idiot on the radio. What some people call nuance and sophistication, Belling calls "crap." Belling is the other side of the coin from Charlie. Belling accuses Gard of lecturing his audience, and then rants at Gard and his listeners uncontrollably for nearly fifteen minutes.

That's what makes Charlie a far better listen. Charlie understands the game. Mark Belling sounds like the whiny kid that got left behind by his Mom in Aisle 6 of the Toys R Us. Charlie talks about the news. Belling tries to make it.

If you listened to the Belling interview objectively, without bias, and have any understanding of politics, you will leave with the following impressions:

• Mark Belling needs to breathe more. Don't think of it as oxygenating your blood, Mark. Think of it as giving your brain a chance to catch up with your mouth.

• Who the hell cares if Mark Belling is happy? Since when does the state Legislature exist to serve Mark Belling?
  

• Can Belling verbally fellate himself on-air any more without someone reporting him to the FCC? How many times does Belling try to give himself credit for the Reynolds bill? Twelve? Thirteen? Mark, you host a radio show. Get over yourself.

• Belling is dead wrong. Republicans won't lose seats if they don't pander to knee-jerk neanderthals from suburban Milwaukee. They're going to lose people like Brett Davis, Gene Hahn, and Debi Towns if they start pandering to fools like Belling. Maybe Mark or his sycophants can tell me who they're going to lose if they don't obey his Marshall Applewhite-like commands. Is Waukesha County finally going to go Dem because Republicans weren't reactionary enough on the gas tax?

I appreciate Belling's passion for the inherent correctness of his own positions, but nothing excuses being a total asshole to an elected official. Grow up, Mark. The only people who nauseate me more than you are those legislators like Jeff Stone and Leah Vukmir who go on your show and practically offer to bear your love child.

And to the Speaker, I offer rare praise. You behaved in a manner that befits your office today. You showed Mark Belling the one thing he wouldn't give you: respect - even when he most certainly didn't deserve it. I may not always agree with your politics or your methods, but you are a nice guy, by all accounts. And that will ultimately score you more points at the end of the day than whatever you may have lost to Belling's brain-dead listeners.