It is a way to get pity votes... I mean really, what is she going to say.. play the I'm sick so pity me vote? You can't really go around telling everyone your an alchoholic and want to represent them now... can you? and who destroys a sign and puts in in the persons recycling bin. dumb liar

According to Darling's press release, there were 'multiple calls to the police' reporting the stolen/damaged signs. Do you really need Darling to publish police reports to go along with the story as 'proof'?

Is that an anti-Darling bias you are showing there Terri?

Darling (or her campaign) didn't create that list of 'included' cities...

Terri: It's not that Darling didn't want to mention Milwaukee, it's that I only mentioned the portion of her district that is in the Patch coverage area. Her district includes about 10 other communities that I didn't mention -- Germantown, Mequon, etc.

that was my thought. plus, who needs to raise a million dollars for a senate campain unless you are worried about loosing.

@bob McBride II...LOL, You better anchor that Huber sign well; it's so rare I may have to have it for my collection.

I'm thinking about trying to make one, although I'm not too handy with the graphics. I was thinking of using the tagline "A name we can all recall"

Lyle for once the tables have turned and I must say your comment is a stretch!

@Nate...If she loses who else is she going to blame? Maybe her recounts will pull the election out of the bag for her.

Funny how you seem to have no issue accepting 'Pants on Fire' Pasch's overdramatized claims about Darling/Walker as gospel truth, but something as common as campaign yard sign destruction requires "real proof" before you believe it...

Well yes, she had them printed at a union shop.

Thumbs up to both John and Nate. Well done, sirs.

Isn't that lovely, at a 4th of July parade, no class. Mob mentality!

Classy, very classy.

I'd like to know what's up with the "We are Wisconsin" folks. I had one ring my doorbell last night (after having left a hang tag on the door earlier) and after explaining to him that I was perfectly satisfied with the "direction Wisconsin is going these days" and that I'd like him to leave me alone, he insisted on standing on my porch and talking at me through the screen door. I finally had to shut the inner door to get him out of my face.

It's the same routine with these folks on the phone. You can tell them you're not interested and they just keep talking and talking over you until finally you just hang up on them.

If it was just one of them once in awhile I'd chalk it up to getting the bad apple, but they all seem this way. It's like they think that if they can just keep you listening to them long enough, they'll win you over. I don't know who's running that show, but they may want to reconsider this tactic, if in fact that's indeed what it is.

You don't need to stand by Alberta to be told that.

Only intelligent comment made in this listing. And yes, she is desperate for the attention and free press. That's why we received campaign literature back in April, before the recall was even authorized. She has lots of money behind her to push forward her party rhetoric. Alberta no longer has much relevance otherwise.

"I want everyone to remember that after the elections, no matter how they turn out, that we will have to find ways to bridge the differences and come together as a single community." - yeah: like our new Governor Walker so tactfully and skillfully, with great vision to the future, united our State so effectively with his "Love me, love my dogma-no room for compromise" behavior! Ha! What a joke! We're now MORE DIVIDED and POLARIZED than we have ever been!

This is totally where she wants to be, a poor pathetic victim. As to the outside interests, what about the nasty Club for Growth commercial they are running or the robo-calls from the American Federation for Children or the ALEC "toolbox" that she and Governor Walker are using to dismantle freedom in Wisconsin. Only a person who can't explain her side of the real issues would worry about signs being stolen by the outside interests. Really, I am not buying this load of crap.

If that's what you think Ryan's plan will be like, then I was pretty accurate with my 'overdramatization' comment. I'm not sure why Ryan is even being made an issue as his plan is at the federal level, Darling and Pasch are running at the state level.

What about Pasch's claim Darling proposed an amendment that would allow fired cops, suspected of rape and other serious crimes to be paid until their appeals are exhausted? See the 'Stunning Reversal' article on this site. Note that Darling's amendment was to roll back the law that dealth with cops fired for rule infractions, not for being 'suspected of serious crimes' as Pasch claims.

Getting back to the issue at hand, the press release indicated that several reports were made to the police regarding the stolen/vandalized signs. Why is it so hard to believe that someone would steal campaign signs? There seem to be reports of it during every election. In fact, before this article was posted, I think I read someone comment on one of these threads where they observed that some Darling yard signs were missing...

I apologize. I didn't realize that Patch was an online news service that simply read and repeated press releases from WisPolitics and JSOnline. If that's their "niche" reporting I would advise people just read the other sources.

Get real Keith, if you got death threats you would report them to the Police. Even if you got several and it turned out to be just one nut case liberal- would that really make you feel better?

You're not tracking are you. The GOP made a big deal over "death threats" but could never tell you how many, just like now that Roberta can't tell us exactly how many signs are missing. Looks like this is replacing the real issues Roberta can't seem to address.

You're complaining because the "GOP" never issued a statement documenting the exact number of death threats received? The news sources published the texts of at least two of the threats sent--they certainly weren't fabrications of anyone's imagination.

Do you honestly think that death threats against any elected official aren't a 'big deal'?

And the problems our state and nation are facing are much bigger than a bunch of public sector union whiners. 18,000 more jobs in June, 9.2% unemployment rate, weakest job growth of private sectors since May 2010! Obama's plans failed. Over reaching government regulations, huge deficits and massive tax proposals are killing our country. Time for a new approach and its time to try the Walker, Alberta, Ryan, Johnson plan....

LOL

Consider the situation. Lawn signs have been out for months without any incidents. Then all of a sudden several reports are made where the signs are stolen or vandalized. Certainly it could be a coincidence that all the individuals involved in stealing the signs happened to choose to do it on the same day, but there's definitely a possibility that it was a coordinated effort to target the signs on a specific day.

I know right!

CowDung - Yeah, it takes a coordinated effort to mess with a total of 4 yard signs as reported in Maley's late breaking news update. Notice the change in the title of the article?

How many 'greedy business owners' to these public sector employees work for?

If you really "need some protection from some of the greedy business owners and Republicans who could care less for anything but the bottom line", how can you not belong to a union?

I'm not trying to say that you are lying about not being a union member, I'm trying to point out that if one truly "needs some protection from some of the greedy business owners and Republicans who could care less for anything but the bottom line", how is it possible that you can succeed in a career without being a union member?

Think about it for a minute--why do you think companies are choosing to outsource and downsize? I bet it has something to do with the high labor costs that tend to go along with union labor. It isn't a 'concerted effort' to break all unions--the unions are just pricing their members out of their jobs...

So why shouldn't executives take pay cuts just like workers to be "competitive." Either they all do it or nobody does it. Can you please stand up for yourself dung?

@CowDung...The only reason that companies outsource is to add more to the bottom line. It is a utilitarian decision. Companies are, for the most part, amoral entities whose only responsibility is to the share holders' ROI. Overall the unions have had very little to do with companies moving production off shore, Higher labor costs in general contribute to the issue, but more importantly; foreign countries have subsidized energy costs, and have extremely relaxed environmental regulations. Probably the biggest reasons for manufacturing moving to China and India is companies wanted to get in on the ground floor to participate in the two largest potential markets in the world. China insisted that if companies wanted to participate they would have to share technology and/or set up operations in China. During my working career I was involved with this manufacturing base transition until I concentrated on "green products". Vicki is right in what she is claiming. Finally one last point; by the time of the Reagan Revolution, unions were already on a steep decline and ceased to be a major factor.

During the Reagan years, foreign cars and Korean steel were the biggest factors in the decline of the private sector unions. USSteel couldn't compete pricewise with the cheaper steel being imported and soon the mills started shutting down. Pittsburgh in the 1970-1980 time frame was way different than it is today.

You are correct about China. My company has had to set up a factory there in order to sell products in that country.

Keith:

Executives can and some do take pay cuts to keep competitive, but it is often easier and more profitable to add to the bottom line by moving jobs overseas. The way the system tends to work is that the board of directors tends to reward the CEOs for making good business moves, like moving manufacturing facilities overseas to reduce costs...

Lyle:

Another factor in the outsourcing game is that it is much easier to replace 100 quality assembly line worker than 1 quality CEO.

@CowDung...The general quality of CEOs has declined over the last thirty years. Moving companies to take advantage of lower production rates don't prove the CEO is quality. I call it picking low hanging fruit. Recent reports show that the average CEO of a Fortune 500 only lasts a little over six years before being replaced. That's down from 10 years at the beginning of the 1990s. A quality CEO is able to overcome the business issues by coming up with ways to make a reasonable return while still being able to create a good company to work for. When I first entered into business we had long term strategic plans that covered 5, 10, & 20 years. Our tactical plans focused on 1 & 2 years. By the time I left, a strategic plan was 1 year and tactical planning covered only the next quarter. Business ownership, business management and their influence on government have decidedly put us in our current position.

If the tenures of CEOs are trending shorter these days, isn't that a sign that the 'good old boys club' isn't as strong as you think it is? It might also be a sign that they are more often being held accountable for their business decisions and must actually 'earn' their high salaries...

@CowDung...The general consensus of institutional investors is that CEOs are being compensated way beyond the benefit they provide for the company. Yes the situation is changing, but it is still well out of balance.

Lyle,

So what are you suggesting be done? Have the government put a cap on pay for CEOs? Tax them at a higher rate? You know as well as I do that even if you tax those offending CEOs 100% percent of their pay, it would only make a very small and temporary dent in the deficit. It's along the lines of Obama railing about private jets. Sounds good, appeases the masses, but in reality doesn't address the problem.

BTW - I heard Obama's "speech" after today's announcement of very disappointing employment figures for June. For those who haven't heard it, I can sum it up for you in short order "Umm...I got nothin'".

@Bob McBride II...Where did I say the government should cap CEO compensation. That is a function of the market place and the board of directors. Much of the way corporate executives have figured out how to be compensated so they don't get hit with the taxes. The feds and states should be able to close those loopholes. I would support an upper income bracket tax rate of 50%. We would only have to decide at what level of adjusted income would be set. It's obvious that we need to go through the tax codes and change them removing all the loopholes. One thing I would support is that the maximum number of deductions should be only 4. Also I would fully support the phasing out of the mortgage interest deduction. However, I want to see the inheritance tax at 25% on estates over $5.0 million. Capital gains should be taxed at regular income rates. Cut off all corporate welfare and reduce federal income taxes by implementing a Fed. VAT.

VAT taxes penalize companies (think those that build yachts in WI, for instance) that cater to high ticked items. Plugging loopholes, while it sounds good, generally involves creating other loopholes. The rich didn't get rich by letting something like the IRS get in their way. Again this is all stuff that sounds good.

In all the things you mentioned, not one of them addresses something that's an element of confronting debt during a time of dwindling revenues in every other venue than the government, be it business, large or small, or one's personal life - cost containment.

@Bob McBride II...Bob, you finally brought up one of my favorite subjects; personal cost containment. I'm a child of the "Greatest Generation" and children of the Great Depression. These people were not part of the "Consumer Generation". They understood the value of hard work and saving. They didn't buy something just to have it, they needed it first. How are we going to teach cost containment to generations of people who have been taught to consume, consume, consume. Beginning in the 1970s wage growth grew at a slower rate than inflation. People were willingly convinced to buy now and pay later, but you had to have it. Who was behind the push for high consumerism? Last time I looked, easy credit and consumption has been pushed by our free enterprise system. Now the debt needs to be paid and 60 years of credit spending has got to come to an end. What would fuel the recovery, if people started to consume again; but that's not going to happen, too many have learned their lesson and now are following the same plan as my parents, buy it only if you need it. Business is currently sitting on over $1.7 trillion of cash waiting for the consumer to start spending again. But, I ask; what are they to pay for the consumption with? What's wrong with this picture?

I was referring to cost containment on the part of the government. You've addressed numerous taxation methods for increasing revenue.

When you're running a deficit to the point where you're not doing much more than servicing the debt, you've got to start cutting back. Businesses of all sizes and shapes and people in their personal lives do that. They stop buying stuff they don't need and they start looking for efficiencies that allow for cost reductions. Our government rarely, if ever, does that. That's got to stop.

We're way beyond the point where "sticking it to the rich" is going to fix the problems we have now - not that it ever would have, frankly. It's time to start a system wide program of cuts that force the various agencies to find those efficiencies if they won't on their own. If the people in place now in those agencies can't or won't, then they need to go. We can't play around with this much longer and expect not to have a total collapse sometime in the near future.

@Bob McBride II...Bob, why is always government at fault? They are only a reflection of the population.

Lyle,

They're certainly not a reflection of the population at present. People have taken pay cuts, they've cut back on their expenditures by eliminating the unnecessary, made better and longer use of what they have and been more selective in their purchases of the necessities.

Why should government be any different? Are you suggesting that, because government has the right to tax more or print more when it needs money, it's under no obligation to use our money in the most efficient and cost effective way possible.

It's pretty plain to see that you don't even want to address that issue. Rather, you're all for increasing revenue at the expense of taxpayers, while remaining unaccountable to them as to how that revenue is utilized.

@Bob McBride...Bob, it's not that I don't want to deal with the issue of government cost containment, but I also want to keep others accountable. Your idea of government cost containment is to eliminate waste and reduce inefficiency and I share that. I want to go even further by changing our foreign policy to reduce the size of our military and restructure our weapons systems. We have found ourselves locked into two unfunded wars along with a failed War on Drugs that has been around since Nixon. I want to cut those programs before I start to cut the major entitlements. The entitlement programs can have a great deal done to them without cutting the heart out of them. To go to a single payer healthcare system would eliminate one of the most disastrous and costly systems we have. Until such time as we are able to make the structural changes to government, we need revenue to operate on. The goal to bring balance to government is to rationalize and contain costs while assuring that we have enough revenue. Your side claims that all it will take is to cut government expenditures and the other side just wants to increase revenues. It will take both to solve the long term problem.

Lyle, nobody is proposing gutting entitlements, despite how you may want to spin it. I've seen nothing proposed that even comes close to doing that, when compared to the kinds of cuts those in the private sector have been experiencing for years now. And the source of revenue for these expenditures is the private sector.

One side wants to look at government expenditures and make reductions where possible prior to taking on more debt, and the other side just wants to levy more taxes and push us further and further into debt without seriously looking at reducing expenditures.

I'm with the former. Everyone who understands where we're headed economically in this country should be. Those who aren't tend to have a vested personal interest in avoiding reductions and concentrating on increasing taxes.

@Bob McBride II...Bob, what do you mean no one proposing gutting entitlements? Ryan and Walker both are proposing just that. The block grants that the state gets for medicaid and W2 , Walker's budget is already either phasing them out or significantly reducing them while pumping more and more money to the DOT and business. All I am saying is that we need to downsize government and increase revenues. Right now do you want to deal with the US becoming insolvent? One of the things that is being discussed right now is that Obama will put SSI and Medicare on the line to get a new debt ceiling limit. Can you not say that the entitlement sacrifices are being used to gain a compromise. It doesn't make any sense to continue the Bush Tax cuts for the wealthiest and expect entitlement recipients to bare the brunt of the Republican's extreme no-tax ideology.

They're not guttings, Lyle. They're reductions. No one is going to be left out in the cold holding the bag. Is it possible some folks might have to contribute more than they had in the past? Possibly. As we all are.

Frankly, the use of the word entitlements is misleading. Most of them are not entitlements. They're benefits granted by the government and, as such, they can be adjusted as necessary when economic conditions dictate.

The compromises you mention would not even be offered as they are now had the Republicans not held fast on the debt ceiling. That's what it takes, Lyle. One party has the you-know-whats it takes to make the hard decisions and back them up, the other just makes promises it can't keep and then blames the opposition when it can't do so or when it is ultimately forced to deal with results of years of over-promising and over-spending.

4 signs? This is breaking news over 4 signs?

Just like the death threat stories. Blown up over nothing.

Many manufacturing workers are making way more than a 'living wage'.

The reality of the global economy is that our labor costs tend to be much higher than those of other countries. If a company expects to compete, labor cost is a big factor. It won't save any jobs by keeping wages high and having the company go out of business. Perhaps the Unions should use some of the millions of dollars they collect in dues and put it toward retraining and/or education programs to help displaced workers find new jobs...

The public sector unions are even less necessary. Our government doesn't have the same profit motive or corporate competition to worry about.

@CowDung...What a bunch of tripe! I am sure you are making more than just a living wage. Why is it OK for you and not for manufacturing workers. I always found it satisfying when my employees were making more than a living wage and in many circumstances I had sales people who made more than I did. I have never resented anybodies wages. You are continually comparing apples to oranges. The US has been under attack from foreign governments restricting trade policies and direct subsidies to business, let alone currency manipulation. In many ways our own companies have joined into this. After Americans are no longer to be able to afford even foreign produced products, the only thing we will have to look forward to is second world status; another failed empire destroyed from within. A fact is that most CEOs don't earn their exorbitant compensation. The people sitting on their boards are buddies and the CEO is sitting on their boards. It is truly a "ole boys club". Institutional investors are putting pressure on this arrangement as I write. This kind of commercial incest has been extremely destructive.

I have no issue with people making a living wage or having them earn more than I do. What I take issue with is that people are somehow entitled to a certain wage level independent of the actual value of their work.

One of the effects of the global economy is that unskilled labor has gotten way more plentiful. The law of supply and demand pushes wages downward. Pushing wages higher than the value of the work makes it more difficult to a business to succeed in the global marketplace.

Please explain this 'destruction of the middle class' to me.

I am part of the middle class, and I think it's a great thing that my property taxes aren't going to be going up by hundreds of dollars this year. I like the fact that government spending is getting under control. I like that tax incentives are going to be given to companies that hire people this year. I don't feel any threat of being destroyed by the Darling campaign, I rather think that the changes being made are long overdue...

@CowDung...I know you are smarter than to ask how the middle class is being destroyed. This is a fact that more and more families are being pushed out of the middle class by unemployment and underemployment. Now, I don't think you, as a middle class, have really felt the impact of the "Great Recession". Even if you wind up paying more taxes you are not going to be pushed out of the middle class. I don't know your particular circumstances, but having followed you for close to six months, you are not hurting. I know quire a bit about Vicki Bennett since she is one of my neighbors. She started life in a family of very modest means and has pulled herself up by her bootstraps earning at least two Masters Degrees. She has held private employment positions including the position of Executive Assistant to the President and CEO of one of the biggest corporations in Wisconsin. Nothing was ever handed to this woman and she has remained honest and caring throughout all of her trials and tribulations. She has a lot going for her, including the fact she has been married to the same man for over 40 years. It would be nice to generally know your background, but you don't even identify yourself with your true name.

How exactly are Darling/Walker pushing people out of the middle class? Their policies are designed to improve employment in the state--that's usually considered a good thing for the under and unemployed.

I am sorry, but these 'destruction of the middle class' claims sound more like overdramatized campaign rhetoric than actual fact.

As far as my background, I am an East Shorewood resident, but far from 'elite'--I still work for a living and will continue to do so for the forseeable future.

I have earned a Bachelor's degree and am a licensed Professional Engineer. I am not a native of Wisconsin, I came here for college 20-something years ago and have been here ever since. I have two children enrolled at Atwater.

I don't think that anything was handed to me either, and I believe myself to be a rather honest and caring person as well.

@CowDung...By creating such a "business friendly" environment, there is no counter balance to business abuses. As it is now, if you don't want to work here, don't let the door hit you in the backside on your way out. Work and jobs are in such short supply that business can get away with just about anything they want to. We are not supporting new business start-ups, but we are trying to steal businesses away from other states, a quick race to the bottom. Even if we give away the store to get a business to move here, what's to keep them from moving again when they get a better offer, NONE! What Walker and Darling is selling is old trickle down economics, it didn't work 30 years ago and it doesn't work now. All it does is pad the pockets of Walker and Darling's wealthy buddies.

Lyle:

What 'counterbalances' are being eliminated by Walker/Darling offering tax incentives for new hires or business expansions?

@CowDung...Thanks for the background. As a PE you have had to put your time in to earn that position. Your profession will always have value. Now compare yourself with someone who is a middle class production worker who has been able to live a middle class lifestyle and is no faced with unemployment or underemployment. If all of a sudden all demands for PEs went overseas and you were forced to change employment that didn't utilize your skills, wouldn't you be upset? Wouldn't you question the company managers who made such a decision only to be told that they can hire PEs at 40% of what they are paying you? I have been blessed to have some very talented engineers and PEs work for me. I had a personal bias that I would never hire an engineer right out of engineering school but they had to have at least 5 years in the field before I would hire them. Subsequently my engineers always cost me more, but in the long run they were worth it, especially in terms of MEs and EEs.

@CowDung...It is not the tax incentives that are the problem it is the fact that by finally breaking the big unions, which fund Dems. and Dems look out for worker interests; the Republicans will continue to dominate the Legislature creating statutes that protect business practice against the workers. He (Walker) is already reconfiguring the State's labor and arbitration board. This is precisely why I have supported a balanced legislature to prevent one side or the other from coming in and creating havoc.

Lyle:

Certainly it is upsetting when businesses send jobs overseas, but that's pretty much a reality that we will all have to face eventually. Already, Indian engineers can be had for a fraction of what I am earning, and someday I might have to find a different career. I don't spend my time waiting for that day to come and blaming management for making the decision. Instead, I do my best to keep increasing my value to the company and make it more difficult for management to send my job overseas. Granted, it is easier to do that in the engineering field than in manufacturing jobs. That's why I made the comment before about having the unions invest some of that dues money into training and education programs that can help their members increase the value of their work and ride through the uncertainties of the global economy.

@CowDung...Your idea of the unions investing money into training programs have merit. However, I would be much more supportive of our public schools training students to be job ready rather than college ready. I am a strong proponent of overhauling our public education system. When I was an employer It took me a long time to train a worker and then once trained have them go elsewhere. I believe in at least two tracks from Middle School onward. When I was in public high school close to fifty years ago we had more than one tract. We had the fewest number of students in the college tract and the greatest in the vocational tract. I am not stating that we should reinstate that system, but we are not training our students to be job ready. The northern Europeans have very good programs. We wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel to do it.

Lyle:

I can agree with a retooling of the public school system. My high school had a very popular vo-tech program, and many that chose that route went on to have successful careers.

I think a big problem with schools is that career counseling comes way too late. I hear far too often from kids entering college that they have no idea what they want to do as a career or what they want to study. I think that identifying one's aptitudes and interests as early as possible and helping them plan their education accordingly would be a valuable change to our current school programs. Certainly attitudes and desires change as children go through their teens, but the lack of any sort of a 'life plan' is certainly something that can limit their options.

Lyle Ruble & CowDung - Great conversation and great ideas. Your conversation brought the level of this article up to 'intellectual.'

CowDung, I think you're on to something about our schools. Grades mean NOTHING, yet parents, students, and teachers view success by the grade received on a test or a paper. I think so many kids would be happier and more successful following a program similar to what you suggested, especially in the inner-city. I know I would have been much more inspired to attend class if I could focus my education on my strengths. I never studied in high school and copied all of my homework from friends. I didn't develop a true drive and self-motivation until I was able to focus my education on my interests in the latter of the college years. Many kids are better off with a grade-based education and need that competition to succeed. It will take a lot to transform the current American education system, but I agree that it is time to revamp.

@Ima Hippee...It's not unusual that the blog will start on one topic and move onto what's really on people's minds. There is no doubt that campaign signs have been vandalized. Is it worthy of breaking news and all this attention, I think not. It happens during every campaign.

As far as complaining about CEO pay; you need a dose of reality. They are out of line and ridiculous. Everyone blames the government and workers for the mess this countries in, but we all know it is business and the financial industry that's really responsible. The decisions that business have been making for the last 40 years with support from corrupted government legislators and regulators is destroying our economy and putting the working middle class in jeopardy. No whining, just facts.
CEOs are not limited to the right or the left. Amorality isn't the purview of one side ot the other. By the way Vicki and I both live in Shorewood.

@Unions_NO...Tell me when we get to the place where everyone has equal OPPORTUNITY.

As a conservative Union No- I am quite ashamed of your rhetoric. Take a walk in poverty for a day or so Union No. Based on many of my party's opinions here I am definitely leaning Pasch. Could it be that you Union- No that stole the signs yourself to fabricate a story?

@Jay Sykes...That 1.5% that exercised their rights as shareholders will be far better off than the 98.5% who did not. It is the institutional investors who will have to push the Dodd-Frank to begin to get control of the new robber barons.

@Lyle Ruble... I am surprised, based on the discussion on excessive executive pay, that more compensation plans were not rejected by the shareholders(owners of the company). These statistics say, much to my astonishment, that the CEO's are not overpaid.

Mr. Marley forget that people go online.

The issue isn't the cost of the signs, the issue is that people would purposely and deliberately go onto someone's property and remove or destroy campaign signs. Does your side really have such an issue with free expression that you can't respect one's right to have a sign supporting the person you don't? How many signs have to be removed before someone has the 'right' to ask people to stop?

@Cow Dung, are you being obtuse on purpose? FOUR signs is not an issue. There is no coordinated attack on Alberta Darling signs. According to the police, this is not an issue. You have no facts to back up your claim "Does your side really have such an issue with free expression that you can't respect one's right to have a sign supporting the person you don't?" --since the culprits haven't been caught--you have no idea who did this. Could be the rowdy teenage kids in the neighborhood or even Darling supporters (gasp!) trying to make the "other" side look bad? My advice to you is to get a real problem to worry about, like what the impact of the budget will be on the Shorewood schools and your property values (since you now say you are from Shorewood--last time I thought you said Glendale. My mistake.) or guns in public places due to the new conceal/carry law supported by Alberta Darling.

Dung, bet you at least four Pasch signs have been stolen or destroyed. But guess what. The only difference is we don't whine about it.

Beth:

I don't know where you ever heard me claim to be from Glendale. I've spoken quite a bit on the Shorewood school budget threads and have stated before that I have kids in the Shorewood public schools.

Yes, it might have been rowdy teenagers that stole the signs. Why is everyone on your side getting so worked up about Darling's press release on the stolen campaign signs?

Yes Bob, we heard you the last 17 times you declared yourself to be a "moderate conservative"...

Are you seriously choosing to not support a candidate because he bought $300 bottles of wine at a restaurant? I wonder what kind of Obama drinks--are you sure he still "represents" you?

He's probably shrugged it all off.

I wasn't the one demanding "real proof" or accusing her of 'making stuff up' when Darling made her statement about the signs...

Beth:

I'm still waiting for that "real proof" to back up Pasch's attack on Darling falsely accusing her of putting forward an amendment to allow police officers suspected of "very serious offenses like drunk driving, domestic abuse, and even rape" to continue to be paid until all appeals have been exhausted...

I am sorry, Mr Dung, I didn't think that you really needed proof of Alberta's flip flop on the pay for fired officers discussion. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/jun/28/alberta-darling/pay-fired-milwaukee-police-officers-Darling-does-/
"Darling acknowledged she sought a veto of an amendment she co-sponsored." So it was rated a FULL FLOP--quite the rarity. The real question is why is she supporting and/or writing legislation without doing her research? We all know why, don't we? She did virtually the same thing with conceal/carry--voted yes and then offered up a stricter amendment later. Why not do it in committee? She is the co-chair of the JFC? She's one of the most powerful people in the legislature. She could have offered compromises or solutions to reflect the wishes of all the taxpayers in her district. She could have shown some leadership, but instead she follows the Party Line no matter how much damage it does.

Beth:

It isn't the Flip Flop that I asked about. I was talking about Pasch's claim about the "officers suspected of "very serious offenses like drunk driving, domestic abuse, and even rape" and Darling's proposed amendment.

Darling's amendment had nothing to do with officers suspected of serious crimes, yet Pasch states that it does. The amendment, according to the Politifact you posted, was to address officers fired for rules infractions, not "serious crimes".

If you would have gone to the 'Stunning Reversal' article I referred you to, you would have seen that I posted that same Politifact article as evidence of Pasch's lie about Alberta's proposed amendment.

@Cow Dung, I misunderstood your question. I think that this answers your question:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/123145458.html
I think that you are hung up with the semantics, Rep. Pasch said, "suspected of"--not charged with...Chief Flynn says that almost all dismissals are for rules infractions(not the actual crimes of drunk driving, rape and domestic abuse--which by the way would be pretty hard to do while working) and always for cause. Funny, how you can be so hard on Sandy when you readily accept that Alberta "misspoke" about something or misunderstood the intent--even on this subject. Remember, she changed her mind.

Pasch is indeed playing a game of semantics. The cops in question aren't being fired for being 'suspected of' serious offenses like "drunk driving, domestic abuse, and even rape", but Pasch intentionally makes it sound like they are...

I haven't received any replies from Pasch for the e-mails I have sent her. Should I be working to recall her because of it? If she isn't replying to my e-mails, it is obvious that she is out of touch and it isn't possible for her to represent me in any meaningful way...

At least you are consistent. Personally, I think that not getting replies to e-mails is a stupid reason to cite for recalling a candidate, but if that's the way you want to play, then that is your right...

@Bewildered...Shalom Aleichem, Sorry, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck; guess what - it's a duck. I don't about you but I've talked to enough survivors who recount attitudes and rhetoric just like WFB Mike.

Does anyone think WFB Mike's wife should represent us on the Whitefish Bay Civic Foundation?

Here is their mission... http://www.wfbcivicfoundation.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=5

I mean really now....