During Friday’s debate, Tom Barrett noted that Scott Walker is the only governor in the nation with a criminal defense fund. Barrett wanted to know who was paying for the criminal defense fund, among other things. But Walker dodged Barrett’s questions and instead insisted that he’s “had a high level of integrity.” Walker’s comments opened the door for an increased level of scrutiny of his history, and social media sites have been ablaze all weekend with talk of Walker’s time at Marquette University, for good reason.
Under normal circumstances, a candidate’s college experiences probably wouldn’t be relevant. But since during the gubernatorial debate Walker himself called attention to his integrity and his history, and since there is documentation which shows that Walker may not have always acted with integrity, that information is extremely relevant.
During his time at Marquette, Walker ran for student body president. Both he and his opponent, John Quigley, were endorsed by the Marquette Tribune. But on February 24, 1988, the editorial board of the Marquette Tribune found it necessary to issue a retraction, essentially withdrawing their endorsement of Scott Walker for ASMU leader, claiming that Walker was “unfit” after brochures that appeared to smear his political opponent appeared on campus. From the original article:
…Tuesday morning, a Scott Walker campaign brochure was distributed on campus which amounts to nothing more than a blatant mudslinging spree.
Walker’s opponent is characterized, misleadingly, as “constantly shout(ing) about fighting the administration,” as “threatening lawsuits” and as “try(ing) to lead several ineffective protests of his own.” In short, the student body is asked to view Quigley as a wild-eyed radical determined to rouse the students into surrounding O’Hara Hall with stones and spears. His platform is caricatured as “just vague ideals.”
Wow.
Further:
Because the same brochure states-contrary to the text of Tuesday’s endorsement-that “the editorial board might not want Scott Walker’s effective leadership and dedication to serving the students,” some may attribute this retraction to a desire on our part to “get back at Walker.” This is untrue, but it is a perception we have to risk.
Clearly, the board did not make this decision lightly:
We examined the brochure without its reference to the editorial board and asked ourselves, “If this was part of the standard Walker campaign literature when we held the interviews, would we have written the endorsement differently?”
Every one of us had to answer yes. We could not have written, in good conscience, that Walker would be a good president. In our opinion, no one who responds to opposition by distorting (if not assasinating) the character of his opponent and making pouty accusations deserves to be president of the student body…”
But wait, there’s more:
We are also disappointed by reports of Walker campaign personnel picking up armfuls of Tuesday’s Tribune and throwing them away.
We are disappointed not because the papers contained our endorsements, but because it is a serious shame to see hours of work and thousands of advertising dollars deliberately made useless. And mostly because a great number of Marquette students were deprived of a chance to see the paper-coverage of the Maya Angelou presentation and the Marquette-Virginia Tech game, among other stories and the four-page health supplement.
Yeah, that doesn’t sound like integrity to me.
We don’t know the circumstances behind Walker’s decision to leave Marquette University. We don’t know if he was asked to leave due to illegal campaign activities, because he is not saying.
Walker has remained silent on both this and his involvement in the John Doe investigation.
I have been in contact with attorneys who have said that Walker may be hiding behind John Doe secrecy laws, that he may not be required to keep silent despite what he tells the public, in part, because it seems unreasonable for any judge to compel Walker to silence knowing that silence could destroy his career.
So why the secrecy?
There are too many questions that remain unanswered. The pubic deserves answers before the June 5, 2012 election, in the name of transparency and true integrity.
Yes, but maybe he doesn’t know the definition of integrity. Just saying.
Remember folks this whole recall is about one issue and one issue only. Do not allow the left to lie about this. Its is ONLY about union rights to your paycheck. They believe they have special entitlement rights. They DO NOT. Barrett has turned his back to the unions as even he does not believe in the entitlements. Scott Walker has done what the people in Wisconsin elected him to do he has earned the right to finish his term, the unions can again try and run Falk in 2013 and if the state is unhappy she will get elected. But the unions are not the voice of this state and their actions the last year have been as disgraceful of a event as we have ever seen in this state.
B.S. Public employee unions didn’t have an “entitlement,” they had a right under the law for decades to try to bargain with government for better pay and working conditions. It’s a matter of record that they often did not get what they sought, because government held most of the cards — e.g., public workers were banned by law from striking. State employees haven’t had a pay increase in six years and they’ve just taken a huge pay cut. Oh, yeah, what a bunch of powermongers. But moreover, it’s just plain ridiculous to drink the Walker Kool-Aid and pretend that Act 10 is the only issue motivating the recall. It was a key component, but there’s so very much more that Walker and his enablers have done to hurt seniors, students, teachers, the poor and the middle class in general, all in the name of giving tax breaks to and reducing regulation for businesses that are already running amok. Where ARE all those jobs they promised?
Dante,
Do you care to post something that actually addresses the merits of this discussion? You poor, stupid, ranting human being….
I agree with dante. The longer this recall goes on the more pathetic the unions and the democrats look in this state. You claimed to start this fight over collective bargining and now you guys have turned it into something else. You just want you power back. The good news is people are starting to realize this. You have no sympathy from anyone other then who was mooching off the rest of us or related to someone who was mooching of the rest of us. The real kicker is that you guys have no good answer for someone when asked why they should be forced to be in the union and pay dues(tax payer funded democratic party). We’re all still waiting. What’s wrong with choice?
Pete, do you think public employees “mooch” off others? I’m just looking for some clarification.
Dante & Pete:
More tax breaks for rich folks and corporations, taking away tax breaks that allow the working poor to stay afloat.
Attacks to wetlands and waterways, some successful (Green Bay), some not (Mining – so far anyway).
Attacks on renewable energy (windpower).
Attacks on a woman’s rights to, oh, a few things – we can assume there’s more on the horizon for the ladies of this state.
Etc. etc. etc.
Oh, yeah, and screwing public employee unions while setting the template for attacks on private unions (Manitowoc).
It’s such a full plate that Walker has served up that there’s something for everyone.
Attack to wetlands, Sue have you seen that corner in Green Bay where that store is going to built? Have you seen the plans for the store? My guess is NO to either question. As for the mine even Barrett has said eventually it will go through up there,
Attack on windpower? This is not the government but the people. Have you ever been in the Shirlry, Legdview area near Green Bay, it was the people who lived out there who fought and won against huge windfarms, not the local government who wanted it.
Attack on women? What attack what are you talking about? Are you talking about that three year old law that trial lawyers got Dems to put on the books and NOT once in those three years was ever used?
Stop using the unions uninformed talking points and look at the real world Sue, it would be less embarrassing for you.
Wetlands are wetlands for a reason…it’s not nice to fool mother nature. Quite frankly there should have been an addendum to wetlands measure…if you get permission to build in a wetland…any resultant flooding does not qualify for state or federal assistance.
Attack on Public Education!
Zach …. Absolutely
While I’m glad to see this post sparked thoughtful discussion, remember that the topic of this particular post is Walker’s integrity, or lack thereof.
Sometimes the comments here are so off-topic that it seems as though some people are using my posts to push their own ideas, regardless of what I write.
Kind of like spam.
That may not be the intent, but oftentimes that’s the result…I find that odd.
Well, I find much of what folks like dante write isn’t much better than spam.
Well, it depends on the intent of those commenting. If people seriously want to discuss the issues I write about in my posts-that’s great. But if they’re just going to write the same comments after each one of my posts, regardless of the topic, then it feels like spam.
(These are my personal opinions, I can’t speak for other BB contributors, of course.)
Correct, Lisa.
Like when Walker said it was essential for budgetary reasons that the collective bargaining provisions remain in the main bill. Then, somehow aghast that the Democrats weren’t just going to roll over, removed the collective bargaining provisions from the budget and passed them separately.
He lied to get elected, and lied after taking office. It is proven. You can end the conversation there. But NO, Walker continued the lying to the people of the state, thinking they were too stupid to see what was going on. He concocts his own shell game of employment numbers so bad that even the MJS had to call him on it.
Shall we go further?
Well, Walker is such a great leader, having taken office with solid majorities in both houses, that he still managed to squander that advantage through his ham handed, inept “leadership”. He threw two senators under the bus, compelled a third to resign, and could lose two more senators next week. He even put his own job in jeopardy.
And none of it had to happen. He could have achieved everything that he wanted on his agenda. He had the whole state government at his beck and call, and he squandered it. And people STILL want to blame it on the unions.
Unbelievable.
If I wrote a post about the importance of proper nutrition for kittens, I think I’d get anti-union comments after that post…
@Lisa: The best thing is to ignore them. Not once have they ever contributed to healthy debate.
Dante & Pete; plus other more sane people…
How long have you been hiding under a pile of rocks??? Walker’s failure to fess up to the secret email system in the Mil Cty Offices, just 25 ft away from his own office, used for campaigning and fundraising…. shows a serious lack of integrity. One of his closest associates has already pleaded guilty on that very issue, yet Walker has shown no concern for this illegal activity on the Taxpayers Dime. Voting for Walker when you know damn well 6 close associates have already been indicted and that more are likely to be soon, and possibly Walker himself means you condone this illegal activity. That means that your integrity is prety much equal to that of Walker’s, nearly ZERO
BadgerRed
ps
pls excuse any spelling mistakes.
Lisa, I admire this post and you did a terrific job clarifying Walker’s lack of integrity. His integrity was a moot point for me when he campaigned, and I knew he and his cronies were doing some underhanded dealing to win the election.
I understand that this is a far left blog and the post are going to be extremist viewpoints, especially Lisas, and the only way that a post here gets approval is to have the same opinion. I could not disagree more with what is posted here and there is no way anyone with common sense and clear thinking would. Lets be honest even one of the better writers who use to post here left because this blog has gone so far to the left.
Dearest Dante, Good, Gentle Dante:
You have a mind like a vacuum. Your voluminous grey matter just sucks everything in and hermetically seals it inside that great cavernous brain of yours. My goodness but your synapses must be expanding to enormous proportions. If you keep up your current pace of brilliance you might pop a cerebral gasket and we wouldn’t want that. Please stop torturing yourself with all this leftiness. You know perfectly well that lefties are incapable of grasping your infinite wisdom. Don’t you think it would be just and fitting to simply deny us the solidity of your unwavering hackery smackery? I beg of you, spare that marvelous brain of yours – why waste all your tact and panache here? Why titter about with lefties when your genial, multi-faceted, and adamantine brain – like a shining diamond on a hill – could be so much more instructive to righties? You can teach us nothing only because we are base and insipid groundlings; we’re only spectators to your spectacle of gumption and prudent horse sense. How can you expect us to ever taste your sweet reason?
Dante, do you believe that examining the integrity of the sitting governor is only the purview of the far left? That’s what your most recent comment suggests. Frankly, I think we should ALL be examining the integrity of our elected officials. There’s no question that Scott Walker’s integrity leaves a lot to be desired, as Lisa Mux and so many others have detailed. I suppose that his immediate family can rely on him (especially for hot ham and rolls after church on Sunday), and thus far the road builders can rely on him to expand highway construction and kill other mass transit (that $500,000+ in contributions was worth it). In fact, big-time funders of Walker’s campaigns have been able to rely on his “integrity.”
But the people in the state who need a governor who considers the needs of the entire state do not have a governor on whom they can rely.
So tell me, do you disagree that a governor, or any elected official, should be judged on his or her integrity? Why or why not? And how do you define integrity in the context of a governor who won election with the vote of 26% of registered voters?
Sure I believe in integrity and Scott Walker has done exactly what the people elected him to do. You say he does not represent the people well that is wrong if Barrett gets in the people will lose representation and once again Madison and Milwaukee will be heard and the rest of the state shut out.
Please dante, we’ve been through this a hundred times. Walker did not do what the people elected him to do because he lied to get elected. And where are the 250,000 jobs? Seriously, this is really getting old.
Lisa,
Thank you for drawing attention to Walker’s evasiveness during the debates. He answered relatively few questions which, indeed, illustrates his lack of integrity. The imprecision of his speech also demonstrates his lack of integrity, for example his dog whistle reference to “special interests” – presumably he means unions. Unions are not a special interest group. And it deflects attention from the real special interest groups to which he is beholden and currently answering to.
Like Rebecca Kleefisch’s debate performance, Walker not only fails to answer questions directly, he uses his podium time instead to tout his “record” in the vaguest of terms. And, as usual, his speech weaves the “royal we” in excess. I’m still trying to ascertain to whom “we” really refers. Whose reforms are “our reforms”?
Here’s integrity for you – he criticizes the Democratic Governor’s Association for getting involved in the recall and makes no mention of the immense help he’s received from the Republican Governor’s Association.
How he rewrites history also speaks to his integrity. One example that comes to mind is when he continually reiterates the idea that there’s no need for rehashing the collective bargaining debate. First, there was no debate. He never debated that issue. Two, by calling for a glossing over of it, he ignores his critics and doesn’t even feign at reaching out to them to address their concerns.
If he does win on June 5 will unions acquiesce, “move on” as Walker puts it or will they say No? Will they continue to stand their ground in a battle of wills and continue to say No! No! No!
Leaders with no integrity inspire similar attitudes among their rank and file. This is one of the most dangerous features of a low integrity official such as Scott Walker.
Also, Lisa, thank you for bringing the Marquette incident to the fore again. Not Eagle Scout behavior, that’s for sure.
Makes you wonder how exactly he “earned” his Eagle Scout badge, doesn’t it?
Every time I see one of Scottie’s lying commercials, I either want to barf or throw something. I can’t believe people can’t see through that lying mug.
Yeah, this was a little off topic. But to your point, we desperately need to get the John Doe looked at. It would be SWEEEEEET if they indicted him in the next two or three days.
I’ll give Walker an “innocent until proven guilty” being involved in the criminal charges of his aides and associates.
But I consider competence and truthfulness part of the integrity evaluation. Certainly Walker was not competent with his mishandling of the Milwaukee County Court House guards when it was determined his actions were not legal. And again as governor, Walker has shown by his hasty and ill-advised move to eliminate or restrict unions, and by his rejection of warning by members of his own party and by refusing to consider Archbishop Listecki counsel urging “caution” that he lacks sound judgement or competence. And has been noted many times here and elsewhere, Walker’s deliberate withholding to the electorate of his “divide and conquer” strategy is, was, and always will be known as a lie of epic egregious effects upon all Wisconsin citizens.
Also, I believe Eagle Scout Scott Walker forgot or has ignored his Boy Scout Oath:
“On my honor, I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”
I also believe he violated his Boy Scout Oath in willfully violating the first tenet of the Boy Scout Law:
“A Scout is: Trustworthy…”
I conclude Walker’s actions are unethical, immoral, and incompetent but await the findings of the “John Doe” investigation to judge if his actions are criminal.