Personally, I only see two...alright three questions on the Baldwin-Azar split.

1) Why is this news?  I mean seriously, it's a "divorce," rather common place today.

2) Will the long-rumored "truth" behind Azar's appointment to the PSC (She's there because of Tammy, not because of anything else) finally be admitted?

3) Will we get a press release when the invalid Canadian marriage of Mark Pocan ends someday too?

U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin and her partner of nearly 15 years are separating.

Baldwin, a Madison Democrat and first open lesbian elected to Congress, issued a statement through her office Friday saying she and Lauren Azar are terminating their domestic partnership.

They were among the first to sign up for Wisconsin's domestic partnership registry for same-sex couples last year.

Azar is a member of the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities. She was appointed by Gov. Jim Doyle in 2007.

The statement said Baldwin and Azar would have no more comment about the private matter.

I'm overall...indifferent on Gay Marriage since 2006.  Oh, I still believe I voted the right way on the Marriage Amendment, since I wouldn't trust State Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abramhamson on deciding the issue on the merits of the law or the Wisconsin Constitution -- which by the way actually states marriage as between "a husband and a wife."  (I'm still waiting for the state left to attack Doyle for his classic "Only an idiot doesn't know what that means" press release.)

As a Catholic, I firmly believe the word "Marriage" means something.  So, while I'm okay with any form of same-sex domestic partnership, could the homosexual community please not sully the word "Marriage" even more?

Lord knows the heteros and divorce attorneys (Face it, the real winners in any successful state with a "Gay Marriage" law are the divorce attorneys.) have done enough damage already to the institution.

It's only 45 days. It's nothing to cheer about.  This is both a sad statement about Wisconsin's continued slaps on the wrist for drunk drivers and makes Pedro Colon's outburst against Steve Nass look even more juvenile.

An embattled Wisconsin lawmaker has been sentenced to 45 days in jail for driving drunk.

Rep. Jeff Wood, a Chippewa Falls independent, pleaded no contest in Columbia County Circuit Court to third offense operating under the influence and possession of drug paraphernalia, both misdemeanors. Prosecutors in exchange dismissed a count of third offense operating a motor vehicle with a prohibited alcohol concentration and marijuana possession.

Judge Daniel S. George also revoked Wood's license for 27 months and ordered him to use an ignition interlock device for two years.

A state trooper arrested Wood in Columbia County in December 2008. Prosecutors say he crashed his car into a highway sign and urinated on the side of the road. A breath test showed Wood's blood alcohol level was nearly twice the legal limit.

Wood still has two more OUI cases pending.

Ricky Martin is Gay

Yeah, didn't see that one coming. (Enough sarcasm there?)

The Latest RNC Issue

Clearly, the issue at hand is the RNC's Finance Department, and whoever was the person in it who thought okay to approve the $2,000 expenditure at the West Hollywood club should either be disciplined or all-out terminated.  From indications posted at the Corner, there will be a sacking of some sort coming shortly.  One thing a lot of Republican candidates out West (the man at fault seems to be a California direct-mail consultant)

I do think dragging in Chairman Steele into this aspect of the story was unprofessional of the The Daily Caller, especially since they were backtracking on the story as the day went on in regards to the West Hollywood club.   Though, can we finally have a week where the RNC finances are not a story unto themselves?

What Are the Odds?

In a story about approval rating on Speaker Pelosi, the Washington Post called 1000 people at random for their input.  One of them was a "John Murtha of Orlando, Florida, who was quoted in the story.

Obviously the name rang some bells in political circles.  It was weirder than that, it was the son of the very late Congressman.

The Zoo SNAFU (Trademark Pending)

Watching the spin from a far on what has to have been the most avoidable transportation problem in Wisconsin history is a blast.  The Barrett guys look like they're whining, the Walker guys can't seem to have enough fun, and liberal bloggers are to the point of depravity.

My favorite is former Norquist aide James Rowen, who seems to think conservatives are happy the Zoo is a mess (Sorry Jim, were not happy, we're simply pointing out it could have been avoidable.).  Admittedly, the irony isn't lost on me hearing a former Norquist aide talk about the Zoo collapsing; since Barrett pretty much picked up the torch Norquist had carried when it came to highways and the Metro Milwaukee area.

The Neumann Rumor Mill

Having worked on campaigns before, let's be clear with ourselves; it wasn't a cool or smart move.  It's also not the end of the world for the Neumann campaign or this young kid's career.  It's about a 1.75 out of 10 on the "Worst Things Campaigns can do to Each Other" Scale.  It's amateur no doubt, but the lasting damage is negligible at least.  It's an act which will be forgotten by next month.

The only comparable thing in primary campaigns past I've seen (and frankly she'll be pissed I mention this again, but screw it we already hate each other) is when Katie Harbath was caught starting a whisper campaign of sorts June 2007 within the Rudy Giuliani Presidential Campaign against the Mitt Romney campaign with sending an email to bloggers about a story in a Salt Lake City newspaper about "The White Horse Prophesy," a discredited legend about a Mormon in the White House.  At the end, it caused a personal phone call of apology from Rudy to Mitt for the email.

What both Walker and Neumann campaigns (and bloggers siding with either side) should do is just let the story go.  The damage is done -- mostly self-inflicted to Neumann -- and there's not much else to gain by bringing it up again. If there's been a behind-the-scenes apology between both men, the better.

As for the staffer, buck up.  You screwed up.  It happens.  Now just keep you head down and do your job to the best of your ability.

Just think, we're gonna have some really nice highways to Illinois...

State authorities closed the Highway 45 bridge carrying traffic northbound over I-94 in the Zoo Interchange shortly before 11 a.m. Friday, fearing that overweight trucks could collapse the deteriorating span.

The bridge, which carries an average of 42,000 vehicles per day, will remain closed until its replacement is completed. That work, started in January as part of an emergency repair project, is expected to be done by Memorial Day.

"This is a public safety action," said Ryan Luck, construction manager with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. "There's no room to gamble on this."

After inspections detected dangerous cracking and deterioration of the bridge in the summer of 2009, the DOT imposed weight limits on three bridges in the interchange. They then acted to replace them, under an emergency contract.

Officials said that overweight trucks continued to travel on the northbound bridge, compounding the deterioration and creating a danger of collapse.

Northbound traffic will be detoured east onto I-94 and returned to the freeway via 84th St. and the westbound freeway.

This is the heaviest traveled highway in Wisconsin, even more so then the recent replaced "Marquette Interchange" in Milwaukee of I-43/I-94.  How this doesn't have an effect on the Governor's race given the history of it (Doyle and Milwaukee Democrats pushed repairs on the Zoo for YEARS because of the urging of Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, who is running to replace Doyle.) is beyond me?

Somewhere, a bunch of Democratic spokes-flacks are huddled in a room in Madison (with a conference call to a room in Milwaukee for good measure) trying to figure out a way to deflect blame.

UPDATE: The Walker Campaign was nice enough to post a map of the detour the Zoo will now be undertaking.

Both the Neumann and the Barrett campaigns have chimed in as well on the Zoo Interchange issue as well.  Neumann comes off like he's reading you the history of the problem (countless  transportation fund raids, in-fighting from Milwaukee politicians, and poor DOT planning).  Barrett sounds like they know they're backed in a corner on this one and are lashing out; particularly at the Walker campaign.

Also, in what is a sure sign of the "Oh, $#!+" status for Barrett on this issue, it's 4:15 CT -- admittedly on a Friday -- and I have yet to see a post from the usual set of liberal bloggers in the Cheddarsphere trying to spin this one.

Just breaking...

Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen says he is asking Governor Jim Doyle and the state legislature to allow him to bring legal action against certain parts of the Federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

"We have now had enough time to review the law and to review the law that exists that applies to this new law to determine that we believe that there are constitutional violations that exist, and we have requested the authority of our state government to sue," said Van Hollen on Newsradio 620 WTMJ's "Midday with Charlie Sykes."

However, he says that if the legislature and Doyle do not approve, they cannot act.

"If they say no, we cannot proceed," said Van Hollen.

Both the legislature and the Governor's Mansion are in the hands of Democrats.  Van Hollen is a Republican.

Oh dear lord, Doug La Follette's in charge...

Gov. Jim Doyle and Lt. Gov. Barb Lawton are both out of the state this week, begging the question: Who’s in charge?

Doyle departed for a 10-day trade mission to Italy and Tunisia on Wednesday but didn’t bother telling Lawton he was leaving. She found out about it from a news release she read in Washington, D.C., where she’s attending a conference until Monday.

The Wisconsin Constitution says when the governor’s out of state, the lieutenant governor serves as acting governor. It’s unclear what happens when they are both gone, but the secretary of state is next in the line of succession.

Secretary of State Doug La Follette said he didn’t know both Doyle and Lawton were gone until he heard it reported Friday morning on Wisconsin Public Radio.

“I’m here and will be around all weekend,” La Follette said Friday afternoon. “It’s interesting, I wonder if I need to give my phone number to someone? But my home phone number is in the phone book, if anyone needs me.”

According to a 1979 ruling by the state Attorney General at that time, it states as long as the Governor can have communications with his office; he is still the one in charge.

Doyle is said to be invoking this ruling for his trip.  The only time Doyle willingly had to let anyone else run Wisconsin during his tenure was for a few hours when he was under general anesthesia for a surgery in 2007.  It's rumored Barbara Lawton and Ed Garvey did an Irish jig in her office for a part of that time.

One needs to file this away in the "Hey, Why Aren't You Exactly?" folder.

The absences of four Milwaukee County Board supervisors from Thursday's meeting means more supervisors view the job as part time, County Board Chairman Lee Holloway said.

"It's not the greatest priority in their life," Holloway said, adding that he didn't mean the remark as criticism.

Just 14 of 18 supervisors were present for Thursday's meeting. A 19th supervisory seat has been vacant since former Supervisor Toni Clark resigned two weeks ago, the same day she pleaded guilty to a felony campaign charge.

Holloway said Thursday's absences were the highest in his 18 years on the board. A check of county records showed no more than two supervisors were absent from any County Board meeting since the board downsized from 25 to 19 members in April 2004.

Supervisors absent Thursday were Gerry Broderick, Elizabeth M. Coggs, Lynne De Bruin and Patricia Jursik. Broderick is recuperating from knee surgery. Holloway said he didn't know the reasons for the other supervisors' absences.

The Journal Sentinel goes on to report that all but Coggs could be accounted for.  De Bruin's being a good mother preparing for her eldest daughter's wedding this weekend (Many blessings to the young couple.) and Jursik was said to be attending to personal matters.

Did any of this matter?  Honestly, I don't know.  With the hacks at the Milwaukee Co. Board who honestly believe they need to be full-time when clearly few other Wisconsin counties believe such a "benefit of the job" is necessary, I truthfully don't think this vote would have been much different.

A proposal to cut pensions of elected Milwaukee County officials to match the same trim approved for other county workers was defeated Thursday by the County Board on a 7-7 vote.

The measure came up only after a substitute calling for a study of the county joining the state pension system also failed on a tie vote.

Voting in favor of imposing a 20% cut on future pension credit on supervisors, County Executive Scott Walker and a handful of other elected county officials were: supervisors Mark Borkowski, Paul Cesarz, Christopher Larson, Joseph Rice, Joe Sanfelippo, Jim "Luigi" Schmitt and Peggy West.

Voting against the pension cut were supervisors Marina Dimitrijevic, Willie Johnson Jr., Theo Lipscomb, Michael Mayo Sr., Johnny Thomas, John Weishan Jr. and Lee Holloway.

Supervisors should take the pension cut in solidarity with county employees, whose pensions also are being cut or proposed for cutting, Sanfelippo said. The pension cut was part of a series of employee concessions included in the 2010 budget, but supervisors were excluded from that action.

Would the extra supervisors being there made a difference?  I don't know, perhaps that's a question for another time if this motion is brought up before the board.  "If" being the prime thing.

Perhaps all the drones at the next "Drinking Liberally" can ask County Supervisor Weishan why he was a "No" vote on this?  I hear he attends occassionally.  Big buddy of Liebenthal's I've read at his blog; "big source" or some such thing.

Interesting blog post by the Journal Sentinel's Alan Brosuk on Milwaukee Mayor (and Democratic Candidate for Governor) Tom Barrett and what he sees as the biggest hurdle when it comes to truly reforming the finances of the Milwaukee Public School (MPS) System: High-prices health insurance.

Barrett is still pushing for a mayoral takeover of MPS, even though the idea seems all but dead in the Wisconsin State Legislature -- controlled by Democrats.  The idea a victim of massive Democratic in-fighting and Republicans unwilling to back the idea for both political reasons and Barrett's own history of antipathy towards MPS and open hostility towards the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program in his tenure as Mayor.

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett is calling on Milwaukee Public Schools and union leaders to work quickly on ways to get more MPS employees to take less expensive health insurance.

In an interview, Barrett said, "I'm calling on the school district, on the School Board, on the representatives of the employees, to meet as quickly as possible to see if they can find a solution to stave off" what lies ahead for MPS, including projections of cuts in hundreds of teaching jobs and increases in average class size.

"I believe a big component of that is putting more people into the lower cost health care plan," he said. MPS offers two health plans, and about 80% of employees take one that costs $7,380 a year more for a family than the other plan.

Barrett put the issue in personal terms: His wife, Kris, is an MPS teacher. Barrett said that when he became mayor, they considered both MPS plans, as well as the city's plan. They decided that the lower cost MPS plan was equal to the city's policy. MPS offers $500 to employees who decline insurance. So the Barretts took the city plan and the $500.

"I felt the lower cost plan was good enough for my own children," Barrett said.

He said he understands that health insurance is a crucial and emotional issue for MPS employees.

"I'm not trying to take away their insurance," he said. "But I am interested in doing everything I can to make sure we do not have an increase in the average class size per teacher. I don't want to see hundreds of teachers and other employees from the school district laid off."

First of all, let me applaud Barrett's stance on this issue.  I just however wonder if he's going to stick with it once he has that behind-closed-door meeting with the powers-that-be at the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC).  After all, they're about to lose their wholly-owned subsidiary in Governor Jim Doyle and they're going to need a new champion soon.  Barrett, naturally fits that bill.

Recall of course, that the bulk of health insurance for teachers in the state of Wisconsin is provided by WEA Trust; which is nothing more than a side company set up and owned by the very teachers union.  Has anyone asked if Barrett; as Governor, going to allow for school districts to shop around for more affordable health insurance packages?  Or is he going to bend as soon as WEAC tells him to shut up, as they do ever Democrat running for Governor?

Only time will tell.  And an aside, I'm still waiting for that post on WEA Trust's exploding costs from all the folks who've raised holy hell about California seeing a 39% increase from its sole insurance provider.  Perhaps there's a lesson in allowing people to shop around in there?

I'll post the story (H/T to Brad Vogel at LIB for the 411) and then comment.

This Tuesday, the state Assembly is set to vote on a proposed bill that would crack down on race-based mascots and logos in Wisconsin schools.

Under the bill, the state Department of Public Instruction would investigate complaints about race-based names, nicknames, logos or mascots.

School boards would then be given a chance to argue that the logos or mascots don't discriminate, harass, or stereotype.

If schools refuse to make changes, they could be fined by the state superintendent.

Brad does a fine job at this blog talking about the potential legal aspects of this law.  It's a good read from the future lawyer.

If I were a betting man (and given the number of times I get proven right by my hunches, I really should become one), I'd say the lead advocates of this are Carol and Harvey Gunderson, of Osseo, Wisconsin.  Carol and Harvey are two retired college professors (Carol from UW-Stout, Harvey from UW-Eau Claire), who have made it their mission in their retirement to try to eliminate Indian and Native American mascots used by various school districts in Wisconsin since 2001.  Most of this is because of Carol's direct decendency from an original Wisconsin Native American tribe.

It should be noted that Osseo's own schools (Osseo-Fairchild School District) use the mascot of "The Chieftains," which tells you how successful they've been in their hometown.

It should also be disclosed that I worked as Harvey's last student assistant at UW-Eau Claire until his retirement.

On occasion, I'd talk about this issue (along with a mess of others) with Harvey while I'd grade his papers, make copies of tests, and a whole mess of other work he'd have me do as part of my work-study position with him.  Having gone through Kiel's own mascot war over the original Raider, I always mentioned to Harv that I thought the choice of such things should come down to the members in each community, not activists who can get on a soapbox and influence politicians not connected to that school.  I always got the feeling that Harvey saw my side and reasons for that side of the argument, that's how it often was with many of our debates in his very cluttered office.

That being said, this is a power grab by the Politically-correct police, especially when it will be State Superintendent will now be acting as judge, jury, and executioner of the remedy.  A look inside the bill says that schools deemed to be "non-compliant" with DPI's decision, will be fined anywhere from $100 to $1000 a day if they do not change their mascots.  Good to see Democrats in the State Legislature are doing their best to protect school district finances.

Of the state representatives for the Osseo-Fairchild School District, co-sponsors of AB 35 include Democrats Brad Radcliffe and Jeff Smith.  Little surprised local State Senator Kathleen Vinehout's not on board.  She's a magnet for these sorts of crack-pot government mandates.

Since they are predictable as hell -- Hell, they are one in the same -- One Wisconsin Now and Madison Assemblyman Mark Pocan (D) -- will be, are, or have already issued their press release about the latest numbers of businesses no longer paying taxes in Wisconsin.  This was echoed by Charlie Sykes at his blog.

MADISON-Wisconsin had 6,700, or 4.3%, fewer private businesses in early 2009 than it did at the same time in 2006, according to the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance (WISTAX). The first-quarter statistics-from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics-were part of a WISTAX review of various "state of the state" measures early in the new year.

"While employment figures and jobless rates are closely monitored by the press and the public during a recession-as they should be", WISTAX President Todd A. Berry noted, "less attention has been paid to the employers who provide jobs."

The 2006-09 drop in private establishments here was somewhat unusual, for Illinois (7.8%), Iowa (2.2%), Minnesota (0.4%), and the nation (6.1%) all experienced increases; and Michigan (-1.7%), surprisingly, was down less than Wisconsin.

The adverse trend in Wisconsin is a relatively new development, as earlier in the decade the state outperformed the four neighbor states. Between 2001 and 2006, the number of private establishments in the Badger State rose 11.5% to 155,900. That growth rate exceeded all the surrounding states and the U.S. (7.0%). Regionally, Illinois's increase was second (8.0%) and Minnesota's third (7.7%). Numbers in Iowa and Michigan declined during 2001-06.

It's not just less businesses paying taxes, it's households too.  Households bail on the state too, and move.  Here's the most recent numbers the IRS has from 2007-2008 on where people are moving based solely on tax payments.

(H/T Rob Port at Say Anything)

Alabama: Net gain of 6,352 households. Biggest gains came from Florida and Michigan.
Alaska: Net loss of 849 households. Biggest losses went to Washington State and Oregon.
Arizona: Net gain of 20,300 households. Biggest gains came from California and Michigan.
Arkansas: Net gain of 3,253 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
California: Net loss of 19,680 households. Biggest losses went to Texas and Arizona.
Colorado: Net gain of 17,583 households. Biggest gains came from California and Michigan.
Connecticut: Net loss of 6,158 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and North Carolina.
Delaware: Net gain of 1,946 households. Biggest gains came from Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
Florida: Net loss of 3,591 households. Biggest losses went to Georgia and North Carolina.
Georgia: Net gain of 37,559 households. Biggest gains came from Florida and New York
Hawaii: Net gain of 646 households. Biggest gains came from Michigan and California.
Idaho: Net gain of 3,836 households. Biggest gains came from California and Nevada.
Illinois: Net loss of 9,888 households. Biggest losses went to Texas and Indiana.
Indiana: Net loss of 1,344 households. Biggest losses went to Texas and Tennessee.
Iowa: Net gain of 1,472 households. Biggest gains came from foreigners.
Kansas: Net loss of 473 households. Biggest losses went to Oklahoma and Colorado.
Kentucky: Net gain of 4,424 households. Biggest gains came from Ohio and Michigan.
Louisiana: Net gain of 4,987 households. Biggest gains came from foreigners.
Maine: Net loss of 712 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and California.
Maryland: Net loss of 8,167 households. Biggest losses went to North Carolina and Virginia.
Massachusetts: Net loss of 3,788 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and California.
Michigan: Net loss of 37,370 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and Texas.
Minnesota: Net loss of 3,124 households. Biggest losses went to Texas and Arizona.
Mississippi: Net gain of 1,007 households. Biggest gains came from Tennessee and foreigners.
Missouri: Net gain of 109 households. Biggest gains came from foreigners.
Montana: Net gain of 2,072 households. Biggest gains from California and Michigan.
Nebraska: Net loss 1,667 households. Biggest losses went to Texas and Colorado.
Nevada: Net gain of 9,329 households. Biggest gains came from California and Michigan.
New Hampshire: Net loss of 1,147 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and North Carolina.
New Jersey: Net loss of 19,285 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and Pennsylvania.
New Mexico: Net gain of 630 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
New York: Net loss of 28,376 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and North Carolina.
North Carolina: Net gain of 40,995 households. Biggest gains came from Florida and New York.
North Dakota: Net loss of 90 households. Biggest losses went to Colorado and Texas.
Ohio: Net loss of 20,575 households. Biggest losses went to Florida and Texas.
Oklahoma: Net gain of 2,988 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
Oregon: Net gain of 10,728 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
Pennsylvania: Net loss of 5,472 households. Biggest losses went to North Carolina and Florida.
Rhode Island: Net loss of 3,374 households. Biggest losses went to Massachusetts and Florida.
South Dakota: Net gain of 1,037 households. Biggest gains came from Iowa and Minnesota.
South Carolina: Net gain of 20,482 households. Biggest gains came from Florida and New York.
Tennessee: Net gain of 12,961 households. Biggest gains came from Florida and Michigan.
Texas: Net gain of 62,827 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
Utah: Net gain 6,097 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
Vermont: Net loss of 1,356 households. Biggest losses went to North Carolina and California.
Virginia: Net gain of 5,210 households. Biggest gains came from Maryland and New York.
Washington: Net gain of 18,029 households. Biggest gains came from California and foreigners.
West Virginia: Net gain of 1,291 households. Biggest gains came from Maryland and Virginia.
Wisconsin: Net loss of 4,809 households. Biggest losses went to Texas and Minnesota.
Wyoming: Net gain of 1,922 households. Biggest gains came from Michigan and California.

Well, these are numbers straight from the IRS.  If OWN and Pocan can't trust them, God help us all.

Finally, remember when early in his tenure when DPW Chairman Mike Tate took a pot shot at a press release from State Senator Ted Kanavas (R-Elkhorn) for talking about people in Wisconsin leaving for Texas.

Well, the IRS is telling us they in fact, leaving Wisconsin for Texas.