August jobs report = "morning in America"?

The big story yesterday was the monthly jobs report, which showed 96,000 jobs added in August, and the unemployment rate dropping to 8.1%. Tepid numbers on the surface, and they look slightly worse when you realize that June and July were both revised down, with a reduction of 41,000 jobs between them, making the gain only 55,000 vs. what was previously reported.

But I also think our media overreacted to these numbers. I checked the newsstand today, and the Wisconsin State Journal is calling the jobs numbers "A blow to Obama." REALLY? I know it's not rainbows and ice cream, but I have a hard time buying that a report that shows private sector job growth for the 30th straight month is a major setback. And as this chart shows, the slow-but-steady recovery to the Bush Recession continues, with more than half of the jobs lost between August 2008 and July 2009 gained back in the last 3 years.

But given that the media really needs this Romney-Obama race to seem close so people will keep watching and buying ads, they're going to try anything in their power to keep Obama from pulling away after a great DNC. So they'll put out the alarm bells from a jobs report that doesn't really change the way things have been for the last few months.

My bigger concern from that report comes from the manufacturing figures, which shows a seasonally-adjusted drop of 15,000 jobs in that sector. That seems to go against the Dem convention theme of "Obama's auto bailout led to a manufacturing recovery." But the jobs report points out that many of the manufacturing "losses" weren't losses at all.

A decline in motor vehicles and parts (-8,000) partially offset a gain in July. Auto manufacturers laid off fewer workers for factory retooling than usual in July, and fewer workers than usual were recalled in August.

This is the flip side of the cosmetically low unemployment claim numbers in July, which happened because of carmakers continuing to crank out vehicles instead of having summer shutdowns. So it's better to look at the 2-month manufacturing trend with this in mind, and it shows an increase of 8,000 jobs since June, with 6,500 of those gains in "Motor vehicles and parts." So auto manufacturing is staying strong, and with this week's news of auto sales being up 20% vs. August 2011, the automobile sector looks to be in good shape and should add jobs for the near future.

If people concentrate on the unemployment rate, the rate of 8.11% is the second-lowest since Obama took office in January 2009. Now many will point out that much of August's drop is due to more people dropping out of the work force, and for that one month, that's true - there were 368,000 fewer in the work force on a seasonally-adjusted basis than July.

But if you look at the unadjusted numbers year-over-year, you see over 900,000 MORE people in the work force vs. this time last year, and 2.2 million more ID'ing themselves as employed, which explains how the unemployment rate is down by nearly 1% in the last 12 months. This chart will show how unemployment was rising in the 12 months before Obama took over, and crosses over when Obama became president in January 2009. Much like with the overall jobs numbers, the trend in unemployment rates is a good one, once the stimulus and other policies stabilized things in the middle of 2009.

What's doubly interesting is that the modern-day GOP gives nearly a god-like status to Ronald Reagan, while demonizing Obama as anti-American and everything Reagan allegedly wasn't. Well, when it comes to the economic circumstances both presidents arrived in office to, and in how their first terms have gone, they're pretty damn similar. In fact, it can be argued that Reagan didn't have it nearly as tough as Obama when he came to D.C. in 1980, and unlike Obama, Reagan's policies made things worse in the first 2 years. And 3 months before the presidential elections, unemployment had gone both for both Obama and Reagan, but the rate wasn't much different than the ones they inherited.

For Reagan's 1984 presidential re-election, the theme was one of optimism, that America had dug its way out of the stagflation economy of the previous decade. Watch this classic ad from that campaign, and answer a simple question- replace Reagan's name with Obama, and tell me what's different today?



So why is our media grumping about this latest jobs report? Has this country forgotten the depths of the mess we were in 4 years ago? Or is our media that far in the bag for a corporate America that loved Reagan's giveaways, and aren't as kind to Barack Obama? I think we know the real answer.

It's not just any FRIDAY

And usually I'd be talking about the "bleh" jobs report or the huge amount of positive economic data that preceded it (such as great car sales and good productivity figures).

But not on Sept. 7. Not by me, anyway. You wanna know why?



Speaking of productivity, I noticed that 2/3 of my entries have been in the last year, which I guess is symptomatic of how this has become a great outlet in a crazy state and a crazy world. I want to give thanks to my 5 regular readers who have tuned in to my rantings and vanity for the last year, and I'll promise throw more around more of these thoughts in the months to come.

Hey, it's a Walker Admin budget release!

Saw that the Legislative Fiscal Bureau and the DOR released end-of-fiscal year revenue numbers, and the Walker folks tried to do some "it's working" -style bragging. And on the face, the numbers look pretty good.

Preliminary data on general fund tax collections for the 2011-12 fiscal year is now available.
According to the Department of Revenue (DOR), collections totaled $13,514.6 million in 2011-12, which is an increase of 4.7% from the prior year.

The final estimate of tax collections for 2011-12 was $13,388,000,000, which is the number that will appear in the next version of the statutes. Actual collections were $126.6 million, or 0.9% above the estimate.

They also ended up $220 million above the LFB's estimates in February, where the LFB predicted a budget deficit opening up through due to low projected revenues. It also seems to contradict my claims in May that the increases were one-time blips that couldn't be trusted for final numbers at the end of the fiscal year. All taxes except for excise taxes came in above the orginal 2011-2012 approved state budget, which means there will be a bit of breathing room in year 2 to keep the numbers in line. They still need increases in incomes and sales taxes, but it's more along the lines of 2-3% instead of the 4-5% increases that were built into the 2012-2013 budget.

However, let's not quite break out the party hats just yet. If year 1 ends up in "surplus", it will be more because of some sketchy Walker Administration decisions on the spending side than improved revenues. The DOR's own pro-Walker release in May mentioned $78 million in savings due to "structural refunding authorized by [the state budget] and other debt refinancing, which is creating reduced debt service costs for the 2011-2013 biennium," and Sen. Kathleen Vinehout later got the LFB to reveal that this wasn't the only time this administation was kicking the can down the road by ringing up their credit cards.

State officials refinanced $190.1 million in May 2011 that would have otherwise been repaid. New bonds were sold in September 2011 to avoid paying $45.4 million in payments coming due in November 2012. And in March 2012, $218 million in debt payments due in May were delayed. The administration will also postpone another $104.8 million this May.

In one year, May 2011 to May 2012, a total of $558.3 million in debt payments due were delayed. Taxpayers will pay $156.2 million in new interest charges because of those recent financial actions. This new debt won’t be paid off until 2030-31.

Pretty easy to lower expenses if you just put em off, eh? And it's pretty easy to have a good budget when you fill its holes by taking $25 million in foreclosure aid money out of the hands of the people who might need it, a move that drew the ire of Preident Obama's HUD Secretary.

In a May 4 letter obtained recently, Shaun Donovan, secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, said the spirit of the settlement was to provide help directly to those affected, or at risk of being affected, by foreclosure.

"I am concerned about other reports indicating that the funds will be used to close state budget gaps unrelated to housing," Donovan wrote. "While ultimate allocation of these funds is up to you and other state officials, I would urge you to use this settlement payment to support direct homeowner assistance that can help ensure that Wisconsin homeowners can take advantage of every opportunity to avoid foreclosure and prevent the blight associated with foreclosure from hurting their neighbors and community."

But that would be helping people that aren't rich over posing for holy figures about papers that say your budget is balanced, which is a big no-no in Fitzwalkerstan. Therefore, they threw the money into the budget hole.

But you can bet none this will not be mentioned when the overall budget figures for year 1 of Ftizwalkerstan get finalized next month, and in all probably will look good at first glance. Walker (and most Republicans, in 2012 for that matter) have shown they can't be trusted to tell the truth on any of these matters, and their short-term gimmicks inevitably cost people more in the long-term. Look no further than Dan Bice's story this week, which showed that Walker's breaking of Milwaukee County union contracts on furloughs will now cost taxpayers an extra $4.5 million.

And why did Walker impose the furloughs in the first place (other than posing for Milwaukee talk radio and rubes in the 262)? A budget that illegally included a $17 million hole in it, assuming that there would be concessions. Walker used that hole to claim a budget emergency and impose the furloughs, (if this lie sounds like the cooked-up budget deficit that led to Act 10 at the state level in 2011, you would be correct).

So let's not give too many plaudits for Walker's "fiscal prudence." There's a whole lot of tricks that had to be pulled just to make this year look good, and you know the bill's coming due for those antics. And when that inevitably hits the fan, it'll create a whole lot more hurt to everyone...except for the administration that caused the problems.

What the U.S. didn't do and Wisconsin did - failed European austerity

As I was writing the previous piece (here it is, if you want to read it), it occurred to me that to handle the fallout of the Great Recession, austerity was and still is on the table as a policy solution. And in recent years, the U.S. has already done a version of austerity in addition to the stimulus that was passed in 2009, as I've pointed out that if it wasn't for politicians in both Washington and the state houses cutting spending in large amounts, our GDP and employment growth would be higher. But that being said, much of the stimulus and tax cuts for Social Security taxes have stayed, and deciding not to totally back off into austerity has kept the U.S. on a growth trajectory 3 years after the recession officially ended in Summer 2009.

Compare that to many countries in Europe. This failure of austerity reared its head again last week when the Eurozone showed record-high unemployment of 11.3%. And the countries that have imposed austerity are the ones doing worse, including Greece and Spain.

Joblessness increased in Spain and bailed-out Greece, both countries at the center of the European sovereign debt crisis which has thrown a cloud of doubt over the future of the single euro currency.

In Spain, the jobless figure rose by another 0.2 points to reach 25.1 percent, the highest in the eurozone. For Greece, the latest data available was for May, which saw a 0.5-point increase to 23.1 percent. A year earlier, it was 16.8 percent.

Youth unemployment was even worse. In Spain it stood at 52.9 percent for people under 25 and at 53.8 percent in Greece.....

Europe’s economy has been hit by the combination of government savings measures — cuts to public sector payrolls and benefits and tax hikes — and the uncertainty that has caused huge volatility in financial markets. That uncertainty is keeping companies from hiring and investing and scaring households away from big purchases.

Another country failing with austerity policies is Great Britain. Reports are out that the U.K stands to achieve the rare "triple-dip recession as the stimulus from the Olympics wears off. In fact, this last week, Liberal Democratic party leader Nick Clegg is asking for a wealth tax to be instituted to make the rich pay a bigger share of the sacrifice. This is no small thing to note, as the Conservatives do not have a majority in Parliament, so if Prime Minister David Cameron wants to stay in power, he probably has to work out some kind of compromise. If there is no compromise, Clegg could choose to break up their coalition, and cause another election to be called (you want uncertainty, "job creators"? I'd call having a new, unforeseen UK election a whole lotta uncertainty!)

Here in Wisconsin, we've seen the failures of austerity first-hand, as our state continues to lose the most jobs in the U.S.- down nearly 28,000 jobs from when Scott Walker took office in January 2011, and down 37,600 jobs since Act 10 was imposed in March 2011. It also has manifested itself with Wisconsin having GDP and income growth well below the U.S. averages, and last month's Philly Fed report said that not only had Wisconsin fallen back into recession, it was expected to stay there for the rest of this year.

As the CBO pointed out a couple of weeks ago, if U.S. policymakers decide to concentrate on the deficit instead of continue several pro-growth programs and tax cuts, the U.S. would join the UK, Greece, and Spain in recession. You'd think that after all the difficulties of the past 5 years and the failures we're seeing in Europe, no one would want to risk going through that again in the U.S..

So that's why it's bizarre to hear pro-austerity Republicans complain that the anti-growth group who favors European-style policies is Obama and the Democrats (well, bizarre or infuriating, because it shows the Republicans to be sociopathic liars). Reince Priebus got caught mumbling an example of this doublespeak during his when Chris Matthews was giving him an epic smackdown at last week's RNC. Reince mentioned that Obama and Dem policies were "European" as a reason for why he felt they didn't work (and hilariously, Priebus said this 30 seconds after denying that Republicans were trying to make Obama seem "foreign").

In fact, the real party that is clinging to failed, European fiscal policies is the GOP. And if they don't get stopped in the next 2 months, we will slide over the fiscal cliff and all the way back down into the hole that we were in 4 years ago. I doubt that we'd even cut the deficit because the job losses would be so great that revenues would continue to go down and assistance like unemployment insurance would go up. And this time, I fear the damage would be permanent.

Are we better off than 4 years ago? Mostly so

Greg Sargent at the Washington Post says that the Romney campaign is hoping for a mediocre jobs report this Friday to step on any momentum the Obama folks may get from the Democratic convention this week. The Romney/ GOP folks also want a bad report so they can continue to say the country has fewer jobs under Obama than before he took over, which as Sargent mentions, is a dishonest statement because it includes the 3 pre-stimulus months in 2009 where the U.S. lost 2.34 million jobs. If you start from April 2009 instead, Obama is UP 1.2 million.

But regardless, it does beg the question- are we better off than we were 4 years ago? One area where we indistupably is not is under incomes, as median household income went down nearly 3% from 2008-2010, and does not seem to have recovered much in the last 2 years either. However, this has been largely done under GOP policies, as the tax rates for the rich have stayed the same under Obama, and pro-worker policies like cap-and-trade and card check were shot down in Congress. So all the GOP can offer is the same polciies that are currently in place, and in many cases, they plan to put the present day on steroids, such as when they decided to follow Scott Walker's lead and endorsed a nationwide "right-to-work (for less)" policy in their recently-approved platform.

That being said, there are signs of hope that perhaps stagnant incomes are going to start going back up. One of those signs was released last week when the Bureau of Economic Analysis said real Disposable Personal Income was up a strong 0.3% for July, and had gone up 2.3% since the start of the year. The report also shows that real disposable income has now finally gotten back to the level it was in Q2 2008, before the Bush Recession hit full force and took nearly $600 billion of disposable income away from Americans between then and the end of 2009 (or nearly $2,000 for every woman, man and child in the country. Yeah, ouch).

And unlike previous months, the increased take-home pay translated into more consumer spending, as real Personal Consumption Expenditures went up 0.4% in July, as opposed to an increase of 0.2% for the previous 3 months combined. This indicates that the 3rd Quarter was off to a good start economically. Obviously, there's still 2 months of data to deal with and the gsasoline price increases may tamper things down a bit, but there is little indication that the economy is doing anything other than growing right now.

As I've also mentioned, the lack of wages trickling down to workers has been one of the few pieces missing in the slow-but-steady recovery that the nation has been under since the middle of 2009. And the upward revision of 2012's 2nd Quarter GDP figures confirmed that we are still expanding, with growth going to 1.7% vs. the previously reported 1.5%, and year-over-year growth went up to 2.3%. This also means GDP has grown 1.9% since the 2nd quarter of 2008, and the private sector is up 2.4% the last 4 years.

And the jobs numbers that the Romney folks are hoping will look bad on Friday show that we've gotten much of the jobs back that were lost during the Great Recession. This chart will remind you of the crater that was left due to several months of massive job losses in 2008 and 2009, and show how we've slowly climbed our way back in the last 3 years under Obama.

Looks like we're going the right way if you ask me, and by a lot of measures, we're clearly on our way out of the hole dug for us by the Bush years. So if the GOP wants to use the Reagan question of "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?", I'd look at where we were heading in 2008, look where we are now in 2012, and say in the big picture, the answer is YES.

Labor Day and unions- still needed more than ever

With Labor Day upon us, now is a good time to remind folks of this country's economic history, and why things have turned against the average worker in recent years.

First, let's look at the incomes of a middle-of-the-road household in America. As the most recently-released Census survey on the subject shows, Americans still haven't recovered to the levels they were at near the end of the Clinton presidency.

Real median household income has not yet recovered to pre-2001 recession all-time highs. Household income in 2010 was 7.1 percent lower for all races combined (from $53,252 in 1999), 5.5 percent lower for non-Hispanic Whites (from $57,781 in 1999), 14.6 percent lower for Blacks (from $37,562 in 2000), 8.9 percent lower for Asians (from $70,595 in 2000), and 10.1 percent lower for Hispanics (from $41,994 in 2000).

In fact, median household income has never gotten back to where it was in 1999, even at the height of the housing/debt bubble in 2007. Since that bubble popped and the Great Recession began, real median household incomes have gone down by 6.3%. The 2010 median household income of $49,445 is the lowest since 1996, a stat that should stun anyone.

And it's not like workers aren't working harder or better in that time. In fact, hourly worker productivity went up more 46% in that time. So where did all the money go? After all, the marginal revenue productivity theory of wages says that workers higher wages due to better producitivity. So why hasn't this happened?

Going back in time is a good way to find out why. Let's compare the 14-year period of 1996-2010 with the 12-year period of 1967-1979. From '67-'79, worker producitivity went up just under 25%, yet that Census Bureau report shows that real median household incomes went up 13%, from $40,770 to $46,074 in today's dollars. And Business Insider shows us that wages as a percentage of GDP were at its highest level ever in '67, at nearly 54%.

You can see that this figure generally dropped in the 1970s and early 1980s due to recessions, but never recovered from the drop during the alleged expansion of the rest of the 1980s and 2000s. (The only time that didn't happen was from 1992-2000, which I'll explain in a second) And now it sits at 44% of GDP instead of the 54% it was at 45 years ago. Think average Americans would be doing better if they had another $1.5 trillion in their pockets (and that's what that 10% of GDP signifies, $1.5 TRILLION).

And a look at top marginal tax rates tells the story. From 1967-1979, the top tax rate on the rich was 70%, and the average worker grabbed half of the productivity gains of the era. From 1979-1992, the top tax rates were dropped from 70% down to 31%. Per-hour productivity went up 23% (much like it did from '67-'79), but real median incomes barely budged- up only 1.2%, showing that the gains did not trickle down to workers with the lower tax rates.

From 1992-2000, productivity went up 20%, and real median income went up nearly 14%, meaning nearly 70% of the productivity gains went to workers. The difference in the '90s vs. the '80s and 2000s? A top marginal tax rate of 39% under Clinton, instead of the lower tax rates under Bush and Reagan. See, when tax rates on the rich and corporate are reduced, it means that the rich have a much larger incentive to use money on legalized gambling such as stocks and real estate instead of investing in their companies, and, you know, PAYING PEOPLE TO MAKE STUFF. A look at a similar Business Insider chart on corporate profits bears this out.

Corporate profits have gone from just over 3% of GDP in the mid-'80s to nearly 11% today. That's money that could be getting sent back down to workers, if trickle-down really worked, but the reality of the last 30 years tells you that hasn't happened (except again for the '90s, when tax rates on the rich were higher). It also illustrates the damaging impact of outsourcing, as free trade policies have become dominant in that time period for both Democrats and Republicans, including Clinton's approval of NAFTA and Most Favored Nation status for China, along with Bush's chief economic advisor claiming "outsourcing is good for America." I think after 25-30 years of this question, the jury is back. It might be good for profits and the 1%, but it isn't any good for the average American who has had to compete with Third World slave-wage labor.

ANd the last piece in this puzzle? The decline of labor unions. Now, I have my own issues with some in union leadership (I argued 2 months ago that public sector unions should emphasize their civil service independence instead of constantly talking about money), but there is no question to me that this country is better off with a strong labor movement. In the mid-'50s, over 1 in 3 workers in the U.S. were in labor unions, and in 1983, it was still over 20%. Now, union membership is at its lowest amount since the Depression, at less than 12%, and it's less than 7% in the private sector. But for those remaining in unions, there is a great economic advantage. Just this last week, the Economic Policy Institute released a paper showing that being in a union greatly helps when it comes to workers' wages and benefits.

Researchers at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) determined that union workers in 2011 still earn significantly more than non-union workers, with men gaining a union premium wage that’s 17.3 percent more than non-union peers. Women see a smaller but still significant benefit from union membership as well, tending to earn 9.1 percent more than non-union counterparts.

The study also found that unions have a profound impact on whether workers have health insurance and pensions, noting that a full 83.5 percent of unionized workers had health insurance, versus 62 percent of non-union workers. Additionally, 71.9 percent of union members had pensions in 2011, though just 43.8 percent of non-union workers shared that privilege.

Another interesting caveat: EPI said that not only do unions raise wages, pensions and the number of people with health insurance, they also reduce inequality among ethnic minorities. Hispanic and black men were the two groups to benefit most from union membership in 2011, with black men seeing a 17.3 percent premium over non-union peers and hispanic men seeing a 23.1 percent premium.

It is quite clear that as unionization rates have gone down, and as tax rates have gone down, the rich and corporate have kept a much larger percentage of their profits to themselves, instead of giving it to the people who made their fortune possible. So why are so many people tricked into blaming unions for the decline in their working standards and wages, when they're clearly working harder and better than ever? It's time for people to be forcefully told the truth that unions are the check on total corporate and management power that allows for a growing economy to reach all citizens, not just the 1%ers that do nothing but trade paper. Sitting back and hoping for those CEOs to benevolently have their great wealth trickle down has failed, and thinking that one day you will win the lottery and be a 1%er yourself has failed, and blaming the people smart enough to see through it and unionize is not the way to make your life better.

So why not go back to the way that worked for 30 years after World War II, which led to the U.S. having the greatest middle class, social mobility and economic power the world had ever known. It is no coincidence that as we have cut taxes for the rich and corporate, taken power from unions and other workers, and encouraged trade deals that put profit over people, that our country has left behind hundreds of millions of people who deserve more than what they have gotten since 1980, and especially in the last dozen years.

So on this Labor Day, more than ever, we need to stand up and proclaim:

And we need to make damn sure we have politicians of all parties respect workers, instead of taking their efforts for granted.

A big reason for the GOP's "Cheesehead Revolution"- Journal Communications

This is the long, unedited version of what I just sent the Journal-Sentinel regarding the coverage they and their radio stations give to Wisconsin's newly-prominent Republicans. Enjoy:

In Sunday’s “Cheesehead Revolution” story, you described the role of Milwaukee’s Bradley Foundation as a breeding ground of these GOP policies. But what it failed to mention was Journal Communications’ role as the megaphone for those policies, as the owner of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel has consistently favored the GOP when it comes to coverage and analysis of political issues.

A typical Journal-Sentinel editorial page includes numerous Bradley and WPRI mouthpieces such as Christian Schneider, Rick (“I’ll Approve the Redistricting Maps, Just Send 'Em Over") Esenberg, Mike Nichols and John Torinus ample column space every day on the editorial page, without their clear conflicts of interest being revealed. Two times, the Journal-Sentinel has endorsed Scott Walker for governor, and it stood silently while their fellow members at the Metropolitan Milwaukee Chamber of Commerce’s PAC gave over $437,000 to Walker and other GOP campaigns. Journal Communications gave TV and radio shows to factually-challenged Bradley Foundation member Charles Sykes, and also gives 6 more hours of right-wing hate radio every weekday, without anything resembling response time from liberal broadcasters in a County that gives 2/3 of its votes to Democrats. Journal Communications’ executives allow this one-sided programming to air on their stations, and we deserve to know why they chose this road when their radio and TV licenses require them to broadcast in the public interest.

Not only do these shows offer hundreds of hours of free air time for WisGOP politicians, but open records obtained by online media reporters showed that they include scripted interviews with Governor Scott Walker and other WisGOP politicians, with the questions and talking points chosen ahead of time by the staff of politicians. Journal-Sentinel writers have to know some of this “propaganda as opinion” is going on inside their company, and given that there is supposed to be a wall of separation between the newspaper and the radio station, you would think they would jump all over such a juicy story. But your paper's writers don’t go after this story, and we have to wonder if they are being ordered not to report it.

It wouldn’t be the first time, as Journal Communciations has made conscious choices in which stories it will cover during the “Cheddar Revolution.” For example, the newspaper couldn’t print enough stories about alleged voter fraud charges in the Racine Senate recount when GOP party hacks complained about minorities and young people voting. But when real evidence surfaced last week that State Rep. Robin Vos’s wife may have indeed committed voter fraud, the Journal-Sentinel did not investigate the story. The Journal-Sentinel produced several articles detailing the alleged corruption of Milwaukee County Supervisor Johnny Thomas (who ended up being acquitted of all charges), but said next to nothing when a newly-appointed top state official was assaulted by her husband, allegedly because she was having an affair with the man who hired her from out of state, DHS Secretary Dennis Smith. (Smith denied the affair this week, saying he hired Spear because she's a close friend ...which really isn't any better on the cronyism front.)

Critical consumers of media should ask why the Journal-Sentinel made those choices, just like we should ask why the Journal-Sentinel refused to be skeptical of Scott Walker’s alleged job gains during the recall campaign when the official federal figures showed Wisconsin leading the nation in job losses. Your newspaper went as far as to say the national figures were “disputed” when the only people disputing them were Walker and his appointees at the Department of Workforce Development. Allowing Wisconsin Republicans to get away with these lies and deceptions while holding Democrats and liberals to account goes a long way toward explaining how Republicans could gain power so suddenly in Wisconsin over the last 4 years, and institute radical policies that go against the fabric of what used to be a unique and respected state.

With that backdrop, it is not surprising that Wisconsin Republicans such as Scott Walker, Paul Ryan, and Reince Preibus tried to spin so many lies at this week’s Republican National Convention. When the Wisconsin Republicans tried their deceptive spin on issues such as the closing of the General Motors plant and acceptance of racial dog-whistles such as jokes about President Obama’s birth certificate and false claims about Obama’s welfare policies, they thought it would work like it did in America’s Dairyland. After all, Journal Communications allowed them to get away with similar falsehoods and inconsistencies for years as they worked their way up in the ranks in state politics. They found out the hard way when all were humiliated and called out by national media at the RNC who decided to do their jobs as fact checkers, causing Wisconsinites to become laughingstocks for electing such dishonest, foolish people to office. In addition to Chris Matthews' "McAvoy moment" where he turned Reince Priebus into a blubbering fool (mentioned here), Rachel Maddow, Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton let Scott Walker have it for lying about the Janesville GM plant.



The JournalComm-approved “Cheddar Revolution” is also damaging our state’s economy, as other people do not wish to locate in such an anti-services and anti-intellectual place, and many well-qualified state residents are packing their bags and looking elsewhere due to the GOP’s destructive policies. Wisconsin leads the nation in jobs lost both over the last 12 months, and since Walker was retained in office in June’s recall elections. An Aug. 31 manufacturing survey for Southeastern Wisconsin shows the sector shrinking in our part of the country, and the Philadelphia Fed also shows Wisconsin to be in recession while the overall U.S. economy continues to grow and create jobs.

Political power gained through such dishonest methods (both through spin about failed policies and the media’s help in covering up the effects) cannot last for long, and eventually will lead to the fall from power being louder and all the more spectacular for WisGOP. But this state is suffering greatly in the meantime, and wounds have been inflicted that many of us will never forgive or forget. It has turned this state into somewhere many of us do not recognize and are not proud of, and it is in no small part because your paper refused to hold to account the politicians and media members that led to this situation.

Instead, you at the Journal-Sentinel are laughing all the way to the bank, as Journal Communications made huge amounts of recall-related ad money from the controversies generated from GOP policies in the last 18 months. And JournalComm stands to make much more in the next 2 months if it can make Wisconsin seem like a close swing state in November's presidential election. Therefore, I have little doubt you will choose to stay silent on matters where real journalists would call out Paul Ryan for his failed policies and statements. You sure did that on Wednesday, when you waited a full day to start discussing Ryan's and Walker's lies blaming President Obama for the Janesville GM plant closing (the last GM car to roll out of the plant was 1 month before Obama even took office).

Since you have been full accomplices in the "Cheddar Revolution" that threatens to damage this state beyond repair, you at Journal Communciations deserve to be punished over the next few years every bit as severely as Ryan, Walker, Priebus and the rest of the “Cheddar Revolution” thugs will be. And you did it to yourself.