On Schultz to vote against recall change
Posted on October 31 at 5:51 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
gpawcat: There have been no recalls of Assembly members because a recall cannot occur until they've been in office a year. They don't have staggered terms, like the Senate does, so they were all elected last November, and not eligible for recall yet.
On Psychologist gets jail time for sex with patient
Posted on October 14 at 12:35 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
Prof: And we also CAN'T comment on the story about a decision handed down by the Court of Appeals.
Even I am left scratching my (bald) head!!!!
On 1st gay Presbyterian minister is Wisconsin man
Posted on October 11 at 9:31 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Did Rocky bail out? I was hoping s/he would address my 8:21 am post from yesterday.
On 1st gay Presbyterian minister is Wisconsin man
Posted on October 10 at 8:21 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Put another way, Rocky: If the church were ordaining a single, 28 year old openly heterosexual male who had a girlfriend, would you be against his ordination on the grounds that he must be having sex with his girlfriend out-of-wedlock and is unrepentent about it? Based solely on the fact that he is "openly heterosexual?"
On 1st gay Presbyterian minister is Wisconsin man
Posted on October 10 at 8:02 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
Rocky: You "assume" he's actively engaging in certain acts because he is described as "openly gay." That is a big leap to make. Nothing I have seen has in any way stated that he has proclaimed to be engaging in any sexual behavior whatsoever. If he is, then that's between him and his God (if, in your word's, he's repentent or not). Simply stating that he is gay does not invite you or anyone else to envision him having sex. It means he loves someone of the same gender. How that love manifests itself is NOT automatically included in their being gay. Rather, it's the perverted mind that wants to make assumptions and deductions based on their own imagination.
On 1st gay Presbyterian minister is Wisconsin man
Posted on October 9 at 10:20 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
Why is it that every time there is mention of someone being gay, the discussion immediately jumps to their bedroom and sexual activities. As far as I have heard, Reverend Anderson has not publicly proclaimed himself to be a "practicing" gay man. Yet, Rocky insists on putting forth his belief as to what Mr. Anderson does as a manifestation of his love.
Why do so many on the religious right insist on apparently daydreaming about the sexual activities of gay people? Unless Reverend Anderson has invited members of his congregation into his bedroom via webcam or some other means, then Rocky is merely speculating about the man's behavior.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: Gay people don't frighten me. Those who dwell on how they imagine others to have sex are the ones who frighten me.
On Attendance nosedives at annual AirFest event
Posted on September 14 at 5:29 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
A disappointing year for air shows. Rockford lost the Blue Angels at the last minute. Janesville had no major draws and was expensive. I had planned to travel down to Scott AFB for their outstanding show, but they didn't have one this year. EAA? Around $40 per day plus travel/lodging/meals.
On Beloit Township plans to preserve police
Posted on July 26 at 8:11 p.m. ( Suggest removal )
"That was the only exemption I could fit it under." That's a very telling statement, and it is quite unfortunate that things appear to not have changed in the TOB. This was probably an "uncomfortable" discussion to have. Yet, the open meetings law exists for issues that are difficult, not for issues that are easy.
I really was hoping that the new regime was going to be more responsive in governance. Instead of looking for ways to keep the people's business secret, elected officials should opt for openness. The only closed sessions should be the "no brainers," and not the ones where the corporation counsel has to reach (as he obviously did in this case).
On Beloit Township unlikely to eliminate police force
Posted on July 26 at 9:41 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
I can't see how listening "to a 30-minute presentation detailing how the sheriff’s office would assume coverage if the township eliminated its police department" falls under any of the allowable exceptions.
Page 1 of 116 | Next
On Wisconsin to use part of settlement for budget
Posted on February 10 at 9:06 a.m. ( Suggest removal )
I'm waiting for the outrage we saw when the state took money from the tobacco settlement and used it for budget shortfalls. Or when they "raided" the transportation and malpractice funds.
Hopefully, those who were so critical of Governor Doyle then (as I was) will be equally as critical of Governor Walker now.