Joe Doakes from Como Park emails in re the Wisconsin legislature voting to evict a liberal “watchdog journalism” group from the UW Madison offices they’ve been occupying rent-free.
Doakes:
Journalists are the next favored minority? So they must continue to receive free rent at the public university? Or else it’s a huge Republican scandal?
The numbers are not working. They claim to be operating on a $400,000 budget. I don’t believe that for one second. Not with 4 paid “professional staff” and 4 interns, paid. Even with free rent, utilities, paper and donuts I don’t believe they would meet that budget. I just don’t believe they are paying themselves low enough salaries to make that number work. So that tells me there is hidden money funding them in addition to other support, like the free rent, utilities, donuts and paper.That’s the real issue. The U at Madison, a bastion of liberal nonsense, is funneling taxpayer resources into a Liberal organization by the backdoor. So lock the door. Makes sense to me.
This is what responsible adults do when cutting the budget – they throw out the freeloaders. This group has never heard of that notion because they live in Madison, a responsible-adult-free zone.
Joe Doakes
Joe links to a Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel piece in the Pioneer Press, which sets up the story:
An independent, nonpartisan investigative journalism organization facing expulsion from its offices at the University of Wisconsin-Madison is doing what one would expect from an investigative journalism organization.
“We are mounting an aggressive response,” said Andy Hall, executive director of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. Hall was granting interviews Wednesday with media and watchdog journalists and bloggers across the country.
Whenever the media strenuously claims another media organization is “independent and non-partisan”, you may be assured they are not.
The “Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism” is sponsored by George Soros, as well as the liberal Joyce Foundation, which also funds the MinnPost and lobbying/propaganda shell group “Protect Minnesota”.
And if knowing them by their sponsors doesn’t tell you everything you need to know, then know them by their work:
In 2011, the center broke the story about state Supreme Court Justices David Prosser and Ann Walsh Bradley getting into a physical altercation.
The “story” they “broke” turned out to be a gross distortion that the “WCIJ” spun into a political stunt to benefit the Wisconsin Democrat party as they got ready to wage the battle over the legislative and gubernatorial recount. The WCIJ is no less a bunch of partisan hacks than their fellow Soros project, the late, unlamented Minnesota Independent (and, it’d seem, its up-market replacement the MinnPost).
The freeloading “journalists” should not only be expelled from their publicly-funded digs, they should be perp-walked out while being pelted with rocks and garbage.
I know you have a reflexive tendency to assume all things UW related are liberal, but perhaps you should reflect for a second. Here is self-avowed conservative Charlie Sykes’ assessment of this action: “petty, vindictive and dumb”. http://www.rightwisconsin.com/perspectives/210335591.html
Emery,
You’re the one being reflexive; assuming my conclusion is based on partisanship rather than actual examination of the facts is acting on stereotype rather than knowledge.
The Sykes piece is behind a pay wall, so I can’t read it. The headline indicates he’s drawing a false equivalence between the vote (evicting a freeloading tenant who uses government property to carry out anpartisan mission, but not interfering with them actually exercising that right) and the IRS scandal (using government to manipulate dissenters’ tax status to keep them in jeopardy of IRS and campaign finance prosecution for exercising free speech).
If that’s Sykes’ tack – it may not be, but I suspect it’s not a bad guess – it’s a false equivalence
The solution is to give a Koch Brothers-backed media free rent at a State institution. Surely there’d be no scandal about that.
So what exactly constitutes “nonpartisan”?
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines it as:
Has anyone at Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel or the Pioneer Press ever used a dictionary? Probably not, since they are “journalists”.
While the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism may not be formally affiliated with the Democratic Party (which might makes it “independent”) it certainly cannot be called “nonpartisan” because of that nagging little word – “bias”.
Gasp!
Did I really type: “Does anyone .. ever used”?
Oh, for want of an edit button!!
Greg,
Don’t say I never did anything for ya.
Greg,
Near as I can tell, claiming to be “non-partisan” is less a matter of semantically (and ethically) fitting a dictionary definition, and more a matter of pseudo-legalistic ticket-punching; if it’s a 501(c)4, they have to claim to be non-partisan, whether they are or not.
See also Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, and (IIRC) the late, unlamented Mindy
Mitch, try this:
http://www.620wtmj.com/blogs/charliesykes/210335811.html
Charlie thinks this is government chilling the media but he completely misses the point even as he mentions it: ” Granted, we are not housed in buildings owned by the state . . . .”
Charlie, that’s the entire point, a non-university group doesn’t get free office space on a taxpayer-supported campus. Black Students Club – sure. Artist-in-Residence – sure. Planned Parenthood? Well, maybe, if it’s giving birth control options as part of the Campus Medical Clinic, maybe. The Kiwanis? CBS News? No. This bunch of clowns? Hell no.
Charlie’s main complaint is it looks bad. Looks better than continuing the subsidy. And Emery, an appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.
“The vote for the budget provision, and 36 unrelated other items, was 12-4 along party lines, with Republicans in the majority.”
Sometimes the best measure of partisanship (or bias) is to see which partisans believe the claims of ‘bipartisanship’.
The mistake here was committed by the WCIJ. It claimed to be nonpartisan, used public resources, and then acted in a partisan manner. It should have done its work in such a way that it could claim bipartisan support.
Remember those Ricin laced letters sent to Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama over their gun stances?
Looks like it was an attempted frame job. Wow.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/06/walking-dead-actress-arrested-for-sending-ricin-letters-to-obama/
Couldn’t the journalists claim sanctuary if they defined themselves as artists? There seems to be a movement afoot to provide that neglected group with shelter. Maybe if they could produce a cartoon or thought bubble?
Thanks, jpmn!
One for the archives, DG’s hysterical, 900+ word rant against RW gun nuts for sending ricin-laced letters to Obama & Bloomberg: http://penigma.blogspot.com/2013/05/ricin-dangerous-violent-gun-nuts-and.html
And, hot off the presses, 350+ words on the assassination of Bobby Kennedy w/o mentioning that he was killed by a Palestinian nationalist as an act of revenge against Kennedy’s support of Israel in the Six-Day War: http://penigma.blogspot.com/2013/06/on-this-day-in-1968-robert-kennedy-was.html
She seems to think liberal republican RM Nixon had something to do with it.
@MBerg
Read the text of the provision, again. “In addition, prohibit UW employees from doing any work related to the Center for Investigative Journalism as part of their duties as a UW employee.”
The prohibition of working with specific groups, emanating from the legislature, does seem questionable. Or do you find that entirely acceptable? Then the NJ legislature should go and prohibit Rutgers from having any professor work with any of those organizations, including public utilities — which CEEEP has projects with.
I do not wish the legislature defining which institutions/groups a professor could work with. Perhaps you and I have very different ideas of what academic freedom constitutes.
They can’t do work for B on A’s nickel. What’s wrong with a no-moonlighting provision? My job has one.
Who does represent the taxpayers? The people who pay the UW people to work for them, or the UW employees?
I’m kind of sensitive about this issue. James Hansen, an un-elected bureaucrat, was paid out of my tax dollars to run the f’n Goddard Institute of Space Studies. He spent his work time campaigning in favor of anti-carbon policies that would starve the poor and the working class. Where’s the accountability? This wasn’t a free speech issue, he was using his position to argue for changes in public policy w/o going through the trouble of being elected.
And don’t get me started about MPIRG. Rich white kids accountable only to themselves, paid out of forced contributions from college students.
“Hey! I’m a college student and I want lower tuition! Not for me, it’s in the public interest!’ Criminy.
If they really think what they are doing is so important, let ’em do it on their own damn time.
I await the time the legislature prohibits any professor from doing any work related to the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission.
Suppose the relevant center was investigating tax avoidance by multinational corporations, and a professor was also researching that topic, and the professor wanted to work together with the center on the subject (which I do believe is related to the topic areas of international finance, as well as corporate finance as well as public finance). How would that activity, to be prohibited by the legislature, be “fleecing” the taxpayers? Inquiring minds (or at least this mind) would like to know?
Thanks Mitch. 🙂
Oh! Oh! You mean like the freeloading, lefty campus grand-daddy of them all – MPIRG?
Fleecing is your word, Emery.
How would you prevent UW employees from pursuing a private goal using public resources? I think we can assume that self-regulation has broken down, given that the representatives of the tax payers have determined that it has broken down.
Why do you hold the conservatives in the legislature responsible for taking action rather than WCIJ for acting in so partisan a manner that the legislature decided that it had to act?
The non-partisan thing bugs me the same way the clip/magazine thing bothers gun guys.
Non-partisan (as Mitch notes) is a narrow legal definition. All partisan means is your group is officially part of a political party (ie republican women’s club).
Non-partisan does NOT mean non-ideological. So the Women for Life, Lower Taxes and Defense Spending Club is non-partisan, but clearly has an ideology, just like mpirg and this Wisconsin group.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=ED0CED43-408A-45FF-9F27-2C9BB43058CC
Many of these organizations are protected from the light of reality by the shade of mandatory student activity fees. Check out the non-educational costs of a being student at the U of M.
Emery wrote:
“I await the time the legislature prohibits any professor from doing any work related to the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission.”
These are research topics, not research partners, Emery. Working with UW faculty gives the WCIJ, a
“Academic freedom” is not a blank check. We know that the “academic freedom”, in the 21st century, means the freedom to investigate and critique pro-free market and conservative institutions. It don’t work the other way around. You know as well as I that Charles Murray, despite his first class academic credentials, could never be employed as an instructor at a public university.
George Soros partially funds WCIJ. If he withdrew his support because he didn’t like the way that they were spending his money, would it be an attack on academic freedom? WCIJ has no greater claim to the public purse than my & any three of my buddies.
Should be:
“Working with UW faculty gives the WCIJ, an ideological organization, the stamp of public approval.”
“Prohibit the Board of Regents from permitting the Center for Investigative Journalism to occupy any facilities owned or leased by the Board of Regents. In addition, prohibit UW employees from doing any work related to the Center for Investigative Journalism as part of their duties as a UW employee.”
It is of interest to compare and contrast with the “Wisconsin Idea”.
/The Wisconsin Idea is the political policy developed in the American state of Wisconsin that fosters public universities’ contributions to the state: “to the government in the forms of serving in office, offering advice about public policy, providing information and exercising technical skill, and to the citizens in the forms of doing research directed at solving problems that are important to the state and conducting outreach activities.”/
http://wisconsinidea.wisc.edu/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisconsin_Idea
It would appear that only certain types of information are now desirable.
It would appear that only certain types of information are now desirable.
Given the number and partisanship of campus speech codes at schools nationwide, you are right, although not in the way you figured.
Another New Deal era idea deemed to be valid for all eternity, especially by those who benefit from it.
As an aside and off topic.
The Fed’s coincident indices for April are out. Wisconsin economic activity as measured by this index continues to surprise, but not in a good way. Wisconsin’s decline is notable because the three month trajectory is not shared by any other state save one — Wyoming. The fact that the Wisconsin index declined is no surprise to anybody who saw the employment release for Wisconsin. It is an interesting question why Wisconsin continues to lag the rest of the country, and why the gap is widening, rather than stabilizing or shrinking.
This may speak to a failure to understand the drivers of modern employment; chasing manufacturing by lowering worker protections, etc. doesn’t make you competitive on cost. You need to show higher productivity. Is the real estate market there tight enough now to see employment growth?
One thing that stands out about MN is that it has long pushed toward growth in the services sectors. They’ve had some increases in manufacturing as well but my bet is you’d find those largely related to the services growth.
The Wisconsin legislators should be more concerned with it’s economic and employment declines. Rather than ideological pursuits which may look good to the party base.
http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/indexes/coincident/
You might as well read tea leaves, Emery. These data aren’t predictors of future economic activity, much less indicators of wise or unwise state level economic policies.
Perhaps, but your comment would be stronger if you would point out what ‘your’ “predictors of future economic activity” would be, for the benefit of those of us who don’t have first-hand experience.
I would like to compliment Terry for treating the word “data” as a plural, as in “…data are encrypted…” This refreshing bit of correct grammar is a joy to encounter, in an age when almost every writer treats “data” as a singular noun, and probably doesn’t even know that the singular form, “datum”, exists.
Re Emery’s thread-jack, go look at the chart. The sole projected national economic growth leader is not Texas or Florida, it’s . . . West Virginia. Meanwhile, North Dakota is an economic basket case.
There’s something wrong with the projections in that report, it’s too much at variance with observed reality. Maybe it’s how they define “growth” in that adding one job in West Virginia might double their employment, whereas a measurable increase in North Dakota’s boom would require an enormous increase in jobs over what they’ve already seen?
Too early to gloat, Doug. Check back in six months to compare hard data to this projection.
nate says:
/”There’s something wrong with the projections in that report, it’s too much at variance with observed reality.”/ > Ha, that’s too rich for a second helping…
Perhaps the Philadelphia Fed needs to adjust their foil hat in order to receive the same signal you’re getting data from. :^)
I guess we get to pick our own reality.
“predictors of future economic activity” would be, for the benefit of those of us who don’t have first-hand experience.
Beating the market is very, very hard. Unless you have inside info or enough money to move the market. That’s why overall growth is the wealth machine of the small investor.
If the Philly bank is correct, you should be able to make money based on what they predict. If you can’t, if it’s already been priced into the market, then you know that lots of big money people believe the Philadelphia fed’s prognostications, or has come to the same conclusions.
Finding the cause and effect of current economic phenomenon is difficult enough. Finding cause and effect of economic conditions that have not yet materialized is a matter of luck.
Here is what Wisconsin says about its economic future: http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ra/econ/
The last report cam out about 6 months ago, so it’s dated.
Here are the facts that nate doesn’t quite understand: A probabilistic forecast still lets you calculate an expected value and expected variance.
My ignorance is your gain, Doug. I’m willing to bet a brand new dollar (Federal Reserve Note, mind you, not a precious metal dollar) that the actual figures one year from now will show Wisconsin did at least 5% better than projected. Mitch can hold the stakes. Better still, he can send them to Angry Clown in New York to be invested for us. The winner will be rich!
“A probabilistic forecast still lets you calculate an expected value and expected variance.”
Like a crapshoot! Got it.
““A probabilistic forecast still lets you calculate an expected value and expected variance…”
…subject to the scope and quality of the data going into the “Forecast”, naturally.
Perhaps the Philadelphia Fed needs to adjust their foil hat in order to receive the same signal you’re getting data from.
We repeat: the projections show ND – the most robust economy in the US, period – as being sluggish, along with Texas and Florida.
That just beggars reality.
Explanation? Other than “adjust your tinfoil” or “the Fed said it, so that’s all that matters”, I mean?
I do not believe that Emery understands the significance of the Philadelphia Fed’s numbers. Seriously. They aren’t numbers you can bet on, and they don’t say anything about the appropriateness of the GOP’s stewardship of the Wisconsin economy.
It is still an interesting question why Wisconsin continues to lag the rest of the country, and why the gap is widening, rather than stabilizing or shrinking.
Wisconsin economic activity lags all its neighbors, and slightly more than 2 percent cumulatively since 2011. Note that Wisconsin lags more than 2 percent against MN. To put the 2 percentage point differential with respect to MN, I wonder whether you’d contemplate your income reduced by 2% with such equanimity as you’ve just characterized Wisconsin’s relative performance. And let me say when reporting data constitutes point-scoring, then it is a sad time. What is it with conservatives and data?
BLS data (April) indicates an absence of strong employment growth.
http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.wi.htm
Emery wrote:
“What is it with conservatives and data?”
I dunno. Why do liberals have such a problem differentiating correlation and causation?
Or with throwing “data” at an argument without regard to whether it actually reaches the conclusion they think, or say, it does?
People on the left often forget that tax cuts are a keynesian stimulus. Better than government spending because you don’t have to worry about the ‘forward lookers’ cutting their spending in anticipation of tax increases that will be needed to pay off the borrowed government stimulus spending.
Perhaps your points should be directed to a liberal.
You do HAVE a dollar to wager, don’t you?
I guess we get to pick our own reality
Truer words have not been spoken a libeRAT. In Emery’s reality, hockey stick global warming projections are teh incontrovertable, settled truth. Hmm, are we sure Emery is not RickPlusOrMinusDFL?
You do HAVE a dollar to wager, don’t you?
In Emery’s reality, grass is legal tender, dontchaknow?