This just speaks volumes about the state of our state under Gov. Scott Walker.

Two headlines pertaining to Gov. Scot Walker

While I understand that Gov. Walker’s decision to cut $300 million in funding from the UW system is not tied to his decision to borrow $220 million to help build a basketball arena for the billionaire owners of the Milwaukee Bucks, it says something about Gov. Walker’s skewed priorities that he’d borrow hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for a basketball stadium at a time when the state is cutting hundreds of millions in dollars of funding from the University of Wisconsin system.

9 Responses to A tale of two headlines, courtesy of Scott Walker

  1. Rita Wittwer says:

    Please, please get this idiot out of Wisconsin. Exposing him on a national level will be so much fun and it might save us from his lunacy. This is why is doesn’t like public schools. It’s scary to know that a first grader is smarter than you are.

  2. Sue says:

    Do you think this is deliberate? Hard to believe they’re not trying to make a point here, even though they usually seem to downplay Walker’s negatives.

  3. Jake formerly of the LP says:

    That is a screenshot that should be on Dem ads for the next 5 months. And no, don’t keep your powder dry for elections.

    I’m not necessarily against the plan by itself, but I’d certainly like to see where they’re planning to put it and what other development it’s linked up to. And at a time with a massive budget deficit and those cuts to the UW (with more likely to follow to K-12 education)? That makes it a much tougher sell job for me.

    It’ll be verrrry interesting to see how talkers on AM620 (“your home for the Bucks!”) try to play this, given that this actually does divert state tax revenue and increase the state’s budget deficit, unlike the streetcar.

    • Jake, I agree – it will be interesting to see how the right-wing squawk brigade on AM620 justify spending tax dollars on a shiny new arena for the billionaire owners of the Milwaukee Bucks while the state faces a crushing budget deficit and steep cuts to essential programs, including in this case the UW system.

  4. Charles Kuehn says:

    Pro sports equates to distraction, fostering a certain amount of apathy toward pocketbook issues (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain) – not to mention channeling a gift to the already-wealthy owners (quid pro quo). On the other hand, a university education presumably produces an informed citizen able to think for himself (much harder to hide the man behind the curtain). Priorities? Whose? Yours? Mine? Think not.

  5. I’ll also add that I think our tax dollars can be better spent than by giving handouts to billionaires so they can squeeze more profits out of their businesses. After all, if this new stadium gets built, the investment the new Bucks owners made in the team will pay off handsomely for them down the road, as the team will have more value.

    And I’d love to hear those who support taxpayer funding for a new Bucks arena tell someone who’s too poor to go to a Bucks game to their face that tax dollars that could have gone to give them a hand up were better spent giving billionaires a handout to make their business more profitable.

  6. Jake formerly of the LP says:

    I know you’re a pathetic troll Steve, but can you at least try to troll in reality?

    1. By law, Tom Barrett and the City of Milwaukee cannot levy a jock tax or any other local tax and designate it for a Bucks arena. Only the state government can do that.

    2. The taxes for the players don’t go up ONE CENT. All this does is divert the taxes they do pay into a specific account for the arena. In fact, this will reduce the amount of taxes the state can use, and will widen Walker’s already-ballooning budget deficit.

    3. How can Barrett act on anything as Mayor when the Bucks owners haven’t even given a site for the new arena, and how it relates to larger development in the downtown area?

    Like most things in life, you suck at effective trolling.

    • EmmaR says:

      For a Centrist, Barrett’s not so bad. I’ve met him several times and always walk away thinking he’s the real deal but just not as good at selling himself and his ideas. I also know high profile, well-respected Republicans who regard him well. Doubtless it’s fun and games for the rabid to listen to Sykes and Belling and indulge in judgement, ridicule, and self-righteousness. Someday those two will have to stand and give an account of themselves and how will that work for them? Belling and Sykes talk. Barrett serves. Learn the difference.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Set your Twitter account name in your settings to use the TwitterBar Section.