Yep…
Scott Walker rejected Federal money & kicked families off healthcare programs but accepted Federal money to fix a bridge in a swing district
— VoteWisDems 🌊🌊🌊 (@VoteWisDems) October 23, 2013
13 thoughts on “This just about sums up Scott Walker’s hypocrisy…”
Comments are closed.
Interesting development for sure, that is quite a link in the commercial hub and it got a whole lot of press from the GB FAUX affilliate. Possibly a reason for the change of heart on Fed dollars.
BTW, did you see BBlue mentioned in the CapTimes, and Bill Kraus predicting Walker bowing out for the POTUS run and will likely not seek re-election as Gov.
http://host.madison.com/news/local/state-debate/state-debate-on-fightingbob-bill-kraus-predicts-scott-walker-won/article_4961fb04-3b1c-11e3-8ff6-001a4bcf887a.html
Forgot to add this earlier, something missing from the gubernatorial discussions thus far, without taking the State Senate in 2014, the legislature could be overturning any potential “D” gubernatorial vetoes with relative ease.
If Mike Tate was smart, he’d have this Tweet printed as bumper stickers. Today.
So drivers on a federal freeway should be allowed to drive, and possibly die on a compromised bridge?
Steve®
Nobody is presently, legally, driving on that compromised bridge. Your point being what, that you needed to prove to us how very little thought can go into any individual comment? Duly noted.
Have anything instructive or educational to bring to any post here? Would love to hear it, but ain’t holding my breath while waiting.
It’s a federal bridge being fixed with federal funds. What else is there to say? It’s not hard to understand who is going to pay. The quote is retarded at best, but understanding its readership it fits.
Well trademark, since you asked. Some of us old-fashioned types think “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of care.” We don’t think bridges should fall down, or just suddenly sink. We think they should be properly maintained so that they can safely and effectively carry commerce.
The problem starts with you excuse generating “I’m OK, You’re OK” types who don’t believe in individual responsibility. Someone should be fired, probably a whole bunch. When there isn’t accountability, this is the kind of thing that happens.
Can’t say you weren’t warned.
“Engineer says he never approved different method on installing O’Donnell panels
http://www.jsonline.com/newswatch/229008991.html#ixzz2ic7hLpBW”
http://www.jsonline.com/newswatch/229008991.html
Now you’re talking about a parking structure? Talk about changing the subject. Obama promised you stimulus to “Rebuild roads and bridges” A bridge just almost fell into the water. It’s Walker’s fault though, those evil republican’s pulled the plug on the bridge.
TRADEMARK, glad you’re finally figuring this stuff out.
“It’s Walker’s fault though, those evil republican’s pulled the plug on the bridge.”
Steve®
Yes, Mark E Bye’s suggestion would have been difficult to read at the proposed 70 mph highway speeds as a bumper-sticker. Though, by your argument, as it was Federal money coming in for the rail expansion, state-wide internet expansion, health-coverage expansion and all the rest of the money reject by Walker and his T-cronies, why isn’t the same theory you pose for the highway money applicable to those past projects?
Those rejected Fed dollars (part of which were taxes paid by WI residents) would have been improving infrastructure, benefiting all kinds of related private enterprise, resulting in expanded tax base for government operation and future re-investments in the systems mentioned and likely job creation, the same way these highway funds will be. Thanks for making the argument proving the hypocrisy of this exception, compared to previous rejections of Fed dollar investments in the state.
If it is not too beneath your dignity or too much work for you to actually address each particular person or person using an alias (cutting and pasting yours is pretty easy) to whom you are addressing a comment, it makes following this particular blog formatting a little easier to read for everyone, and it indicates to me, anyway, some minimal human respect for others involved in the conversation.
It’s an existing federally built bridge that just almost fell into the water. Federal funds will pay to fix it. This isn’t hard to understand and trying to compare it with money for pointless deficit increasing expansions ie new construction is silly. Federal money is crack to you guys, someone has to be the responsible one and put you all in rehab for a few years.
Steve, are there folks from Wall Street on this thread? Please point them out. Thanks in advance.
“Bank Of America Dumps $75 Trillion In Derivatives On U.S. Taxpayers With Federal Approval.”
http://seekingalpha.com/article/301260-bank-of-america-dumps-75-trillion-in-derivatives-on-u-s-taxpayers-with-federal-approval
To put that in perspective, US GDP in 2012 was around $16 trillion. Really conservative estimates of the costs in Iraq and Afghanistan are running at $6 trillion. Social Security’s Trust Fund is $2.3 trillion.
All the other Wall Street banks have a lot more derivative exposure. I’ve seen estimates of $700 trillion, but no one really knows.
When you start denigrating others in a discussion, it is clear to everyone you’ve got nothing but your own biased speculation. The bridge money won’t add to the deficit? The Fed money Walker turned down was happily spent by other states. Our share of Federal revenue was budgeted to be spent and was added to the share of other states. So Walker by short-changing real needs of the people of WI did nothing to either diminish the deficit or stop the Federally budgeted expenditures from being made and only served to punish WI taxpayers.
If you have nothing than more abusive personal characterizations and no facts backing your claims, do us all a small favor and STFU.