250,000 jobs created at a minimum – Not So Much!
An economic forecast by Gov. Scott Walker’s own administration predicts that Wisconsin will fall far short of adding the 250,000 new private-sector jobs by 2015 that the governor promised as a key part of his successful election campaign.
The Department of Revenue report released Friday predicts that by 2014, the state will have added only 136,000 jobs in the private sector compared with 2010. The job growth estimate was down 43,000 from the department’s previous report released in June.
Scott Walker and the republican majority have fallen far short in many many ways.
Adding jobs would be quite a change from the last 3 months, given that Wisconsin is 49th in the nation for jobs under Walker’s budget.
And check out the assumptions the LFB had when it anticipated solid revenue growth for 2011-2012. We aren’t going to come close to that, and we’ll be in a budget deficit within a few months.
RECALL these failures.
Their policies have failed, and they have admitted it. It is time to reverse their policies in hopes that the entire state doesn’t sink while they’re at the helm.
It’s amazing that when you don’t know anything about economics and what you think you know is wrong, you can’t make any progress on creating jobs. When your whole political career is based on crony capitalism, this is what you get. Walker… An EPIC FAILURE. Recall indeed!
Ha ha ha epic failure after A few months.Then Obama must be a colossal incompetent one term loser
*Sigh*
Reading what you write is painful, Ray. What words you use, you waste on diatribe sans evidence, logical analysis or facts.
Walker said his policies would work, and he had insurmountable Republican majorities in both the Senate and the Assembly to pass any little thing that his heart desired. The result? EPIC FAILURE.
Walker and the President? Apples and oranges.
President Obama has had his hands tied by cynical Congressional Republicans willing to tank the economy in order to score enough political point to regain the White House in 2012, by Congressional Republicans fixated for some reason on restricting abortion rights, of all things, rather than on job creation.
As always, it is regrettable to see ideology blinding you to the obvious.
2012 is going to be interesting. The wingnuts are floundering, Republican tax policies are under fire and the country is starting to blame Republicans for the state of the economy.
I wonder what Ray will have to say when President Obama is re-elected, when the Democratic Party regains control of Congress, and when Walker is recalled.
(*laughing*)
Well, I imagine that he’ll be kind of quiet.
In the meantime, Ray, how about presenting a logically reasoned and evidence-based point once in a while, instead of always throwing snarky “peanuts” like this one from the “peanut gallery” in an effort to deflect away from something that you find embarrassing or hard to explain/defend?
Look, if you lack the maturity or the intellectual chops to do that, we’ll understand. It is a common wingnut/teabagger/Republican failing.
Let me add, Zuma, that responding as Ray does is a sure way off this blog in time. If you can’t offer content based in logic that addresses the point of the article, then this community doesn’t need you. I’m sure the powers that be would agree that we’ll give you a lot of rope with which to hang yourself. . . er, ah. . . make some cogent comments. But the tolerance here for trolling doesn’t last forever.
“If you can’t offer content based in logic that addresses the point of the article, then this community doesn’t need you. I’m sure the powers that be would agree that we’ll give you a lot of rope with which to hang yourself. . . er, ah. . . make some cogent comments. But the tolerance here for trolling doesn’t last forever.”
If only that were true, Steven. With Ray, it’s lasted as long as he’s been commenting here.
Ray has been on Blogging Blue for a very long time. What he wrote up above was tame, almost “erudite”, in comparison to what he generally writes, which usually includes ‘bon mots’ like “libtard”, a label which Ray recently applied to Phil Scarr and me.
That one got Zach’s attention, and he told Ray, “Write that again and see what happens.” I, for one, was more than a little surprised that Zach said anything at all, much less something that pointed.
Well, truth be told, Ray has used that particular term a lot in the past, along with a variety of other infantile wingnutitudes without suffering any apparent consequences. He may not use “libtard” again in order to avoid the “wrath of Zach”, but I can guarantee you that he will continue commenting in a similar vein.
Based on past experience, unfortunately, I can also almost guarantee you that, even though Ray won’t ever “offer content based in logic that addresses the point of [a given] article” or “make some cogent comments”, he probably won’t ever get the boot.
Unless Zach just happens to accidentally run across another one of Ray’s “libtard” comments or finally realizes that Ray is just a less verbose version of Notalib, I just don’t see it ever happening.
But, that said, Ray is really nothing more than an annoying little gnat that most of us just flick off without a second thought. He makes Blogging Blue look bad, though, but, if Zach can live with that, I guess I can, too.
That said, if it was my call, Ray would be gone.
If your only going to hold out for well reasoned rational republicans who have solidly logical beliefs and truly believe what they are saying, you will be waiting a very long time.
That being said no one( at least i dont and think people agree with me) wants to read a completely one sided blog where everyone agrees. It makes for a very boring blog(ask Fred).
Im not for kicking anyone out, let them be and show the world(and independents) who they are.
the thing is their only goal is to muddy the waters. Look at how Orly took th first amendment posts to crazy paths. Dont buy into their BS, if you dont allow them to muddy the waters, then they cant.
“That being said no one( at least i dont and think people agree with me) wants to read a completely one sided blog where everyone agrees. It makes for a very boring blog(ask Fred). ”
Well, I hear ya, Jeff, but I don’t think that that’s what Steven and I were talking about.
I dig going back and forth with Locke or ForgotMyScreenName.
I don’t, however, like having to deal with the juvenile vitriol of people like Notalib or Ray.
Steven and I weren’t talking about turning Blogging Blue into a one-sided blog that doesn’t allow for intelligent and articulate conservative opinion. We were talking about the need to exclude people like Notalib and Ray who irrationally insult without ever contributing anything of substance to the discourse.
Ray’s politics aren’t at issue, Jeff. His maturity is. I wouldn’t recommend anyone’s exclusion based upon their political leanings. I would, however, recommend it based upon their inability to act like an adult.
thats what I am saying Z. When people come in and bring nothing to the table, just ignore them. Let their posts speak for the right wing wisconsin voter that they are.
Agree with Jeff and Steven. Banning is left to the truly horrendous statement or action (like sock puppetry….). Those meatheads don’t make anyone look bad but themselves.
If you see the trollish folks as the rest of us do and as you say: as fleas not worthy of a second thought, then your behavior certainly belies that. Not that I don’t enjoy your rants at times, but these guys know every time they burp out a neanderthalish utterance they’re gonna get a 10 paragraph diatribe from ZB. It’s kinda why they do it. Fleas not worthy of second thought also aren’t worthy of intelligent, rational 10 paragraph replies.
IMO, anyway.
Adding…because you can’t rationalize with stupid.
JCG: “[T]hese guys know every time they burp out a neanderthalish utterance they’re gonna get a 10 paragraph diatribe from ZB.”
Yeahhhh, JCG, I don’t think they think about it or care, at least in the short term. Like a toddler throwing a temper tantrum, or a monkey in a cage throwing their poop at spectatots, they’re just “in the moment” and acting out.
In “10 paragraph replies”, or in shorter or longer ones, for that matter, all I do is shine a brighter light on things for the benefit of the “non-Neanderthals”.
That said, in the longer term, my “rants” have given, and give, even “Neanderthals” like Notalib pause. If you had been down “in the weeds” of the exchanges that Notalib and I had, both here on the blog, and by e-mail, you would have seen the significant impact that my “rants” had on his anachronistic, juvenile, bigoted facade.
[By the way, JCG, you do me a disservice in calling what I write “rants”. They’re not really “rants”, are they? You’re grinding are very strange axe here, brothers, given that “the Neanderthals” usually refer to what I write as such, whatever the content.]
In any event, when I talk about the need to ban people, it relates to doing only what is absolutely necessary to both elevate the discourse and to limit infantile cognitive dissonance.
Phil Scarr just wrote a comment elsewhere on the blog where he expressed a certain nostalgia for the likes of intelligent and erudite conservatives like William F. Buckley, Jr. I share in that nostalgia, just as I enjoy the challenge of sparring with people like Locke and ForgotMyScreenName here.
I’ve often thought about how embarrassed conservatives like William F. Buckley, Jr. would be at the likes of Notalib and Ray. And I sincerely doubt that they would lobby, as you apparently seem inclined to do, for allowing them to “remain on board” if all they do is “throw [infantile] “poop”.
I want the intelligent conservatives out there to argue the conservative case here on Blogging Blue, not “freak show” participants like Notalib and Ray. We more effectively carry the day when we prevail in debates with conservatives like that, than by embracing the idea of entertaining the infantile, “freak show”, cognitive dissonance of the likes of Notalib and Ray for no better reason than to embarrass the conservative movement and woo independents.
You’ve got Plato and Socrates spinning in their graves with talk, and expectations, like that. JCG, I don’t think that you could be more wrong about it.
I happen to think that Zach wants more for Blogging Blue than a blog that resembles the “Jerry Springer Show” whenever people like Notalib and Ray show up. It should be about civil and rational discourse here, JCG, not about doing your level best to taint the world of conservative ideas with the infantile, “freak show” contributions of people like Notalib and Ray.
They aren’t really contributing “conservative ideas”. They’re just “throwing poop.”
The rest of us deserve better.
For the record, JCG, you’d be better off figuring out ways of proactively articulating the progressive point of view than in counting the number of paragraphs contained in my comments, or in justifying Ray’s continued presence on Blogging Blue.
[Just to save you the trouble, this is 15 paragraphs long.]
Phil Scarr’s comment can be found on “Proud To Be A Liberal”.