No ALEC reference?

This is just general catty-ness, Nuitari. No need to drag out the big weapons.

Who was Kleefisch's predecessor?

Nuitari, Kleefisch was on Fox and Friends a few months ago defending ALEC and cookie-cutter legislation, since you bring it up: http://www.prwatch.org/news/2012/04/11453/wisconsin-lt-governor-rebecca-kleefisch-defends-alec-fox

Bob, I'm not being "catty." Former Lt. Governor Barbara Lawton's shoes would have been hard by any successor, described by the Capital Times as "the boldest and most active lieutenant governor in state history." That's why the sound of Kleefisch sucking at the taxpayers' teat is so profoundly loud, she is a 180 degree spin in the wrong direction from Lawton. Kleefisch is only marginally more qualified for office than Scott Walker as she has an undergraduate degree (journalism). I don't tend to vote for underqualified people when there are better choices.

Anti, here's a brief bio for Barbara Lawton. http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Barbara_Lawton

She is still an active advocate for economic development in our state as chair of the Wisconsin Arts Board. Here's a link to a press release and report about a recent economic impact study of which the WAB has been part: http://artsboard.wisconsin.gov/category.asp?linkcatid=3698&linkid=1654&locid=171

This is the kind of person we need in the Lt. Governor's seat.

"...shoes would have been hard to fill by any successor," I meant to write. Sorry! ; )

Bob, I'm not being "catty."

***************

Yes you are.

I suppose to you the truth is "catty," Bob. I forgot that some people can't tell the difference between fact and rhetoric.

Who is Barbara Lawton, and what does she look like?

Bren, every time Kleefisch pops up here, you go into this same routine. It's catty, Bren. It makes you look foolish and petty. I'm only trying to help you get over this obsession of yours. Nobody cares about Barbara Lawton. Get over it and move on.

You're welcome to your baseless opinions, Bob. Regardless, the fact is that Kleefisch is such a cipher that we can count her appearances on Patch on a single hand.

Touché!

; )

Rebecca Kleefisch... and her hair. It has a presence all it's own.

Regardless of how many hands you're using there to count her appearances here, or whatever, on every occasion she's been featured here, you've weighed in with the same, fawning wet kiss for Barbara Lawton. It's a bit of a creepy obsession you have there, Bren. But if I know you, as long as it garners you attention, you'll keep doing it.

One could accuse you of "creepiness" toward your preferred candidates, Bob. You appear to have a need to satisfy emotions with your preferred political candidates in addition to doctrine; I merely have professional respect for mine. When there is such a disparity in qualification, for example between Scott Walker and Tom Barrett, or Rebecca Kleefisch and Barbara Lawton, that disparity is glaringly stark. You chose to vote for a college-dropout for Governor; I chose to vote for the J.D. with economics background. Nothing "wet kiss" or "obsessive" about that. Just plain ole common sense.

Bren, the next time some article involving Kleefisch pops up here you'll have your opportunity to prove that this isn't just some ridiculous obsession you harbor. Until then, the record speaks for itself. I'd put money on your inability to resist, but I think we all know what that leads to here....

Sorry Becky , A day to late and a dollar to short. This should have been #1 on your agenda from day one. Love your comments Bren, you hit the nail right on the head !

That has nothing to do with Barack Obama. You aren't going to escape from paying for healthcare by moving to Russia. If you lived in a country with a national health plan you'd be paying through taxes.

At a rally in Virginia in June 2008, Obama said: “In an Obama administration, we’ll lower premiums by up to $2,500 for a typical family per year.”

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/rising-health-costs-undermine-obama-pledge-to-curb-trend/

Oh, and, its that complicated third grade math, again. Premiums are UP by about the same amount he promised they would go down.

Well, this is the price we pay for inserting a for-profit middleman into people's healthcare. It's hard to reason with greedy people.

Bren, it has everything to do with Obama and Obamacare. My premiums are going up to pay for the 26 years still living in mommy and daddy's basement AND for pre-existing conditions AND because the five million lifetime cap has been lifted.

You Liberals just don't get it. The insurance companies will still make a profit, they just pass the increases on to us.

Obamacare did NOTHING to bring down rising costs, it has only added to them!

Didn't the ACA mandated 80/20 rule remove all the greed and make it more affordable? Or so Obama told us it would be so.

One doesn't need to reason with 'greedy people' the law regulated the overhead to 20%. Where are the reduced insurance premiums promised with the 80/20 rule?

Jay, please concentrate on the "greedy people" and "for-profit middleman" portion of the argument and stay away from the hard figures. Thank you.

@Anti-Alinsky -
Your 12% increase is one company's experience in one year and the increase could be the result of your groups health experience for the year - a relatively small pool of employees with one or two cancer diagnoses can wreak havoc on the rates. Without knowing who your employer is, or the size of the group, I wouldn't care to speculate on the actual reason for the increase. Over my career I have been responsible for the health plan for my employers and I can tell you that for small employers, 12% increases are nothing new. Our fiscal year 2012 premiums did not increase (we actually received a small "Obamacare" rebate in 2012) and our fiscal year 2013 premiums are projected to increase less than 5%. These are merely two more data points for your consideration.
Regards - JQP

John Q. Public wrote: "...Your 12% increase is one company's experience in one year and the increase could be the result of your groups health experience for the year..."

But it's not:
http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/local/ci_21757212/study-tax-obamacare-could-cost-middle-class-mass
http://oversight.house.gov/hearing/examining-the-impact-of-obamacare-on-job-creators-and-the-economy/
http://www.sentinelandenterprise.com/local/ci_21757212/study-tax-obamacare-could-cost-middle-class-mass
http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/09/obamacare-promised-2500-decrease-in-cost-for-families-ends-up-as-3000-increase-2458878.html
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/3000-increase-in-health-insurance-premiums-fromobamacare/
http://illinoisteaparty.net/2012/09/26/obamacare-promised-2500-decrease-in-cost-for-families-ends-up-as-3000-increase/

Mine is just a personal account!

Anti, the ACA forces insurance companies to justify their rates and refund customers beyond a certain percentage point if they cannot. For example, I received a $35 refund from my insurance company. Not much, but it's a start.

It's one thing to choose to purchase a luxury item and pay the higher cost; health care is not a luxury and that's what it has turned into. This is going to be a long, tough battle but it must be engaged to restore sanity to the process. If rates and coverage were reasonable, there would be less reliance of government. More people could pay their bills, and hospitals and doctors would get paid. I know a number of people who don't go to the doctor when they should because their monthly insurance premiums and deductibles are so high they can't afford it. There's something just a little wrong with that.

Bren wrote: "Anti, the ACA forces insurance companies to justify their rates and refund customers beyond a certain percentage point if they cannot. For example, I received a $35 refund from my insurance company. Not much, but it's a start."

Yes Bren, but tell me, when the government FORCES you to take children to age 26 AND people with pre-existing conditions AND removes lifetime caps, what happens to the cost of insurance? It goes up, and since those costs can be justified, the expense to deal with it gets passed along to us.

BOcare did NOTHING to address the real costs of rising health care. Rather,it just added a higher burden to the system WITHOUT providing options to lower costs (Unlike Governor Scott Walker who had to remove millions from state aid to schools, but offset that with tools for local governments to balance their budgets)

I just went to the ER for one of my kids where, because of a temporary clerical error, I received a bill of $3,000 from the hospital. We got it squared away with the insurance company, but how could the 2 hours we spent in the ER cost that much? The doctor was in the room for about ten minutes, x-rays were billed separately, and the nurse spent maybe a half hour on and off. THAT'S where B.O. and his Democratic cronies should have focused their energies.

Continued: B.O. missed a great opportunity to reach across the aisle to try and solve health care. In March of 2010, rather than ramming PPACA through the House, he should have sat down with both Democratic and Republican leaders and said:
Look, we can get this through on a partisan effort. But I would rather come up with REAL solutions to solve this. Keep that in mind as we work to solve this problem.

Instead, B.O. just rammed it through, which shows the lack of leadership he has!

ObamaCare is not the reason for the cap in coverage being lifted. This has been a trend for at least the past decade. If you were to buy private health coverage, there has been a shift towards a cap of $7-10 Million.
Regardless if you want a National Health Care Plan or not, ObamaCare is a horrible hybrid version. Anyone who has had a problem with a bill knows the red tape is a bitch. Call the Dr. regarding a bill and they blame the insurance; call the insurance and they blame the Dr. Imagine fitting Gvt into this- another contact that will give you no answer, if you can even get a human voice on the phone.
ObamaCare keeps insurance Companies in the mix, which will cause higfher rates for most of us.
Insurers are FOR PROFIT, and to demand by law that we MUST buy from them is going to embolden them even more.
Anyone who thinks this is a solution to medical costs going higher please explain it to me, I'd love to hear from you.
Many of my friends who own small businesses are actually looking at the cost savings to drop their Health plan and pay the "tax". If small business is considering this, don't you think major Corporations with hundreds or thousands of employees will follow suit? When this happens, the costs will skyrocket and the consumer will not know because the Gvt. will be paying the premiums. Insurance Companies will need to add staff to deal with the Gvt red tape- this cost will be passed on.

@Anti-Alinsky....What part of recession don't you understand?

@Anti-Alinsky
yada, yada, yada,
we've heard that from you enough

doesnt matter Anti who is president - health insurance in Wisconsin (especially southeast) will always be high thanks to AURORA HEALTH = they don't want competition and are doing everything in their POWER to eliminate it - when there is little or no competition - they can set whatever rates they want and nothing the insurers can do but raise our rates - check our rates vs Colorado for instance. So either complain all you want or Move somewhere else.

Lyle. We are not in a recession and if this is the growth you are proud to accept your standards are very low. Hope and change promised a lot more than what was delivered.

Joe Todor wrote: "...yada, yada, yada, we've heard that from you enough..."
No, you haven't! Not when you are still willing to accept B.O.'s lies over the truth

Lyle wrote: "@Anti-Alinsky....What part of recession don't you understand?"

Whaaa? We are still in a recession after four years of B.O. management? I thought the Propaganda Ministry reported we are on the road to recovery!

@Anti-Alinsky
... and Mitt Romney doesn't LIE ?

@Steve and The Anti-Alinsky....Although the Great Recession is officially over, the losses were so great that the recovery is a long laborious process. If you have read your history, the Great Depression began in 1929/1930 and the nation was not fully recovered until 1946. This economic downturn is the worst since the Great Depression and to expect to be fully recovered within four short years is unrealistic. Since we are in a global economy, much is out of our control. Economists are predicting faster growth and recovery rates for 2013/14, no matter who occupies the Presidency. We are also transitioning into a different kind of economy altogether, much of it is still undiscovered. Transition from a post industrial economy to the information/service economy is driving significant changes. To look for a reestablishment of the old model based on continuous growth is looking for something that probably will never occur again.

@Anti-Alinsky
yada, yada, yada,
we've heard that from you enough

hired women from his binders and binders of women
Health insurance won't go down if Healthcare is repealed - will only go up since people will not be covered for preexisting conditions, kids in school will come off parents insurance earlier, preventive mediciine/care will be eliminated, more people forced to go without insurance - so keep living in your rose colored glasses

Joe Todor wrote: "...yada, yada, yada, we've heard that from you enough..."
No, you haven't! Not when you are still willing to accept B.O.'s lies over the truth

@Anti-Alinsky
... and Mitt Romney doesn't LIE ?

I wonder why, if Romney did all those things you say, why Massachusetts is not voting for him? hmmm...perhaps because what you have listed is LIES! Romney is a Venture Capitalist who went in to companies, fired all the employee's and had all the jobs shipped to China. He did this to at least 40 companies. Those are the FACTS! I've had a hard time trying to keep up with where exactly Romney stands on any issue! He's lied so many times that I don't think he even knows! Obama has added 5 million plus jobs and counting. He has overhauled the health care industry to make them more competitive and stops them from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions and makes them pay more for actual health care instead of pocketing millions or billions in profit! Creates a marketplace that offers group rates and new tax credits so everyone can afford insurance. Further cuts taxes for small business to cover 50% of their premiums. Prohibits discrimination in premiums so women don't pay up to 50% more for the same policy as men. AND Romney...want's to appeal all of that! Even though he was for it and implemented the same kind of policy in Massachusetts. Romney will put U.S. interest over all else? How laughable is that! I bet he did that when he shipped all those jobs to China didn't he?

Linda, just because you heard it from B.O.'s Propoganda Ministry doesn't mean it's true.

Remember Romney was labelled a felon?
Remember Romney had millions hid in the Caymans?
Remember the Benghazi attack was a protest gotten out of hand?
Remember "I will cut the deficit in half in four years"?
Remember "You didn't build that"?

And that's just a start!

How right you are!

"Most notably, Wisconsin has not been as exposed to the automotive manufacturing slump as Indiana, Michigan or Ohio, all of which have double-digit unemployment rates, compared to a seasonally unadjusted rate of 8.7% for Wisconsin last month."

Well, that's only because the auto manufacturers completely left Janesville, Beloit, Kenosha and Milwaukee leaving huge numbers unemployed and causing massive economic losses!

There are no automotive jobs left in Wisconsin to come back to.

It's really the problem of living in a Post-Peak Oil World that is attempting to continue the growth paradigm of $20./bbl oil. The end of growth is here - and human beings are not prepared for it.

Also, remember most pension funds, especially public employees, CALPERS and County of Milwaukee for example, are based upon an assumption of annual returns of 8%. That is impossible in a finite world with finite resources - and retirees demands for returns causes downward pressure on wages.

Returns of 7% require a doubling every 10 years - it is an exponential function - which the human brain can't grasp - and the outcome is always the same - collapse. 1 to 2 is easy, 2 to 4 is more difficult, 4 to 8 is hard, 8 to 16 is near impossible, and 16 to 32 and above can't be done.

@Richard Head My point is that since 70% of our economy is based on consumer demand, then one can conclude that demand will not rise consistently as long as wages remain flat. This has happened before, of course.

The private sector is too greedy and dense to realize that its long-term well-being depends upon the well-being of its customers. This is why the US economy will remain in the doldrums for quite some time.

Peak oil will only occur once. We are now post peak oil. Wage deflation will be a part of this - and it will continue until industrial civilization ends - which it will.

"The private sector is too greedy and dense to realize that its long-term well-being depends upon the well-being of its customers."

NO - it's the PUBLIC SECTOR - seen what's happening around here in Racine and Mt. Pleasant as businesses and homeowners are taxed out of businesses and homes so opublic officials/employees can continue to consume POL products without conservation being imposed on them? It's "Conservation by other Means"

The need for returns by retirement funds and investors drives this also - who's greedy? Those on entitlements and pensions driving the push for more returns - thus forcing wages down and jobs overseas.

The Boomers have to be cut off and left to their own ways and means. Wealth transfer schemes like Social Security, Medicare and defined Pensions/Retirements plans need to be ended.

@Richard Head Economists measure the health of the economy by what is called money flow. This can be accurately measured by our state sales tax revenues. When revenues go up, then that indicates greater economic activity. The more activity the greater amount of people benefit from it.

Too many people think that the economy is based on wealth accumulation. This is untrue. Economists call invested money dead money.

US Corporations are currently sitting on 1.8 trillion dollars in cash and they do not plan on hiring anyone soon. In fact, they are demanding further tax cuts. The disconnect between Corporate America and the US populous has not been so glaring in years.

Not even close Patzy. While Tammy Fay fed off the money Jimmy Baker brought in to pay for her millions of dollars of cosmetics, Rebecca Kleefisch is the genuine article. I have met her a dozen times, and she needs absolutely NO makeup.

Jason, I too enjoy Ms. Kleefisch's adoring glances at Scott Walker in their rare shared photo-ops. Mr. Walker is busy preaching ALEC around the country and Ms. Kleefisch does well, whatever it is she does working part-time for a full-time salary and benefits.

Jason, crawl back.

More brilliant political satire?

I find Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch's dated, late-80's Tammy Faye Baker look to be about as stylish as Jason Patzfahl's dated, early-2000s David Beckham faux hawk look.

http://greendale.patch.com/users/jason-patzfahl/photos#photo-7956897

http://www.menshairstyletrends.com/quiff-peaked-wav/

…..merely more hypocrisy from the self-proclaimed satirist.

@The Anti-Alinsky...She may not need cosmetics but it sure would help if she had a brain. She is the Wisconsin model for an "air head".

Lyle,

You've spent the last two damn days insulting the intelligence of various people. As someone with no small amount of experience with psychometrics, I would really like to know what your IQ score is.

After that, I would like to discuss the reasons you feel the need to do that.

@Luke....i am equally curious as to why you're reacting so strongly to my assessment of the Lt. Governor. I have listened to her many times and I have yet to hear her to say something substantive.

As far as my I.Q., that is something that I am not going to share. I will say that it is at least two standard deviations above the mean. However, as you know, that is only one measure out of many. Political opinion has nothing to do with intelligence, there are so many other variables determining social positioning. The only correlation that I find between high intelligence and social position is that of religiosity. They is a strong correlation between high intelligence and agnosticism and atheism.

You guys have had two shots at her and you lost. Time to move on. 2014 will be here in a heartbeat. In the meantime, why not fill some of that time trying figure out why you have such a problem with her, but reelect Lena Taylor and Gwen Moore on a regular basis.

Bren, Those adoring clances are only Becky's thoughts of dreaming of being our next Gov after Scooter Wanker goes to prison.

@Lyle Ruble, and you have the nerve to call me a misogynist. Your hatred for Republican women is off the charts. GOP women like Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch are smart, intellectual, and generally care about how they present themselves, and they use makeup. God shines on Conservatives because they don't believe in killing his unborn children. Maybe that's why liberal women are so unattractive.

@AWD....Did I say all conservative women, no. I could care less what someone looks like. I am more concerned with the quality of their mind and the depth of their soul. The Lt. Governor strictly parrots the party line leaving one to wonder if their is anything between the ears.

Lyle,

Can you imagine how funny it would be if Kleefisch posted here and insulted your intelligence while confusing "there" with "their"???

Boy, would she look stupid. Imagine the irony!!!

@Luke....I am human and I do make errors. If that is all you can criticize then I guess I'll survive.

Annie are you a Hooker ? I thought that I seen you Hooking out in Madison during the protests.

GoObama

Go Gary Johnson!

GoSteve ®

Lee = Loser
Romney = Winner

Liberals have a hard time dealing with attractive women in politics. Look at how they attacked Sarah Palin. Their idea of beauty is Helen Thomas or thunder thighs Hillary Clinton.

@Penny: Could you imagine a singing duet between Hillary and Gwen Moore? Enough to make me tear the ears off my head. Throw Thomas in, and call the EPA for noise pollution abatement! (Sorry for the mind-song that is forever stuck in your head now)

@Mike in OC....Where did you get the tree hugger from?

@H.E. Pennypacker....Seems that you are obsessed with women's attractiveness. That seems pretty shallow to me for making decisions about someone's worth.

Need an air head in OC Mike ... We have a bunch of them , and you can have them all.