Image 01 Image 03

Walker rising, Barrett falling, Unions crying

Walker rising, Barrett falling, Unions crying

Saturday evening the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel published a sweeping endorsement of Governor Walker in the upcoming Wisconsin recall election. The news was a stunning endorsement for Walker, who faces democratic Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett in June, given that the newspaper has been known to have a liberal bent.

In their endorsement, the MJ Sentinel not only defended Walker’s political decisions (they dismiss that Walker’s policies are killing job growth) but also suggest that a more appropriate read is that either that Walker overpromised or that “the political turmoil in the state is inhibiting job creation.”

Acknowledging that his worst flaw may have been his “in-your-face style at the start,” the newspaper goes on to credit Walker for reflecting that, in this respect, he knows he could have done better.

Moreover, they suggest that they’re not buying Walker’s union opponents’ claim that this was a one-issue recall:

Walker’s rematch with Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett was prompted by one issue: Walker’s tough stance with the state’s public-employee unions. It’s inconceivable that the recall election would be occurring absent that. And a disagreement over a single policy is simply not enough to justify a vote against the governor.

The endorsement admonishes Mayor Barrett, calling him “tentative and slow to act” and “risk-averse to a fault,” while saying that “Walker’s attacks on the state’s largest city [Milwaukee] are overblown and divisive.”

Could this be in reaction to Friday’s news that Barrett skipped out on two law enforcement recognition ceremonies this week? Barrett had been scheduled to attend both the Milwaukee police department’s Merit Awards Ceremony on Tuesday as well as an annual ceremony to “honor the courage and sacrifice of law enforcement officers killed in the line of duty” this past Wednesday. Barrett chose to cancel Wednesday’s event in order to meet with union organizers.

This past week also saw the publishing of several polls showing Walker taking the lead against challenger Barrett.

But underlying the paper’s endorsement of Walker is their broader assault on the basis for the recall itself, suggesting that only criminal wrongdoing should be sufficient grounds for the action:

Even if you disagree with Walker’s policies, does that justify cutting short his term as governor? And if so, where does such logic lead? To more recall elections? More turmoil?

It’s time to end the bickering and get back to the business of the state. We’ve had our differences with the governor, but he deserves a chance to complete his term. We recommended him in 2010. We see no reason to change that recommendation. We urge voters to support Walker in the June 5 recall election.

If that wasn’t enough good news for the long-suffering residents of Wisconsin, this Friday Judge William Conley ruled that union members will have to ask for their union dues to be deducted from their paychecks (rather than having the amounts automatically deducted). From American Thinker:

The same US District Court judge, William Conley, struck down parts of Governor Scott Walker’s union reform bill last March, including a provision that would have forced unions to recertify every year by getting a majority of members to vote in favor.

But this important decision – forcing union members to “opt in” to having their dues deducted rather than the union’s preference for an “opt out” clause – will force unions to be more responsive to members.

Doesn’t look like the DNC will be sending those funds everyone’s been waiting for. In the meantime, if you have three minutes, do yourself a favor:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


alan markus | May 20, 2012 at 8:55 am

I just put this comment up over at Althouse:

10+ days since the primary, and I have seen exactly one Barrett yard sign. Granted, I’m in a “red” county, but I don’t know what to make of that – in other competitive races you still see plenty of signs for the Democratic candidates

casualobserver | May 20, 2012 at 8:56 am

Gee, could it be that the newspaper simply wants to be on the side of the now clear winner for future political reasons? What was their editorial position during all of the recall shenanigans and earlier when the Democrat lawmakers huffed over to the next state in a tantrum? I suspect they were delivering news and opinion to “explore” the side of the unions and the Democrats. I don’t read the paper, but I’d take that bet in a heartbeat.

Why didn’t this “endorsement” occur when it could have done Scott Walker the most good?

The logical answer is that this the recall’s outcome is a “fait accompli” and that the Sentinel’s staff is trying to save itself the embarrassment of losing again (how many times is it now?)

LukeHandCool | May 20, 2012 at 9:04 am

“Walker rising, Barrett falling, Unions crying … and MSM losing interest.”

Nothing to see here, folks. Keep moving. Keep moving.

Let’s not forget that Mayor Barrett and Scott Walker’s overall effectiveness will depend on the outcome of the state congressional elections.

Yes, the overall national elections are important but the state houses are in many ways more important for the next Governor of Wisconsin.

This could also be an indication that the DNC and its fellow travelers in the Sentinel realize that an even bigger landslide for those state house elections could be coming in 2012 (and that’s saying something because 2010 was pretty bad for the Dems).

alan markus | May 20, 2012 at 9:11 am

Walker got the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel endorsement the first time too. This is from October 24, 2010:

Walker offers toughness, experience

The good people of Wisconsin have had the benefit of seeing that the sky, indeed, did not fall with the end of most collective bargaining and having public employees actually contribute toward their health insurance and pensions. They also mostly saw their property taxes fall for the first time in recent memory. There is the added benefit that all of the state colleges will be out of session on June 5. So the outrage machine will have a more difficult time getting an easily misled constituency out to polls.

All of that said, the Republicans of WI must continue their efforts as if they were 2-3 points down. Because that is about the typical “margin of fraud” in WI and has been ever since “Motor Voter” was implemented.

[…] In another blow to the Barrett campaign, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel endorses Governor Scott Walker saying: No governor in recent memory has been so controversial. No governor in America is so […]

Everybody loves a winner, they say.

    Pasturized in reply to EBL. | May 20, 2012 at 10:05 am

    There’s a difference between a sad confused column and an actual editorial endorsement by the paper. What you link is the first, not the second.

      Pasturized, I was engaging in some hyperbole. As far as I know the Washington Times has not endorsed Barrett. But that an editor would allow that article by Cotto to pop up like an unwanted zit is frankly amazing to me.

        MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to EBL. | May 20, 2012 at 1:44 pm

        That was a sad column given the publication in which it appeared. I agree with what you have on your blog that the content would have been more appropriate for David Frum or David Brooks column than from a columnist at the Washington Times.

Uh oh! The urinal, as my mom affectionately called it, endorsed Walker? Then I won’t vote for Walker! (Actually, I would, but I don’t live in WI anymore.)

It must be a message to Barrett. Maybe we should we learn to dump on RINOs just like the J-S dumped on a DINO.

Insufficiently Sensitive | May 20, 2012 at 12:52 pm

Spare us those orchestrated hagiographic hymns! Leave them for the totalitarian dictators and union bosses. Governor Walker needs no such embarrassing promo clips – in fact, they might disgust more viewers than they inspire.

Glad to hear it. I don’t really care what editorials of any newspapers have to say.

I’m glad to see Walker winning, I do agree with one part of the editorial, and its something Walker himself admitted on Greta’s show. He should have have not pushed the legislation that hard without first laying the groundwork.

I agree with his policies, I tend to vote liberal on many social issues, but I’m a fiscal conservative, and with a 3 billion deficit, Walker did what needed to be done.

    JerryB in reply to alex. | May 20, 2012 at 1:55 pm

    He should have have not pushed the legislation that hard

    Scott said that? I thought he was patient in the extreme, with the deserting senators, the stinking commie occupiers, the traitorous Capital police, the moonbat Dane County judge, etc. In the end, I think he handled it all very well.

[…] the liberal Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel endorses Scott Walker.  Jilted Unions are heart-broken.  My mirth-o-meter is pegged out. Share […]

huskers-for-palin | May 22, 2012 at 12:42 am

To give you an idea on how developed the Walker ground game is, I was at a conservative rally in Missouri last weekend where they were organizing individuals to come up to Wisconsin to walk precincts, make calls and coordinate with local tea party groups. Individuals will come up for four-day assignments with fully paid airfare, room & board and materials. Based upon the interest I saw, the quota got filled.

I seriously doubt if this would of happened in the pre Tea Party era. This type of coordination would of never materialized against the union machine. Walker would of been in deep doo-doo.