Where's The Ambassador

[flyoverhoya]

In case anyone's interested in a perspective from out here in WI (from someone who didn't vote for Scott Walker, but who doesn't really have a dog in this particular fight) -

1) The protesters are overwhelmingly WI folks - the emphasis in certain national media outlets on out-of-state protesters being bussed to Madison is overblown.

2) The counterprotest from last Saturday was also largely local, although organized by an out of state group (Americans for Prosperity). My take on it was that it's kind of sad that people who may have gone through private-sector losses (Mercury Marine, Kohler, Harley) are not complaining about their own situation, but saying "screw my neighbor, too."

3) The notion that Wisconsin didn't have budget problems until the recent business tax cuts is absurd. We were in a deep hole. That said, digging it $117MM deeper was not helpful.

4) The Club for Growth is running a truly despicable TV ad here - basically your stereotypical negative political ad (grainy B/W photos, dour music, gloom and doom narration) against public employees.

5) We're going to go broke on recall elections in the next 12 months. A Utah group is trying to start petitions against 8 Democrats, and about 6 Republicans are facing home-grown recall efforts. Once we get to 12 months from last election day, expect several more, including one against Walker.

6) Generally speaking, Wisconsin has relatively high taxes, but also great public services and schools. That's been the deal for quite some time, and it'll be a shame if it goes away. Quality of life is what we have to offer here.

7. It was warm (40s) last week. That sort of weather in Feb. will get alot of people outside.

Two cents from ground zero.

[Boz]

Alright, who wants to fight about something?

*&^%$##$^%%$!!!!!!! [edited]

[nodak89]

Feb 23, 2011 23:02:53 GMT -5 Boz said:

Alright, who wants to fight about something?

*&^%$##$^%%$!!!!!!! [edited]

I'm too bummed about Wright to fight.

But I'll try.

IGNORE GLEN BECK!!!

FOOTBALL!!! BOOTS!!! KIT!!! PITCH!!!

[Boz]

Frack.

My heart's not in it either.

Maybe I'll be up for some bickering this afternoon, who knows?

Meantime, I'll take my aggressions out on the trolls over on the main board.

[TBird41]

Boz Doctrine goes mainstream: douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/02/populism-and-the-partisan-mind/

[TBird41]

iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2011/03/longhorns-17-badgers-1.html

As a son of Iowa, I'm no stranger to bragging about my home state's ranking on various standardized test. Like Wisconsin we Iowans usually rank near the top of the heap on average ACT/SAT scores. We are usually joined there by Minnesota, Nebraska, and the various Dakotas; Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire...

... beginning to see a pattern? Perhaps because a state's "average ACT/SAT" is, for all intents and purposes, a proxy for the percent of white people who live there. In fact, the lion's share of state-to-state variance in test scores is accounted for by differences in ethnic composition. Minority students - regardless of state residence - tend to score lower than white students on standardized test, and the higher the proportion of minority students in a state the lower its overall test scores tend to be.

Please note: this has nothing to do with innate ability or aptitude. Quite to the contrary, I believe the test gap between minority students and white students can be attributed to differences in socioeconomic status. And poverty. And yes, racism. And yes, family structure. Whatever combination of reasons, the gap exists, and it's mathematical sophistry to compare the combined average test scores in a state like Wisconsin (4% black, 4% Hispanic) with a state like Texas (12% black, 30% Hispanic).

[WilsonBlvdHoya]

Boz and fellow-riders, the comment to Douthat's ramblings is far more trenchant than anything he's ever produced. To wit:

"You know, this made the rounds on Facebook the other day and sums it up better than I can here:

A unionized employee, a member of the Tea Party, and a corporate CEO sit at a table with a dozen cookies on a plate. The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 of the cookies, looks at the Tea Partier and says, "Watch out for that union guy - he wants a piece of your cookie."

[jerseyhoya34]

Douthat is one more voice in the mushy-headed, postmodern dream of moral equivalence.

[Boz]

Mar 3, 2011 8:59:09 GMT -5 WilsonBlvdHoya said:

Boz and fellow-riders, the comment to Douthat's ramblings is far more trenchant than anything he's ever produced. To wit:

"You know, this made the rounds on Facebook the other day and sums it up better than I can here:

A unionized employee, a member of the Tea Party, and a corporate CEO sit at a table with a dozen cookies on a plate. The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 of the cookies, looks at the Tea Partier and says, "Watch out for that union guy - he wants a piece of your cookie."

Strong argument. Never mind that the corporate CEO probably paid for most of the ingredients to make the cookies.

And also employed the baker.

[TBird41]

Oh, by the way, it's cool that we're talking about my first post, but everyone clicked on the link on the second one, right? The one that showed that Texas actually does a better job educating than most states w/ teacher unions when you control for race?

[Boz]

Mar 3, 2011 10:14:53 GMT -5 TBird41 said:

Oh, by the way, it's cool that we're talking about my first post, but everyone clicked on the link on the second one, right? The one that showed that Texas actually does a better job educating than most states w/ teacher unions when you control for race?

You also need to control for participation, regardless of race or other factors. It stands to reason that states with a small number of students taking the SATs are going to have better average test scores than states where nearly everyone takes the test.

www.commonwealthfoundation.org/policyblog/detail/2010-sat-scores-by-state

[TBird41]

Mar 3, 2011 10:27:30 GMT -5 Boz said:

Mar 3, 2011 10:14:53 GMT -5 TBird41 said:

Oh, by the way, it's cool that we're talking about my first post, but everyone clicked on the link on the second one, right? The one that showed that Texas actually does a better job educating than most states w/ teacher unions when you control for race?

You also need to control for participation, regardless of race or other factors. It stands to reason that states with a small number of students taking the SATs are going to have better average test scores than states where nearly everyone takes the test.

www.commonwealthfoundation.org/policyblog/detail/2010-sat-scores-by-state

That makes sense. The site I linked to used the National Assessment of Educational Progress for 4th & 8th graders rather than the SAT/ACT for that reason.

And, to be fair to Wisconsin, Badger Hispanic 4th graders did do better on the Science portion of the test, even if Badger Hispanic 8th graders weren't able to match their counterparts in Texas.

[WilsonBlvdHoya]

Mar 3, 2011 10:04:23 GMT -5 Boz said:

Mar 3, 2011 8:59:09 GMT -5 WilsonBlvdHoya said:

Boz and fellow-riders, the comment to Douthat's ramblings is far more trenchant than anything he's ever produced. To wit:

"You know, this made the rounds on Facebook the other day and sums it up better than I can here:

A unionized employee, a member of the Tea Party, and a corporate CEO sit at a table with a dozen cookies on a plate. The CEO reaches across the table, takes 11 of the cookies, looks at the Tea Partier and says, "Watch out for that union guy - he wants a piece of your cookie."

Strong argument. Never mind that the corporate CEO probably paid for most of the ingredients to make the cookies.

And also employed the baker.

Wrong again, Boz. The CEO MANAGES the enterprise. Which means (S)he gets to decide which baker/ingredients/cookie factory etc. ON BEHALF of the shareholders. The shareholders PAID for the baker/ ingredients/cookie factory etc. (as well as PAID for the CEO!) by investing their capital in the enterprise.

If CEOs and other execs want to appropriate the lion's share of enterprise compensation because they believe they're principally responsible for the success of the firm, fine. But there better be an active and vigilant shareholder constituency and boards of directors which hold management accountable for its actions (which, of course, doesn't occur in early 21st-century versions of American capitalism).

So who holds senior management accountable in America? Answer, no one. (I'll roll my eyes now.....)

[jerseyhoya34]

I'd add that the CEO also funnels money to candidates to make sure he is not oppressed by our draconian tax system. Heaven forbid that he did not get to depreciate all the crap in his shop.

[Boz]

I'm hungry.

[jerseyhoya34]

Semi-rhetorical question: If the Republicans are so good at creating jobs, how come they have not done it this century?

[TBird41]

Mar 3, 2011 13:36:43 GMT -5 @jerseyhoya34 said:

Semi-rhetorical question: If the Republicans are so good at creating jobs, how come they have not done it this century?

Who creates private sector jobs?

[jerseyhoya34]

The elephant in the room is that Obama takes the blame for unemployment in the private sector, but the same folks are unwilling to give him credit when jobs are created. Which one is it?

For all of the talk about how certain folks would "show us" how to create jobs, I've only seen these folks act out Rovian parables, as in Wisconsin.

[hoyawatcher]

When we get back to the 8% unemployment so strongly promised with the first stimulus bill then I will be quite happy to give Obama credit for all the jobs created above and beyond that. Until then ... not so much.

[TBird41]

Mar 3, 2011 14:45:07 GMT -5 @jerseyhoya34 said:

The elephant in the room is that Obama takes the blame for unemployment in the private sector, but the same folks are unwilling to give him credit when jobs are created. Which one is it?

For all of the talk about how certain folks would "show us" how to create jobs, I've only seen these folks act out Rovian parables, as in Wisconsin.

You didn't answer the question.

Who creates private sector jobs?