Kris Barrett: Divide And Conquer

Original Post: WISN

Wisconsin Radio Network ran a Q&A with Kris Barrett, wife of Mayor Tom Barrett after she turned in his nomination papers earlier this year. Kris Barrett, you'll remember, illegally used state resources to politick on government time.

Kris Barrett has been stumping for her husband and is a part of his campaign which is why I am using her words against her.

During the debate Friday Mayor Barrett repeatedly brought up a phrase the Governor used when talking to a donor about his strategy, a common metaphor "divide and conquer."

I say it's common because, when she dropped off the papers, she told WRN, "He has faith in me. I mean, we have a short amount of time to get the word out and to get Tom's message spread and divide and conquer."

"Divide and conquer."

Tom Barrett repeatedly talks about Scott Walker's ideological civil war and yet, here's the Mayor's wife saying the exact same thing.

Tom Barrett is demanding that Scott Walker release emails that may (or likely will not) prove some sort of guilt. And yet he says nothing about the emails that prove his own wife engaged in illegal action at MPS.

I don't expect to hear much on the double standard promoted by Tom. (He kept referring to Governor Walker by his first name during the debate so he must love it when you fail to use an honorific.) Read more: http://www.newstalk1130.com/pages/common_sense_central.html?article=10159412#ixzz1wSzo7naE

TEACHER SUSPENDED FOR TELLING STUDENT HE COULD BE ARRESTED FOR TALKING BADLY ABOUT OBAMA

Original Post: The Blaze

by Mike Opelka

Last Monday, a high school student in North Carolina engaged his social studies teacher in a heated debate about politics and the two leading presidential candidates. During the exchange, the teacher (an obvious Obama supporter) got very angry with the student and accused him of disrespecting the president. She even went so far as to tell the boy that he could be jailed for speaking ill of Obama.

Sarah Campbell of the Salisbury Post first reported on the story. She claims that the school district is not releasing the name of the teacher and that she is not responding to requests for public comment (although the two students identified her to the newspaper). According to Campbell’s story, the teacher will not be suspended or even face disciplinary action for what was heard on the recording. A statement from the school was released at the end of the week:

“The Rowan-Salisbury School System expects all students and employees to be respectful in the school environment and for all teachers to maintain their professionalism in the classroom. This incident should serve as an education for all teachers to stop and reflect on their interaction with students. Due to personnel and student confidentiality, we cannot discuss the matter publicly.” So, how bad was the exchange? It got fairly heated, with the teacher shouting at times. The kerfuffle started after one student asked a question about the teacher’s “fact of the day” that said Romney was a bully back in high school. A student asked:

“Didn’t Obama bully somebody, though?” The teacher started to get angry and said:

“Not to my knowledge.” A couple of students relayed the story about Obama admitting that he bullied someone when he was younger. And that seemed to light the fuse on his teacher’s anger. A couple of the students exchanged words with the angry teacher.

“Stop! Stop! Because there’s no comparison. He’s running for president. Obama is the president.” As one student attempted to argue for a fair, two-sided debate on the history of the candidates, he was shouted down and talked over by the teacher. She continued:

“You got to realize, this man is wanting to be what Obama is. There’s no comparison.” Once again, the students pressed for equal discussion of the histories of both men, with one saying:

“If you’re gonna talk trash about one side, you gotta talk trash about the other.” The teacher just seemed to dig her heels in deeper and press her defense of Obama telling the defiant teen:

“You will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom.” Again the student persisted and invoked his First Amendment right.

“I’ll say what I want.” The still unidentified teacher read the student her rules…her Obama rules.

“Not about him, you won’t!” The back and forth continued and the most strident of the two students reminded his teacher that President Bush was constantly treated to negative statements about him while he was in office:

“Whenever Bush was president, everybody talked sh-t about him.” To which the teacher responded:

“Because he was sh-tty.” The social studies educator went on for a full minute with more ranting, saying that people were arrested for saying derogatory things about President Bush. The student correctly reminded the teacher that opinions are protected, but you cannot be arrested unless you threaten the president.

Our research has not turned up a single case of anyone in America being arrested for speaking ill of former President Bush. The local newspaper story also mentioned that their discussions about the story with a political science professor could not recall the arrests that the teacher was speaking about.

Update:

We learned the name and the fate of the Social Studies teacher heard on the video posted below. Toyna Dixon-Neely is the woman heard yelling at students who dared to express negative opinions about President Obama. We also found out that Ms. Dixon-Neely’s outrageous statements may not have led to a strict punishment: the local newspaper is reporting that she has been suspended with pay. (Curiously the Huffington Post says that the teacher is on an unpaid suspension, pending the outcome of the investigation by the school board.)

The entire confrontation was recorded by a student and posted on YouTube. Listen below; slight content warning for language.

guantanamo detainees get new 750g soccerfield

Original Post: Fox News

By Catherine Herridge Published February 28, 2012

At a time of record deficits, a new soccer field for detainees at Camp 6 in Guantanamo Bay is just getting the finishing touches -- at a cost of $750,000 to taxpayers. The project was the highlight of a tour Tuesday of the detention camp for reporters at the facility covering the arraignment in a military court of Majid Khan, a former Baltimore resident and the the only legal U.S. resident on trial at Guantanamo.

In this April 27, 2010, file photo, reviewed by a U.S. Department of Defense official, a Guantanamo detainee's feet are shackled to the floor as he attends a "Life Skills" class inside Camp 6, the high-security detention facility at Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base.

The project began in April 2011 and is due to finish this spring. The detainees will now have three recreation facilities at Camp 6, which is home to "highly compliant" detainees who live in a communal setting. In addition to an indoor recreation field and the existing outdoor recreation field, the new soccer field -- selected because it is such a popular sport with detainees -- is half the size of an American football field. The new field has been specially constructed so that the detainees "have maximum access" -- about 20 hours a day. Special passageways allow the detainees to pass into the new recreation yard without being escorted by the military. On the tour, a military police representative who asked not to be identified by name said allowing high levels of activity outdoors helped reduce behavioral problems at the camps, and it also limited the amount of interaction between detainees and the guards.

Since the detention camps opened in 2002, some half dozen cases have been prosecuted -- four ended in plea agreements with minimal jail time. Khan, accused of being hand-selected by Sept. 11, 2001, mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for a second wave of attacks inside the U.S., including a plot to blow up gas stations, is expected to cut a deal. He is also implicated in an assassination plot against former Pakistani President Pervez Musharaff and a car bombing at the Marriott hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia, in 2003.

His appearance will be the first time anyone outside the U.S. military or intelligence community has seen him since his capture after Sept. 11 and transfer to secret prisons formerly maintained by the CIA.

Even some of President Obama's most ardent supporters suggest the administration seems eager to close the camps and reduce the detainee population, and plea agreements with minimal jail time are a sweetheart deal for all involved.

Detainees like Usama bin Laden's personal cook and his driver are spending less time in prison than American citizens prosecuted in federal courts on lesser charges. By example, Zachary Chesser of Charlottesville, Va., who was convicted for making threats against the creators of "South Park" and for supporting a Somali terror group, but who never fired a shot on the battlefield, is now serving a 25-year sentence. By contrast, Omar Khadr, who killed an American soldier on the battlefield in Afghanistan is nearly half way through his eight-year sentence at Guantanamo, and may finish out his term in Canada.

On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder, testifying about the Justice Department budget on Capitol Hill, said the recidivism rate for Guantanamo detainees overall is in the mid-20s. But the recidivism rate for those transferred during the Obama administration is 7 percent. Holder acknowledged that part of that comparison may be because the former detainees have been out for a shorter period of time, but also because the determinations about each of their release had to be unanimously approved by a task force.

drones in American skies, civil liberties in jeopardy

Original Post: Digital Journal Washington - A bill passed last week allocating more than $63 billion to the Federal Aviation Administration would increase the existence of drones in civilian airspace across America and is expected to be signed into law by President Barack Obama. As America’s drone war begins a new surge in Pakistan, the U.S. House and Senate have both approved the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act bill, a bill which would pressure the FAA to weaken rules currently in place on domestic drone authority, and allow American skies to be filled with tens of thousands of drones. If the new bill becomes law, up to 30,000 drones could by flying in U.S. airspace by decade’s end. The Senate passed the bill by a 75-20 margin. Civil liberties groups have spoken out on the measure, stating the new legislation offers no restrictions on drone surveillance operations by police and federal agencies and could put us on track toward a “surveillance society.”

As drone technology rapidly advances, America’s law enforcement community is eager to use these robotic machines in their daily operations, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) notes Unfortunately, nothing in the bill would address the very serious privacy issues raised by drone aircraft. This bill would push the nation willy-nilly toward an era of aerial surveillance without any steps to protect the traditional privacy that Americans have always enjoyed and expected.

Details in the new drone bill are extensive. Among them, the bill would require the FAA to expedite and simplify its drone operation permission process to government agencies, to be completed within 90 days. The FAA is currently considering a proposed set of regulations alleviating drone rules, set to be released this spring. The operation of any drone weighing 4.4 pounds or less would require the FAA’s approval to “a government public safety agency,” as long as certain parameters are heeded (sight lines, daytime operation, operation below 400 feet in altitude, and operated only in safe airspace.)

Also included in the new measure is a requirement the FAA produce a comprehensive plan “to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system,” Common Dreams reports.

In this instance, “civil” drones applies to those operated in the private sector, but as things currently stand, permission to operate a drone is all but impossible for a non-government entity, save for hobbyists. Drone industry groups, along with their congressional backers, consider this as a potential source of income. The bill requires the FAA’s plan allow the integration of drones into U.S. airspace “as soon as practicable, but not later than September 30, 2015.

The FAA has been given nine months to produce the plan. Additionally, it must develop a five-year “roadmap for the introduction” of these civil drones in national airspace. The bill would also require the FAA’s final ruling, within 18 month of the comprehensive plan’s submission, “that will allow” civil operation of drones weighing under 55 pounds in U.S. airspace along with a proposed ruling for conducting the plan. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a watchdog group, has brought a lawsuit against the federal government requesting the FAA release records on agencies, almost 300 of them, carrying authorization for domestic drone operations.

Jennifer Lynch, an attorney with EFF told Talking Points Memo the new drone bill increases the importance of the lawsuit. “I think the fact that Congress is pressuring the FAA to expand its UAS program through the FAA Reauthorization Act only reinforces the need for these records,” she noted. “It’s important that we learn more about how the federal government and state and local law enforcement agencies are already using UASs before we expand their use further. The privacy concerns posed by the use of drones for domestic surveillance are too great to excuse the FAA’s lack of transparency on this issue."

Lincoln Republican abolishes slavery, Obama Democrat brings it back

Original Post: ABC News

"House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., shot down the Obama administration’s compromise on contraception Sunday, discounting the plan that requires insurance companies, instead of religious hospitals or universities, provide access to free birth control under the new health care law as nothing more than an “accounting trick.” “This thing is a distinction without a difference,” Ryan told me Sunday on “This Week.” “It’s an accounting gimmick or a fig leaf. It’s not a compromise...”

There are so many things wrong with Obama here.
1)I thought Congress already wrote the bill. How can he now offer a compromise? How can the president change the terms of this bill at a whim? I thought we had a separation of powers.
2)Forcing Catholics to provide contraception is against their doctrine and clearly violates the 1st amendment.
3)The Church put out a letter coming out against this change. Obama ordered the Chaplains in the army not to read this letter. A second violation of the first amendment.
4)Obama's "compromise" requires the insurance companies to produce this product for free. What is it called when you force someone to work and you don't pay them? It's slavery. We fought a war over it.

Republican Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves and Democrat Barack Obama re-instituted it.

EXCLUSIVE: GAB Investigating Democrat Allegations of Fraud From Wirch Recall

Original Post: Media Trackers

By Collin Roth

The GAB is investigating fraud in a recall effort!

But it is not an investigation into any of the of the recall efforts involving Scott Walker, Rebecca Kleefisch, or four Republican State Senators. This is an investigation into the effort to recall Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch from nearly a year ago.

On Thursday, Media Trackers learned that the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board dispatched two investigators to Kenosha to interview circulators involved in the effort to recall Senator Bob Wirch. According to sources, the investigators were asking about recall training, whether individuals were misled, and about the appearance of the late Bill Pocan’s signature on a recall petition.

Spokesman for the Government Accountability Board Reid Magney had no comment indicating that he cannot comment about ongoing investigations.

One year ago this month, the Taxpayer’s to Recall Robert Wirch launched their drive to recall Democratic State Senator Robert Wirch after he and thirteen other Democratic State Senator’s fled Wisconsin to avoid a vote on the Budget Repair Bill. The recall effort collected 17,138 valid signatures to force a recall of Senator Wirch over the 60-day period from February 24, 2011 to April 25, 2011.

During the signature gathering process, the Democratic Party of Wisconsin recklessly alleged “overwhelming evidence” of fraud in the effort to recall Senator Wirch.

The heart of the Democratic Party’s “overwhelming evidence?” A total of twenty affidavits, or 1/10 of 1% of the signatures gathered.

As a Media Trackers article from May 13, 2011 documents, the affidavits were extremely weak and lacked merit:

Of the 20 signed affidavits, five of the individuals signed recall petitions at Recall Wirch drive-thru’s, which were clearly marked by large signs. Others claimed to have been “tricked” into signing recall petitions for Scott Walker, in support of Sen. Robert Wirch, or even to “recall Sen. Wirch from Illinois.” Three of the 20 affidavits lacked a notary, and two were notarized by Heather Libbey, a staffer of Democratic Senator Mark Miller who Hunt contends, was “sent to Kenosha to thwart the recall efforts.”

The only affidavit that Hunt admitted had “relative substance” was that of Mrs. Pocan, whose deceased husband Bill Pocan, was discovered on a recall petition. Hunt went on to vouch for his organization saying “no one from Recall Wirch put that name on a petition.” A sampling of the affidavits went along these lines:

“I was mistaken when I signed the petition to recall Senator Wirsh(sic). I thought he was a Republican cronie(sic) of Scott Walker. When I found out he was Democrat I wanted to take back the signature.”- Wayne L., Kenosha County

“My neighbor stopped by my house about a month ago and he asked me to sign a petition. Had I known the petition was to recall Senator Wirch, I would not have signed the petition.”- Gertrude Z., Kenosha County

“I saw a sign and stopped. Asked if this was for Senator Wirch and they said yes. I thought that the petition was to get Senator Wirch back to Wisconsin and was not informed that the petition was to recall the Senator.”- Celia G., Kenosha County Dan Hunt, the former Chairman of Taxpayer’s to Recall Robert Wirch, told Media Trackers that special investigators from the GAB arrived on Thursday and interviewed individuals from the Recall Wirch effort concerning citizens who claimed they were “misled.” One such individual who claimed she was misled and signed an affidavit was Lisa Turner of Kenosha. Turner signed an affidavit saying:

A man came to my door and told me that they were trying to get people to sign a petition to have work done on the neighborhood park…I do not and have not supported the efforts to have a recall election held for Senator Wirch’s seat. When the Recall Wirch circulator accused of misleading Turner hired a private investigator to clear his name, the truth quickly came to light and Ms. Turner’s story fell apart. Media Trackers reported on August 12, 2011:

When the private investigator interviewed Turner, Turner stated that in April 2011, she was contacted by a representative from the Wirch campaign who asked explicitly if she had signed a recall petition against State Senator Robert Wirch. Turner responded that she had. As Prijic notes, “since Lisa Turner admitted to signing the Wirch Recall Petition, it makes no sense to claim later that it was a petition to improve a park.”

It was only after admitting she had signed the Recall Wirch petition that the representative from the Wirch campaign told Turner that “the circulators had been informing signers of the recall petition that it was for parks, neighborhood improvements, and streets etc.” When a representative from the Wirch campaign came to Turner’s door to sign the aforementioned affidavit alleging fraud, “Ms. Turner stated she did not read the affidavit or know its contentsI know I totally sign affidavits and legal all the time with out reading any it, including the title so that's an easy mistake to makes. Sarcasm.” Despite the weakness of the actual allegations and affidavits, the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has dispatched at least two special investigators to Kenosha to interview those involved in the effort to recall Senator Wirch.

Dan Hunt, organizer of the Recall Wirch effort told Media Trackers that “the timing of this investigation is rather suspect.”

“At the time of the Democratic challenges, we vigorously defended ourselves and the GAB sided with us on most of the challenges” Hunt said. “It boggles my mind that the GAB can determine at this late date that an investigation is warranted,” Hunt added.

With numerous stories fraud and errors running rampant in the four State Senate recalls, as well as the efforts to recall Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch, the timing of this investigation could not be more suspect. Just last week, an Racine man found his name four times on the petition to recall Senator Van Wanggaard without having signed at all.

Nevertheless, it appears the GAB is devoting their precious resources not to investigating fraud that could effect current recall efforts but to a witch-hunt based on trumped up affidavits gathered by the Democratic Party nearly a year ago.

My comments:
And they didn't even have to be sued to to it? What I want to know is how this investigation started. Presumably the GAB didn't launch this investigation on their own, since their only job is to review petitions. I don't think the Wirch campaign asked for this since it happened a year ago. We also know that the GAB has no possible way of accepting requests to look into fraud from anyone else so what prompted this and why do they suddenly have the resources and authority to do this when they don't for Republicans? Surely it's not a violation of the Equal Protection clause, a group of judges would know better than to violate the Constitution wouldn't they?

Reedsburg Catechism teacher rants about Scott Walker factually inaccurate and unintentionally racist

Keep in mind this is a Catechism class. I took Catechism class and we didn't talk about anything like this. My class was, you know, mostly about the Bible and Christian teachings. This teacher asserts that 40% of blacks between the ages of 18 and 24 don't have drivers licenses and are therefore disenfranchised. Really? Really? I won't go over the list of things that an 18 year old can't do with out a picture id in modern day life (in Milwaukee that includes being outside after 10) but this is really a condescending statistic. It would only disenfranchise people if they were unable to get an ID. The voter id law provides for a FREE id for those who want it. So this teacher is saying that black people will be (and I want to make it perfectly clear that this is his thinking and not mine because I believe they are smart enough to get an id) disenfranchised from voting because they are too stupid to get an id and too lazy to vote absentee. He also says that Mitt Romney paid less in taxes than the student's parents. Again, really? Let's say the average middle class worker in Wisconsin pays 30% (which is way high but for purposes of this problem we'll let it slide), we also know that the average Wisconsin worker makes about $35k a year. Mitt Romney paid about 14% which amounted to about $3.2 million. Ok some simple math and....30% of 35,000 is....$10,500. This teacher is asserting that 3,200,000 < 10,500. Now I think why MPS is an intellectual void in which only about 8% graduate and can read at an eight grade level. Something, something wine and wafers.