Senator Ron Johnson: "Slay The Beast"
Who be these con-serv-a-tives?
By now it is a nearly hoary adage that liberals seldom bother to read conservative books or listen to conservative ideas. And, yet, we are struck anew every time we encounter the startled bemusement of a media type who encounters an actual conservative thought… and finds it strange and marvelous.
And so it is with the coverage of a recent speech by Senator Ron Johnson.
Since his election in November 2010, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has assiduously avoided covering much of what Senator Johnson does and says, even though he is now the state’s senior senator. So that may explain this blog report from columnist David Umhoefer, who seems genuinely surprised to unearth a "little noticed" speech in which Senator Ron Johnson says his goal for the federal government was to "dismantle that beast." This was followed by an equally puzzling utterance:
Government is "not here to solve our problems," Johnson said.
Of course, Umhoefer need not have relied on this video to uncover the fact that Johnson harbors such exotic views.
He could have spent 10 minutes talking with him.
Or any other conservative since Ronald Reagan… heck, since Thomas Hobbes wrote Leviathan.
As usual, therefore, you are better off actually watching what Johnson said than the gloss that a reporter puts on it:
Graeme Zielinski's Enablers By Kevin Binversie
Possibly even more frightening, is that some posts seem to contain private, off-the-record information which could be only be obtained in email conversations between Zielinski and various reporters throughout the state. Considering Zielinski’s about to speak only "off-the-record" with reporters in his new position, it might be wise for many of those same reporters to ask if their conversations are staying between them and Graeme.
So who were his chief enablers and defenders? One only needs to enter the fever swamps of the Left to find the ones most upset with his dismissal. These "winners" take the cake...
Fallone's Big Labor Flip Flop By Collin Roth
Just last week, liberal Supreme Court candidate Ed Fallone accused Justice Pat Roggensack of creating "legal bribery" on the high court. Fallone attacked the 2009 4-3 decision to allow campaign contributions from parties with cases pending before the court, labeling the decision the "Roggensack Rule."
Roggensack's campaign spokesman rebutted Fallone's criticism saying, "It would appear that Professor Fallone's campaign attack falls flat in that he failed to demonstrate how contributions and endorsements have impacted decisions made and rendered by the Supreme Court."
But if Professor Fallone would like to discuss campaign contributions, lets examine a quote from 2012 where Fallone criticized the Citizens United Supreme Court decision.
"And yes, union officials who use involuntary money for campaign purposes, in the form of dues. Neither form of campaign contribution from a collective entity should be permitted, and the Citizens United decision creating a First Amendment right out of whole cloth on behalf of collective entities is a particularly poorly reasoned decision that has disastrous consequences for our democracy."
Last summer, Democrat State Representative Brett Hulsey pleaded no contest to a disorderly conduct charge for a incident at a beach involving a 9-year-old boy. That should have used up his quota of weirdthat his behavior in the Capitol has lately been so bizarre that both the cops and his own aide were worried that the high profile liberal was a few pepperonis short of a pizza.