Blame it on:

• Obama
• Unions
• Excessive regulation
• Intolerable taxes
• Rachel

Imagine all of the hard work Walker has done since he became Wisconsin's Governer...attempt to bust one union and that's all people will remember.

Union Blocker Walker...Doesn't it just break your heart? LOL

Keep singing the same ol song D.C. "Blame it on Obama". It has nothing to do with big business breaking the backs of the working class does it?

Contessa,

Might want to get your facts straight. I live in Illinois.

Our taxes have gone up on corporations, etc. and our unemployment is DOWN during the same period that Walker has been in office. You are either misinformed or you're a liar.

Mining? Even the Wisconsin GOP is partially against that. Beyond that, how many "jobs" would the mining expansion create? HALF of the Wisconsin GOP voted against the bill, so don't tell us that the Democrats blocked the bill. Again, misinformed, or lying?

So Obama is responsible for Wisconsin's problems? If that's the case, why does Wisconsin need Walker, or anyone else?

Credit rating? Well let's see. Because of Walker's policies Wisconsin, which used to have some of the best schools in the country is now ranked 44th. Illinois is ranked 4th.

So please keep your uneducated cheeseheads north of the border. The ONLY thing they are going to be good for is flipping burgers.

Tourism is the life blood of northern Wisconsin. It's a long-term, sustainable, and lucrative industry. And it relies on clean water and air, and the preservation of Wisconsin's natural heritage.

It hasn't been the Democratic Party that's slowed the Republicans' mining juggernaut down; it's the people of northern Wisconsin, who understand the consequences of a massive iron ore strip mine in the middle of all that natural beauty.

Walker and the Republican legislature have been trying to ram that mine down the people's throats, as well as trying to force the Department of Natural Resources to "relax" clean water and air regulations.

That mine would cause the state to lose tourism jobs, as the area's lakes, ground water and wetlands are polluted, the transportation infrastructure is dominated by ore-movers, and the general atmosphere, which draws vacationers from all over the Midwest, is ruined.

Dog. You might want to check your facts. Wisc unemployment is now 7.1%. Illinois is 9.8%. Does that make my statement that Wisc unemployment rate is much better than Illinois false?? remedial math anyone?

Obama is responsible for an unemployment rate that has stayed above 8% ...the worst long term unemployment since the great depression. Of course, Obama would blame someone else for he has NEVER taken resposibilbity for anything that is wrong.

Credit rating: Do you read much? Illinois was just downgraded by MOODY's as the WORST creidt rating in the country.

Do you have a link to those school rankings or did you just pull that number out of your......?

Worst long term since the depression. Could be because this is the worst downturn since the depression.

Overall the national rate, Illinois' rate have both gone down more than Wisconsin's.

As the chart above shows, Wisconsin is continuing to lose jobs. Illinois is ADDING jobs.

http://www.kmov.com/news/local/Illinois-unemployment-rate-drops-for-fifth-straight-month-141073423.html

Credit rating. Let's see, when you use money that should be going to homeowners who were hurt by the bank to reduce the state's debt, who's getting hurt the most.

When you refuse to fund schools adequately to artificially keep your credit rating up, who loses?

I'll keep the good schools.

http://education.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/education/high-schools/articles/2009/12/09/americas-best-high-schools-state-by-state-statistics

http://dept-education.info/2011/06/public-school-rankings/

In addition WALKER cut funding to the schools more than any other state, while at the same time mandating that the local communities couldn't do anything to offset those cuts. More bake sales anyone?

hahaha love your link...California is way up there, why? Because they have very wealthy enclaves. How is the rest of the state? Check out Californias sat/act scores. Your link just shows which states have wealthy enclaves, not overall quality of every school.

Walker did cut funding...that is how you balance a budget. But funding cuts were more than offset by gains due from employees paying 5% into their pension, 12% into their healthcare (still way below what federal employees pay) and schools having the option of not getting ripped off by having to buy WEAC health insurance. Some schools saved millions of dollars by switching to health insurance companies that gave them a competitive bid. OUR SCHOOLS ARE FUNDED ADEQUATELY.

As my link shows, from Nov to December, Wisconsin's unemployment rate went down at a faster rate than the rest of the country.

"Worst long term since the depression. Could be because this is the worst downturn since the depression."

it is bad because Obama "stimulated" the economy by giving 40% of stimulus to hire public workers instead of stimulating the private sector, because his epa passed onerous cap and trade laws, because Obamacare left businesses with too many uncertainties, etc.

Our economy is recovering despite Obama. Had we had a free market econoomy prez, our numbers would be much better.

Wait, Contessa, you said in another post that the policies passed by Walker were creating jobs in Wisconsin. Specifically you argued that RTW states create more jobs and have better chances for long term growth than union states. When you argued this I countered by showing that statistically there isn't a correlation w/ more job creation and either union or non-union states/policies. You stated that you maintained that being RTW creates more jobs in Wisconsin and that if states want to improve their economic outlook they have to start reigning in unions, especially at the state level.

You are now saying that states cannot fight against unemployment because it's due to the federal level and federal conditions.

So which one is it?

As my link shows, from Nov to December, Wisconsin's unemployment rate went down at a faster rate than the rest of the country.

LOOK AT THESE CHARTS. That's why Wisc. is employment rate is not improving, plus the fact that Dems just blocked a mining legislation that would have produced many jobs.

These two posts are incompatible. Either Wisconsin can create jobs independent of the federal government or Wisconsin cannot create jobs independent of the federal government. Which one is it?

Since Walker's disapproval rating are over 50%, care to explain that number?

20 million dollars in taxes to do a recall. If you don't like Walker, vote him out if 4 years. Libs have struck out twice with recalls. They are wasting taxpayer money. Comprende?

Didn't reply to the question.

Wait 4 years. Because the law allows a recall. Get it?

Struck out twice with recalls. Not quite. You still have FEWER Senate Republicans than you did a year ago.

So you think a legal procedure is wasting taxpayer monies because it's gouging your ox? Funny if the situation was reversed, I'm sure you would wait.

Sort of like the Republicans running fake Democrats so there would be both a primary AND a general election instead of just the general election. Did you complain about THAT waste of money? I'm sure you didn't.

Hello? I did explain it. The majorty of the people are against recalling someone because some whiny people didin't get their way. Yes, you struck out with recalls. We lost a couple of senate repubs but maintained the majority.

Just because it is a legal procedure does not mean changes don't need to be made. Let me guess. If Falk wins and dems get control of senate THEN it will be time to change the recall laws. (then it will be time for many Wisconsinites to head for warmer weather permanently)

As of last month Walker was ahead in polling:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/25/us-wisconsin-walker-idUSTRE80O2B520120125

But now it is unclear:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/73384.html

Yep. Nationally unemployment went down half a percent while Wisconsin's went down 0.3%.

You lose again. Of course since your schools are now some of the worst in the country, I can understand why you'd have that problem.

Schools some of the worst in the country???

Our schools have budgets that are now balanced. Kaukauna had a surplus due to Walker and hired more teachers thereby lowering class size. No teachers were laid off except in areas that had existing contracts already in place. All this without raising taxes.

Sorry, you lose.

"Yep. Nationally unemployment went down half a percent while Wisconsin's went down 0.3%."???????

Nov. to Dec. data...National went from 8.6% to 8.5%....a drop in unemployment of 1.7%

Nov to Dec. data...wisconsini...went from 7.3 to 7.1%.... a drop in unmeployment of 2.7%

TAke a math class please.

Reading is NOT a skill with you is it contessa? Must be those "good" Wisconsin schools.

Have ANY idea what unemployment going down BY means. Your stating the percentage difference and even there, cherry pick your numbers by using one month as opposed to using the ENTIRE chart that you cited.

http://www.wpri.org/Reports/Volume18/Vol18no2.pdf

Simply google "effect of wisconsin school budge cuts" and you'll get thousands of hits on how Walker has hamstrung the schools to balance their budgets and at the same time cut their funding by just about more than any other state in the country.

A great bunch of burger flippers you got there.

I think that taking the last set of unemployment data is most appropriate. Wisconsins unemployment numbers went down at a faster rate than the rest of the country.

"Simply google "effect of wisconsin school budge cuts" and you'll get thousands of hits on how Walker has hamstrung the schools to balance their "

Google??? ahahahahahah no bias there. Money talks and google listens. Why don't YOU tell me how Walker has hamstrung the schools.. this will be good...I'm waiting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's see. Even for you this might be easy.

Let's say this was President Obama (you understand analogies don't you, or do I have to spell it out for you). Let's say that Wisconsin had to maintain a certain level of repair on your roads. Let's say he then cut federal monies for roads by 30% to Wisconsin. Now you've got a 30% shortfall, but you still have to maintain the roads. (I haven't lost you yet, have I? I can go back if you want.) Oops. I forgot to mention that President Obama also said that Walker couldn't raise taxes on the people of Wisconsin to make up the difference. Lost you yet?

So how do you still maintain the roads, lose money that you had, can't raise money by any other means, and still maintain the roads? YOU CAN'T.

If you don't understand that, you MUST be a tea party member. They think that everything is a fantasy world where things get paid for with imaginary money.

In addition, ever hear of states' rights? If President Obama did the above, you'd be screaming about states rights.

Walker has effectively said that he's running the schools throughout the state. With that in mind, HE IS responsible for anything that happens and so far it hasn't been good.

Dog. Walker made cuts to school but the money saved by having employees pick up 5% of their pension and another 6% of their healt care, combined with the schools abilty to negotiate health care contracts with the competition kepf schools financially sound. What don't u get?

Please give examples of what happened that hasn't been good in the last year. I'm still waiting.

Walker cut funding to the schools more than ANY other state in the country. If you think a 5% and 6% change by the teachers makes up for those cuts, you're nuts, but of course you belong to the tea party. The teachers agreed to concessions BEFORE the cuts.

So EVERY teacher in Wisconsin did that? Wrong again.

If Obama had forced those type of changes on Wisconsin, you'd be absolutely out of your mind.

Of course you're the tea party.

Say goodbye to Scotty. He's history. More to the point the Republicans are going to lose their Senate majority.

Dave apologies to you.

Heat of the moment with contessa and hyperbola.

The Marquette poll includes questions about current events and issues, questions intended to vary throughout the year. And this snapshot shows Wisconsinites favor mining legislation, albeit by a slim margin.

The February poll asked Wisconsinites about the proposed Gogebic Taconite LLC open-pit iron ore mine in Ashland and Iron counties, and about their knowledge of the ongoing John Doe investigation, which has led to charges against people who worked for Walker while the governor was a Dane County executive.

Supporters of the proposed mine say the estimated 600 to 700 jobs it would bring are desperately needed for the area, where unemployment rates consistently are among the highest in the state.

Critics worry that legislation aimed at streamlining the permitting process does too little to protect water and air quality.

Fifty-two percent approve of the mine, 33 percent disapprove, 5 percent haven't heard about it, and 10 percent didn't know if they liked the proposal or not.

In Hurley, though — near where the mine would be located — Sharon Ofstad said she believes support is much higher.

As owner of Sharon's Coffee Co., Ofstad said she hears consistently positive opinions on the proposed open pit iron ore mine from locals, tourists, even her own.

Contessa has come up with probably the biggest tea party lie I've ever heard, or seen. "As owner of Sharon's Coffee Co., Ofstad said she hears consistently positive opinions on the proposed open pit iron ore mine from locals, tourists, even her own."

Yeah, tourists come to Wisconsin to see open pit iron ore mines.

And they drove down in hordes to the Gulf because they wanted to enjoy the BP oil spill.

That was from the article dog. did you read it. It is not made up.

It's all about perception. Yep, If your a public employee and are used to retiring at 50-55 on a pension paid 100% by others with a health care second to none, then you're pissed. If you are not in a union (88%) then you think it is about time they paid something into their pension and more into their health care and you are tired of unions and politicans colluding with taxpayer money while the taxpayer does not have a seat at the bargaining table. It is happening all over the country and will continue to happen. States must balance their budgets and they are finding it necessary to do so on the exhorbitant public employee beneifts or face bankruptcy like Vallejo, Ca. and soon to be Stockton, Ca. There is only so much money to go around and the fat lady is starting to sing.

This shows how out of touch with the real world you are contessa.

I'm a recruiter. I place professional people who have education comparable to teachers.

Let's see. Kerry Ingredients, Kraft Foods, Sargento, etc.

THEIR retirement plans are equal to, or better than the Wisconsin teachers. They also get paid MORE than Wisconsin teachers.

As for the teachers and the union workers, there is NOTHING stopping you from becoming one of them, except for your language and math skills, why didn't you do it?

Taxpayer doesn't have a seat at the table? HORSE MANURE. If you don't it's because you didn't vote.

Contessa like many other conservatives repeat the lie that public workers get generous salaries and fringe benefits. It is easy to sell that lie because the public has to deal with public workers on many levels of government. People hate bureaucracies because they can be frustrating. But people do not hate the police and fire departments and in reality, some bigger cities give generous salaries and fringe benefits. That is to attract people to the job.

I didn't say anyting about public workers salaries. It is their benefits that are outrageous. Retire at 65 like everyone else. Go on medicare like everyone else. Pay into your pension like everyone else. No spiking. No double dipping. etc.

Contessa we've already been over this. Public workers do retire at 65 or 67 like everyone else. But they can put in for early retirement at 55. However they get reduced benefits at the age of 55 when they do so. The private sector does the exact same thing.

Wisc. pubic workers may retire at 57 with 30 years of work and receive full benefit. Retiring early hardly loses much and they are paid this until theydie when I see a younger retired person, 9 times out of 10 they are pubic sector workers.

http://www.wisconsin.edu/hr/benefits/leave/sick.htm

http://www.wisconsin.edu/hr/benefits/retsav/

http://www.wisconsin.edu/hr/benefits/retsav/early.htm

Employees (other than protective) who retire at age 55 have a reduction of at least 9.6% or .4% per month between the ages of 55 and 57. Between the ages of 57 and normal retirement age the .4% is reduced by .00111% for each month of creditable service. Therefore, if you have 30 years of service you can retire at age 57 with no "penalty." If you have less than 30 years of service, the additional payments you receive through early retirement may make up for the amount you lose through the reduction. The chart below shows the percentage of the base monthly retirement benefit (For Annuitant's Life Only) that is payable with various combinations of age and service.

Many persons are unaware that the WRS retirement benefit is adjusted each year as investment returns dictate. Your retirement benefit reflects this adjustment beginning May 1 of each year. Persons who are in the variable fund after retirement will see an annual adjustment (negative or positive) to that portion of the annuity as well as a fixed adjustment. Increases are not guaranteed

Okay first off Contessa you're admitting here that you lied or at least misrepresented information earlier. You said that people retire at the age of 50-55 w/o any benefit impact. That is not true. You then revised your statement to say that no it's at age 57 if they've worked for 30 years that they get to retire w/o any benefit impact. So let's just be clear here: no one is retiring at age 50-55 w/o taking a benefit impact. That is a lie or otherwise is a misrepresentation of the truth by your OWN admission.

Secondly you are misunderstanding that the above quotes are saying. They are not saying that there is no penalty inherently. What they are saying is that the WRS payment system enacts a penalty that takes place per month but that this combines w/ your social security payments. A person who has put in 30 years worth of payments into the WRS system who combines that amount w/ his early social security benefits will net out as having no penalty. The penalties are still applied to his paychecks, but it nets out being that he's making the same amount he would be making w/o a penalty. This isn't to say that anyone at the age of 57 can retire. If you only have 20 years in the system and you retire you will take a HUGE hit on your retirement benefits. If you have 29 years you will take a hit. You've completely misrepresented this information.

That doesn't make any sense contessa. So you are saying you don't have a representative government?

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

So are you saying money doesn't not influence politics?

Please tell me you are not that obtuse?

Computer is getting slow (happens everytime I am on a liberal site...probably can only handle so many facts at once) Therefore, I will try again at another time when the pipes are faster.

It's all about perception. Yep, If your a public employee and are used to retiring at 50-55 on a pension paid 100% by others with a health care second to none, then you're pissed. If you are not in a union (88%) then you think it is about time they paid something into their pension and more into their health care and you are tired of unions and politicans colluding with taxpayer money while the taxpayer does not have a seat at the bargaining table. It is happening all over the country and will continue to happen. States must balance their budgets and they are finding it necessary to do so on the exhorbitant public employee beneifts or face bankruptcy like Vallejo, Ca. and soon to be Stockton, Ca. There is only so much money to go around and the fat lady is starting to sing. - Contessa61

You are so misinformed it's pathetic! I'm embarrassed to know you're a fellow Wisconsinite. If you'll take a moment to get your nose out of Scott Walker's arse and turn off your stupid-tube and think for yourself you would realize that most government employees do not make what their counter parts in the private sector do. The money paid into the WRS and for health insurance made up for the gap. Basically making working for the state pretty equivalent with the private sector. Now that the equilibrium has been shot to hell you can sit back and wait for the services you rely on to go down the tubes. It's not going to happen over night because there are still good, hard working people employed by the state. But over time basic services will degrade due to the lack of a good and qualified work force.

All you retrogressives who only parrot what Fox news and Walker cronies tell you to took a big hit thanks to the economic crash, but rather than using your energy to build yourselves back up, you wasted it on trying desperately to tear the government employees down. You like to call Dems whiners who didn't get their way, but it's quite obvious you haven't looked in the mirror lately.

As for retirement, 50-55 speaks only of law enforcement and fire fighters. Go a head and shoot them down too, that what you and peole like you do best. Everyone else must wait until they have at least 30 in for full benefits just like any where else.

You're a waste of Wisconsin's good clean air.

PLEASE BE FAIR AND SUSPEND TOBY FOR 48 HOURS. HIS POST IS FILLED ITH NAME-CALLING.

HERE TOBY

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-03-01-1Apublicworkers01_ST_N.htm

In order for your statement to be true contessa that the taxpayer is not represented at the negotiating table that would mean that you don't believe your government is representative. Even if you say that the public should have a say in what the union workers get that would still mean that you'd be doing so through your elected government. That statement makes absolutely no sense. I am asking you to explain it since it doesn't make sense. I also wouldn't be attacking other people when you just called me obtuse when I simply asked you to clarify a statement that doesn't make sense. Seems an overreaction on your part. How exactly could the public have a seat at the negotiation table? How does that work? It doesn't make sense.

Additionally how is it that Wisconsin unions are causing so many problems when the BLS says that Wisconsin unions only represent around 14% of your workforce?

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9V_9wmE8nyUJ:www.bls.gov/ro5/unionwi.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESinOEd2l0ER1TPXlvrEJawznrP_IAaMQXN_Td74ogP5OGMeJiNXuqYGAmXtiYispbg-DxbrU9j-zfu-QmEsN1j17l120IqwlrkvCNJR-A4LZZOFExK3TobGyizDniaR31t4I4vg&sig=AHIEtbS1gRO-plOBPFvOHisqK9OD2QSukg&pli=1