And I'm ghost...

...i.e. moving for good, like I used to live on Atwood, or something. This space will only reopen in the case of technical disaster. I'll be off playing with crickets, therapist's orders, but if you require related reading material, subscribe to Shiv/Shill/Shine (current and future hub/mothership) check LCD rap system--or keep picking up a paper copy of the Onion until whenever the local stuff hits the net.

"Sorry Jesse. I didn't mean to be 'anonymous.' Against the code."

Anywho, the Madison reacharoundosphere is in wise, magnanimous, hands. As proof I leave you with one final cut n' paste waste of scrolling, the collected works of hmmmgrrr, Wisconsin State Journal institution (Ellen Foley's favorite columnist!) and selective Dane101 ombudsman. Sometimes he goes by George Hesselberg, or George H.

links head to original context:

I read the article very closely. I also did a search through the article and headline for the words "left" and "leftist." Not only is the term "leftist" NOT used in the headline, it is not used in the article. An inaccurate, then, little potshot, as it identifies the author as being guilty of, pardon me, assuming certain things which, when investigated are not true. I suspect that Progressive Dane is tired of certain inaccurate assumptions, too. A more interesting discussion might be about whether the term itself is accurate and, if so, what is the matter with using it in a headline to describe PD? It goes to the development of "leftist" as a pejorative description, I suppose. Whenever you use an adjective, it is a question of context: left of what? Remarkably, sometimes the media aren't aware of what they are doing until someone points it out. Thus the "leftist political party Progressive Dane" gets changed to the "grassroots political party Progressive Dane" when someone points out the unfairness or pettiness or downright waste of space adding that "leftist" does. The act of labeling puts a label on the labeler, too. Old advice: Don't assume.

Especially when labels these days don't tell us anything - John Stauber over at PR Watch could give a course in misleading names - we should be diligent when compromising accuracy in favor of simplicity.

(By the way, Jesse, your smoking-ban commentaries on the potential harmful effects of a state law have been terrific.)

===

I think you should correctly spell "Leckrone."

===

Fair comment, sir, except for a couple of items:
When you discovered you were totally wrong on the main point of your argument - that Schubert worked on the Edit Page of the WSJ while a member of a group called the "Common Sense Coalition" - you should have punted. The information that she has retired was in the very source you quoted from. It is fairly common for commentators to be reluctant to give up a good argument just because the facts are wrong, but a little dose of humility is good for the soul, so I think you should just take it and let it play itself out.

As for assuming that a married couple have the same viewpoints, I imagine in time you will realize how sexist that logic is. If it has to be pointed out to you, it is evidence of your youth and marital status. Until you have been in a position where a supervisor or colleague assumes you share the same viewpoints as your spouse, perhaps you will believe this. Let me warn you: It is not only sexist to assume this, it is also unfair. The Common Sense Coaltion, besides its silly name, will probably get publicity when it issues a press release and editorial support when its activities match the policies of the WSJ or CT or even Dane101.

As for judging ethics by counting stories: During budget season, it can be expected that a group formed to talk about money issues is quoted when the topic is, um, how money is spent, and such a group will attempt to get its opinion known by writing to the, um, opinion page.

Progressive Dane does it, Democrats do it, Republicans do it.

Finally, the tactic in comment writing to begin a sentence "It is not known . . ." is lazy research. We get enough of that in Madison. If you are going to raise the bar, you're going to have to be able to jump over it yourself.
Cheers.

===

locally owned, really?

===

This was a well-written and interesting commentary.

===

I don't think Mr. Gerdes is from Madison:
"I stay at wayne's home, part of a modern suburban development between Chicago and Milwaukee on Lake Michigan's western shore."

===

No where in that story is the person who died described as a "rock climber." Geez, stop blaming the media for every little perceived slight. Everything depends on perspective, I suggest, including a comment that rock climbing is "no more dangerous than crossing the street." Depends on the rock, depends on the street. And actually, if the man was killed while climbing on rocks, I guess he was killed while climbing on rocks, which some might call rock climbing. Using your (a trifle over-sensitive) logic, I suppose if I had a heart attack while golfing, Arnold Palmer could object to the description because I am not a member of the PGA At least when I climb on rocks along the East Bluff, I not only don't call myself a rock climber, I don't hammer permanent holes in the landscape. The real rock climbers I have met in frequent hikes are focused, friendly and incredibly accommodating to interested observers. My only small complaint is that sometimes they take over entire vistas on a weekend afternoon, but that is a tiny complaint. Most hikers, myself included, like the company and marvel at the dexterity.

===

Jesse: In addition to all of your salient points, I would add that this has not received the sort of public attention it deserves, and I can't understand why. Is it because of an expected veto? And what causes this incredible antipathy towards access to information? Do they believe that the still untested cable programming from the Legislature is enough? The more channels of information the public has - the internet, radio. tv, newspapers, etc - the better-informed the public becomes and the less chance there is of secrecy.

That's the key here, I think.

Secrecy.

We can't object to something we don't know about, we can't stop a train that has already passed.
- George Hesselberg

===

Fine commentary. I have the same thoughts whenever I see the stolen Calvin image on logo-packed trucks.
George H.

===

"none of the toilets would flush -- unfortunate, but understandable considering that the plumbing probably has a few glitches that need ironing out with the opening of the long dormant venue."

Nicely written piece on the opening of the Majestic. I do not consider malfunctioning toilets at a newly opened concert venue to be "understandable." That is unhealthy. And a "long dormant venue" means there was plenty of time for repairs and is not an excuse. Perhaps that explains the expensive beer.
George H.

===

You might want to be clear about the fact that this is a "bill," which means it is a proposal. It needs to be approved, and it also looks like it needs a financial impact statement. Regardless of support, the way this is written, it is possible someone might interpret it as a done deal, and it is not. So if you support it, make your support known.

===

Ridicule is probably not a good way to encourage comment or debate. I was just asking for a little clarity. If you are going to have advocates providing information, at least it should be clear and accurate. This was not, from several directions. When will these bills be presented to the Legislature? Does "bi-partisan support" mean more than two legislators? Should people get out and advocate? What are the potential objections? How much in taxes will not be collected because of it? Do the savings balance out? Is there no energy used in discarding, recycling, hauling, abandoning old appliances? If a retailer is making extra money, will the retailer pick up the old appliances? Don't consumers have to sometimes pay to recycle their old appliances? Such as the $35 fee per item for most appliances in the city of Madison Would that be the case here? Got a cartoon for that?

===

This story is not new, having been covered in detail almost exactly two years ago in the Wisconsin State Journal by reporter Judy Newman.