You might want to update that, because Russ took a lot of it back after the Wisconsin for Falk/ Falk for Wisconsin PAC fiasco. Just sayin'...
Meanwhile ... Briggs & Stratton Corp. plans to reduce its salaried workforce by about 10% this year, the company said Thursday, as its lawn-and-garden products business is not expected to return to earlier levels.
Posting small snippets of a much larger interview....methinks the context is missing here.This ad is shameful, and I'm betting Sen. Feingold will have something to say about how dishonestly his words have been used to imply his endorsement of Kathleen Falk.
Congratulations on your mention in Media Matters.
Ugh, who cares what that man has to say. I am never going to forgive Feingold for not jumping into the race himself. He is the only Wisconsin politician (under age 70, at least) who would have been a shoe-in to beat Walker. But being governor is very hard work -- a lot more work than being a law professor, or a U.S. Senator, for that matter. Feingold could have been a unifying force throughout this movement, but he showed his true colors in his decision to sit on the sideline licking his wounds.
I think your right, he might have beat Walker. I wonder what the real reason is that he didn't run. Assuming there's more to his decision than he explains. Could it be the same reason Doyle decided to just give up? Maybe they both saw hard choices to be made and realized that they could be as unpopular as Walker is with their own base.
That's just spineless. Politicians who only want to serve during good times don't deserve to have a base. I hope voters remember this betrayal if Feingold or Doyle ever try to return to politics.
Look how divided Barrett's base is because he made fiscal choices that didn't bow down to the unions. Feingold is smart enough to see that.
Look how well imustberacist can write at times . . . hmmmmmmm. Interesting.But as to the content of your last comment, I don't see any evidence that Barrett's base is divided.Dems, yes, are divided for different candidates. But each candidate's base is not divided. Try again to do your own divisive games, troll.
We're going to lose this recall, I fear, with this and other tactics taken by one candidate who increasingly looks to lack focus on the reason for the recall: The Republicans' similar tactics.
Remember that Russ Feingold voted to confirm Ashcroft for Attorney General who gave us more war. Feingold voted for John Roberts for the Supreme Court who gave us Citizens United--Good lord help us.
If you want a politician to truly be 'independent' and vote their conscience and not just the 'party line', then occasionally they're going to vote in ways you don't agree with.
Feingold also voted against the Patriot Act. The only one to stand up for our rights.
Feingold's Progressives United already denounced Falk's tactics to raise the funds for running her attack ads -- and they are really not going to like using those funds for this ad. http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/capitol-report/capitol-report-la-follette-blasts-falk-for-connection-to-special/article_e4449baa-7916-11e1-83ab-001a4bcf887a.html
Lets be real here. Progrssives United has a problem with the SUPERPAC, NOT Kathleen Falk. Its a larger interview of course. However listening to thewhole interview dos not change the outcome of this at all. Russ Feingold gave Kathleen Falk a very nice compliment. It is disingenious for the Barrett supporters to try and change the subject and the meaning of this like they have been!
Disingenuous is saying that the problem is from where her money comes but ignoring how it is spent -- and especially if spent to imply an endorsement that didn't come to Falk from the guy who founded Progressives United to fight Super-PACs.Feingold opposes Super-PACs specifically because of their impact on elections with massive ad buys like this.And listening to the interview certainly does change the outcome of this ad, which somehow doesn't mention that Feingold said the same thing about other Dems. I'd just love to see you, Jeff, saying this to Feingold's face -- and to see his face in reaction to your disingenousness on so many levels.
Well Anon, I would gladly talk to Feingold, you act like i said something about his mother. Here is how the conversation wouldprobably go. ME: Senator Feingold sounds like you think Kathleen Falk would make a good Governor of WIsconsin. Senator Feingold: Yes I think she would do very well...Me: Me too.
I have been making a secret effort to like Barrett but every time I get close his hysterical supporters start to put me off him. I sense that jobs are at stake. Still, any port in the storm.
Looking for info -People are throwing around the term "super-PAC" here, which usually means a 501(c)4 organization, which doesn't have to disclose where donations come from (as opposed to a 501(c)3 - a simple PAC - which does have to disclose).Wisconsin For Falk says they are "registered with the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board as a 1.91 organization." Does anybody know if a "1.91 organization" is the equivalent of a 501(c)4 or a 501(c)3?
501(c)3s and 501(c)4s are not PACs. The 3s are supposed to be charities and educational groups. The 4s are supposed to be advocacy groups. Neither are allowed to do political work, per se.
I have been making a secret effort to like Gareth but every time I get on a blog -- I just saw him comment at another one -- his hysterical support puts me off Falk.I sense that his job is at stake. Still, any port in a storm, when that port is his mother's basement.
See, this is what I'm talking about.