Welcome, if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or subscribe to our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!

(h/t: Charlie Sykes for bringing this up on his radio show)

This coming weekend is the US Bank Golf Championship at Brown Deer Golf Course –link-. As a promotional feature, the Championship held a long drive challenge for area celebrities on Tuesday. Two of the celebrities involved in the event were State Senator Alberta Darling and her opponent in the upcoming race, Democrat Sheldon Wasserman.

Here is an overview of Charlie’s and his listener’s comments:

Alberta, who is over 60 years old, out-drove Sheldon 153 yards to 135 yards. She kicked his butt. Normally this won’t be a big deal except for one thing…

A while back, The State Senate Democratic Committee in Wisconsin spread rumors that Alberta was too sick, too feeble, and not fit enough to run against Sheldon and shouldn’t continue in political office. They lied that she was so weak that she wouldn’t be able to knock on any doors during this campaign season. When confronted, Wasserman claimed that, as a doctor, he would never say anything so vile about a cancer survivor. But the fact is that Democrats did spread false rumors about the health of a breast cancer survivor, and it was a sleazy, nasty thing that their finger prints were all over. And then, of course, they lied about spreading the lie. “Citing health reasons,” Democrats lied, “Darling recently admitted that she wouldn’t be able to knock on any doors this cycle.”

When you spread rumors that your opponent is too frail and feeble to campaign, make sure she doesn’t have the strength to out-drive you.

From everything I understand, Alberta was upset that she didn’t get her best shot either. She didn’t think a 150 yard drive was that good for her.

Also to be noted, I logged on to the DSCC WI web page to see if they were still stupid enough to leave the release they wrote about her health. Instead I found a rather lame poll bashing Alberta…

–UPDATE–
Mark Belling brought up this issue on his Late Afternoon Show. Dowload part five of the podcast, it’s in the very begining. Belling explained slimy acts the Democrats did to spread lies about Alberta’s health, enouraging lobbiests to stay away from her. Belling called Darling one of the most phyiscally fit people he knew and that she did pilates more often that Wasserman scratches his back. Listen to the first 5 minutes of the podcast to hear everything Belling had to say on the circulating story.
I just wish he would have mentioned gop3 outright

Right now, Brett Favre is probably the only man in the world that is ‘readjusting’ his positions more often than Barak Obama. Every day it’s a new story or excuse on why Brett decided to hang it up or why he thinks he should play again.

My personal opinion on the issue is Brett Favre should not be wearing a Packer jersey come September, not because his asking for release makes him a traitor, or that he’s throwing Packer Nation under the bus, but because it’s time for a the team to move in a new direction, which should continue to focus on youth. Brett Favre is now a distraction to the team and is going to cause more harm than good to the organization. Though I would prefer a trade, I think that is impossible and his unconditional release is the best thing for both parties. Brett can’t be traded because he’s owed $39 million on the last three years of his contract and there aren’t a whole lot of teams out there that Favre would want to go to (a.k.a. a Super Bowl contender) where he would start and could afford him. However, if the Packers could trade #4, I don’t think it would be too hard to get a second or third round pick for him.

The last thing on the Packers execs mind should be to allow Brett to be welcomed back with open arms, since the Packers have allowed Brett to become the single biggest distraction in the NFL. Yes, he’s a bigger distraction that T.O. and Randy Moss… probably combined. If the team decides to bring him back, they’ll be faced with a quarterback that will probably quit on the team mid-season if the team starts off 2-5. They’ve invested a lot of time in Aaron Rodgers and its evident that that the team is committed to having Rodgers be the starting quarterback. I’m not saying he’ll be able to lead the team like Brett, I’ll reserve that honor for Brian Brohm, but it’s time to move in a new direction, if for nothing more than the truth that comeback or not, Brett is at the end of his career. Ted Thompson is the type of person that values youth in an organization and the last thing the team needs is a 38 year old Brett Favre, that can’t make up his mind to play or not, to take away snaps from a younger player that deserves a shot. If the Packer brass is stupid enough to bring back Favre this season, all of Packer Nation will have to go through this same process again next off season and the process will drag itself our further, while other capable quarterbacks are forced to wait.

Am I the only one that remembers when Brett slapped Javon Walker around for not honoring his contract and threatening to hold on and demanding to be traded? Three years later Brett becomes the whiney boy that isn’t having fun so he wants to take his ball and go elsewhere. Well I’m sure Javon needs someone to go to the LA clubs with now.

Many other quarterbacks have tried to revive their diminishing careers after the teams that they made their careers established they did not want them. Joe Montana went to Kansas City, Warren Moon had to go through Seattle and Kansas City before he knew to hang it up, Joe Namath went to the Los Angeles Rams to die, and even Johnny Unitas finished his career off in San Diego. Brett should probably take a page out of the books of these quarterbacks and realize that the sun is setting on his career and probably hang it up before he embarrasses himself. But if he doesn’t , I’m sure the Bills, Dolphins or Raiders could want him.

Turning to fans that want Brett back, I think most of them are fools. Holding rallies like the one in West Allis are a complete waste of time and are just silly. The AP did an informal poll on Brett’s return.

Here’s Brett’s interview from On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, in case you missed it last night. I got a few questions on why he would go on Greta instead of a sports station, but Greta is an undying Packer fan from Appleton.

Rumor has it that in tonight’s interview Brett will be trashing Ted Thompson and Mike McCarthy.

(h/t: Wasserman Watch). –This blog also posted all the finance reports from 2002 on.

Sheldon Wasserman has been going around telling voters a lot of tall tales when campaigning against State Senator Alberta Darling. He claims that he’s a libertarian (which is just a lie), he’s a fiscal conservative (which he isn’t), he’s signed a pledge to the tax payers (which he’s broken), he claims to be saving the taxpayers money by riding a bus to Madison but what he’s really doing is using taxpayer money to build part of his quarter-million dollar war chest.

Records from the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board show that Wasserman applied for the Wisconsin Election Campaign Fund (WECF) grant every two years since 1994. The WECF is taxpayer money handed to candidates who agree to certain finance limits. Over all that time Wasserman received a total of $21,459.20 from taxpayers. This candidate welfare grant is a sort of program that was meant to provide funding to candidates who can’t fund a strong campaign otherwise, not for a liberal to abuse a government handout program while already sitting on a massive war chest.

Campaign finance records show that prior to the fall 2004 election, Wasserman had $138,416.68 on hand and still decided to fleece the taxpayers out of $2,726.20 by applying for the grant. What’s even more disgusting is during the campaign season Wasserman was able to grow his war chest to end with $169,821.38 after the election. Wasserman has been stealing money from the taxpayers and just storing it up year after year.

Here is the list of WECF Amounts that Rep. Wasserman Received from 1994 to Today

• In 1994 Wasserman received $6,519 in tax dollars
• In 1996 he received $3,888
• In 1998 he received $3,738
• In 2000 he received $4,588
• In 2002 Wasserman applied for the taxpayer handout, but he ran unopposed and did not qualify for public funds
• In 2004 he received $2,726.20
• In 2006 he again applied for the taxpayer grant but did not qualify because he ran unopposed
• Total: $21,459.20

Worse than the fact that he’s been using taxpayer money for elections is that he still applied for the funding during years when he was unopposed. All these “costly” elections, yet he entered 2007 with $220,518.53 in his war chest to make a run for State Senate against Alberta Darling, funded, in part, on the backs of taxpayers.

How much money did Wasserman save taxpayers by riding the bus?

There has been a significant backlash over the events that happened at RiverSplash on Saturday night. I was there both nights and would just like to say that there were virtually no problems I encountered on Friday night and again I have to stress that the bars did a phenomenal job carding people. However Brian and I have still been debating how close we were with proximity and time to the shooting that occurred. Based off phone records and texts we put together and police information we either walked past right before or right after the shooting occurred.
Here are two videos from TMJ4 about the event.

Those videos from TMJ kind of allude to the idea that these events were mostly caused by out of control ‘frat boys’ (notice the arrests) even though as Charlie Sykes has pointed out, during his radio show, it was not like that at all. And some are even calling for RiverSplash to end.

Visibly angry over what he and other city officials described as a festival marred by alcohol-fueled disorder and violence, Ald. Robert Bauman said Monday that “the jury is out” on whether RiverSplash will be held next year.

Unless there are radical changes made in the way RiverSplash operates, RiverSplash is as good as finished as far as I’m concerned,” said Bauman, who spoke during a news conference at City Hall alongside Mayor Tom Barrett and Police Chief Edward Flynn.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said the festival has devolved over the past few years from “a family-friendly event” to Saturday’s “drunken brawl,” a description that - based on the accounts of those who were there - was no exaggeration. Unfortunately, RiverSplash’s future may be in jeopardy, and if it is, some of the organizers, particularly the establishments in the area that serve alcohol, need only look in the mirrors over their bars to find some of the culprits.

I feel like this fest has gone the same way as State Street in Madison, and perhaps the same steps could be taken to keep the crowd down and keep problems more under control. I suggest cordon off the streets and charge people $8 to get in, this would also keep people from sneaking in alcohol of their own and problems would be limited. This, coupled with adequate security should be able to keep the ‘hooligany’ and ‘rowdiness’ down.

I am sick of hearing about “windfall profits” from Obama, Clinton and the Democrats. It promotes the idea of a limited American Dream where you are only allowed to be so successful. I mean really, why should we allow the market to work (sarcasm)?

If you really want to decrease prices, increase competition and supply, allow offshore drilling, open a minuscule part of ANWR, start building nuclear power plants. Since when did Americans become so weak minded that we whine about the effects rather than looking at the cause? We are a nation of problem solvers that has currently shackled itself with with the green handcuffs of hotly disputed global warming. What do we do in response? Blame big bad oil!

If we weren’t so busy wallowing in our own self-pity and playing the blame game, we would notice there are many other companies out there who make profits like big oil, “Big Food” is a great example that Mark Perry has graphed for effect:

If we want to stay the greatest nation in the world, we need to respond to success with greater efforts to succeed, not higher taxes and attempts regulate those who succeed.

So many of my liberal colleagues like to point to our states “image” or green ranking when they are talking about big businesses leaving Wisconsin. They seem to think if we just spend tons of state money on light rail, green energy, emissions control and socialized un-”Healthy Wisconsin” healthcare we will somehow attract more talent and more businesses.

As it turns out, it’s a question of simple economics that becomes more and more evident as time passes:

“The Lone Star State passed New York as home to the most big companies in the latest list compiled by Fortune magazine.

Texas now boasts 58 headquarters, three more than New York, the previous No. 1, and California, with 52.

Business experts say it’s a matter of simple economics – Texas attracts companies with its low taxes, affordable land and large labor force.

“Cost is overwhelmingly the No. 1 driver,” said Albert W. Niemi Jr., dean of the business school at Southern Methodist University, who wrote his doctoral thesis about companies leaving the Northeast for the Sun Belt 30 years ago.”

And to preempt those who will say “oh, it’s just oil companies”:

“Other Texas companies on the magazine’s list include technology, such as Dell Inc., three of the nation’s biggest airlines, two of the biggest homebuilders, an insurer, a hospital company and the largest garbage hauler around.”

Hmm, I seem to remember some CEOs in Milwaukee blatantly stating this point:

“They said Milwaukee’s taxes are too high, and the region doesn’t know how to market itself, suffers from a lack of leadership, has wasteful government spending and doesn’t provide enough tax incentives to attract and keep businesses and create jobs.

And when they were done criticizing the region as a terrible place to do business, they piled on and did it again. And again.”

While on a recent trip to the range at Badger Guns with my good friend Chuck and his little sister, I personally observed someone refusing to be a victim.

I was waiting in line to pay for range time at Badger Guns (and range) in Milwaukee when a middle-aged woman in front of us inquired about the process for purchasing a gun. The man behind the counter had politely started walking her through the background check, 48 hour waiting period and other details when she blurted out that she had been robbed reported it to the police but she “refused to be a victim again”. They talked through it and then he went into calibers and explained the range time that comes with each gun purchased, etc.

I realize I started a bit of a debate with my last post on purchasing my first handgun, but I wanted to share this as just another example of how responsible gun purchasing and ownership is a positive right. I fully advocate her, or any new gun owners’ participation in safety training and range practice but, each of us must protect our 2nd Amendment rights not just to protect ourselves but, to allow others to do the same.

From The Heritage Foundation’s front page:

The very food-related problems that we see today are much like the hypothesized future ones that were supposed to be caused by global warming.

For the ill-informed, from Heritage:

America’s first mandatory policy to reduce global warming emissions is its biofuels mandate. Along with the national security and other perceived benefits, these agriculturally-based alternative fuels were purported to have lower global warming emissions than the petroleum-derived gasoline or diesel fuel they displace. At the beginning of the decade, Al Gore said that “by tripling U.S. use of bioenergy and bioproducts by 2010, we can keep millions of tons of greenhouse gases out of the air….”[5]

Thanks to the 2007 energy bill signed into law by President Bush last December, it is occurring even faster than Gore imagined. The U.S. is now required to mix 9 billion gallons of such fuels into the gasoline supply in 2008, up from less than 3 billion gallons in 2000. The mandate is mostly met by corn-based ethanol. Europe has also set similar targets for biofuels, mostly bio-diesel made from palm oil, rapeseed, or soybeans.

Not surprisingly, diverting crops from food to fuel use has raised food prices. At a little over $2 per bushel when the mandate was first effective, the price of corn has recently surged well above $5, due in large part to nearly a quarter of the crop’s now being needed for fuel use. A host of corn-related foods, such as corn-fed meat and dairy, have seen sharp price increases. Wheat and soybeans are also up, partly as a result of fewer acres now being planted in favor of corn. European biodiesel mandates have had a similar impact.

A Purdue University study places the annual food cost increases for 2007 at $22 billion and estimates that “$15 billion of this increase is related to the recent surge in demand to use crops as fuel.”[6] That $15 billion calculates to an additional $130 per household in 2007, and food prices are considerably higher thus far in 2008.

Other factors–high energy costs, below-average yields in some regions, growing world population, a weak dollar–have also impinged on food supplies and prices. However, most experts see the biofuels mandates as a substantial contributor, and one that exacerbates any other pressures on food costs.

With 800 million people at risk for hunger and malnutrition, the consequences are far more severe in developing nations than they are in developed nations. “When millions of people are going hungry, it’s a crime against humanity that food should be diverted to biofuels,” said Palaniappan Chidambaram, India’s finance minister.[7] World Bank President Robert Zoellick has acknowledged that “biofuels is no doubt a significant contributor” to high food costs, adding that “it is clearly the case that programs in Europe and the United States that have increased biofuel production have contributed to the added demand for food.”[8]

Even some of the political unrest described in the Pentagon study is starting to emerge. Rising prices have led to food-related rioting in several developing nations.[9] While it is not possible to demonstrate conclusively that, this rioting would not have occurred if not for the biofuels mandates, it is far from speculative to assume that the increased pressures of the mandates on food prices were contributors. In any event, the rioters are clearly not responding to global warming, as there has been no additional warming in 2007 and thus far in 2008.

Moreover, all of this is occurring from biofuels usage that is only a fraction of what will be required in the years ahead. America is only one-quarter of the way toward the 36 billion gallon requirement by 2022 included in last December’s big energy bill. The European Union also has plans to increase its biodiesel use, though it is now reconsidering this policy.

To add insult to injury, the global warming benefits of biofuels have been called into question. Two recent studies published in the journal Science conclude that, rather than reducing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, biofuels actually increase them.[10] One study finds that clearing lands for energy crops creates a so-called carbon debt by “releasing 17 to 420 times more carbon dioxide than the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions that these biofuels would provide by displacing fossil fuels,”[11] while the other projects “GHG emissions from corn ethanol nearly double those from gasoline for each km driven.”[12]

Last year, a study conducted for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, presciently entitled “Biofuels: Is The Cure Worse Than the Disease?” stated that “the rush to energy crops threatens to cause food shortages and damage to biodiversity with limited benefits.”[13] The authors were right. Oxfam, an international aid organization that has been very vocal about the threat of global warming, now concedes that “large-scale growth in biofuels demand has pushed up food prices and so far there is little evidence that it is reducing overall carbon emissions.”[14]

These titles are getting wittier –except for the Ziggies one, Ziggies just sucks. Oh yeah and I realized I’m a day behind, my bad. Real Chili is well documented for its health code violations, and problems people have with that place. The fact that half the employees may or may not be recreational drug users cause any problems? Granted Real Chili probably has some of the best food on campus, but still their violations go way back, and yes this is the second campus food place This is everything that the JS has posted on them through the years:

• All food must be protected from cross-contamination. There were many boxes of raw hamburger meat stored above containers of cooked chili in walk in cooler. Properly store all raw meats below and away from creaky to eat foods.
• Potentially hazardous food must be held hot at 135 degrees or above. Hot dogs stored in a container were found sitting on top of the hot hold unit at 121°F .
• The slicer in the kitchen was seen with an accumulation of old food debris. Break down slicer completely, clean and sanitize to remove all food debris.
• There is an ice scoop in the beans that has a broken handle and is no longer cleanable. Replace scoop.
• The faucet in the ladies room is spraying water out of the sink and onto the floor. Repair the faucet to function properly.
• The sanitize solution at the 4 compartment ware wash sink was found at 0ppm. Properly set up and maintain the sanitize compartment of the sink to the proper concentration. For chlorine based (bleach) sanitizer it should be set up to 100ppm.
• Ready-to-eat potentially hazardous food held for more than 24 hours must clearly marked to indicate the day by which the food is to be consumed on the premise, sold, or discarded. Use food within 7 days or discard
• There were several dead roaches seen in the basement under the shelves in the westerly room and in the southeast corner of the westerly room. Remove dead cockroaches and maintain effective pest control
• An open bag of mouse and rat poison was seen in the basement near the stairs, partially covered by a box of food service supplies. Discontinue use of rodent bait pellets unless used in a locked and covered trap.

This place had generally good food as well, but it was always a bit dirty. I think out of all the places on campus I’ve eaten at this one most recently, even knowing the above.

I’ve actually only eaten there once when I was a freshmen, and I got about two bites into a burger and realized it was a mistake. This place was one of the establishments featured on the TMJ4 exclusive in the past, and it seems as though things have not improved. I was told that for my last post I never had to actually post about the squalid conditions of Gyros, I just needed to take a picture. I feel like that’s all I really should do for Ziggies, but then you’d miss all these fun violations. Some of the violations go back a bit, but I seriously can’t believe people still eat there.

• Food equipment must be clean and sanitized before used with food. The large cutting board in the back kitchen area is badly scored and dirty. Resurface the board to be smooth and cleanable or replace it with a new one
• Food equipment must be clean and sanitized before used with food.
• There is a 2 drawer refrigerated unit in the front cooking area that has raw meats being stored directly next to cooked gyro meat. The drawer below also has raw and ready to eat foods in the same space. Store all the raw animal product in the bottom drawer and all the ready to eat foods in the top drawer to prevent any cross contamination issues
• Utensils and food-contact surfaces of equipment must be sanitized. The sanitizer bucket that was set up on the cook line was at 0ppm. Properly set up solution to 100ppm for bleach-chlorine sanitizer. Use test strips to test concentration.
• Utensils and food-contact surfaces of equipment must be sanitized. The sanitizer bucket that was set up on the cook line was at 0ppm. Properly set up solution to 100ppm for bleach-chlorine sanitizer. Use test strips to test concentration.
• There are no shelves in the basement freezer walk in and all the food is sitting directly on the floor. Provide approved shelving in the freezer and keep all food up off the floor at least 6 inches.

4-101.11 There is a homemade style dipper well over the prep sink in the ice cream area of the store. This is not an approved dipper well. Remove the pan and use the dipper well that is properly plumbed. If you want to add an additional well it will have to be to code and properly plumbed.

There are still no roaches of to be reported there either. Guess they don’t all have infestations, but I’m still never setting foot inside that place. If I want to poison myself, I’ll walk the extra block to get to Gyros or maybe Real Chili…??