Mary Burke: The Handpicked Heiress

 

Mary Burke, courtesy of Watchdog.org

Most know Mary Burke as the Madison millionaire heiress to the Trek Bicycle Company who has thrown her hat into the race for governor.  However, most know little beyond her basic background.  Burke is quite silent as a candidate for governor, which further enshrouds her candidacy in mystery.  A closer look into her background may help to shed some light on her record, why she is running for governor, and why the liberal elitism mindset in candidates may backfire.
  
  Mary Burke is the daughter of Trek Bicycle founder Richard Burke.  The Burke family members are also philanthropists; founding the Burke Foundation and large donors to the Road Home and Boys and Girls Club of Dane County organizations.  Mary attended Georgetown and later earned her master’s of business administration at Harvard.  She consulted in New York and D.C. before returning to Wisconsin to work for Trek.  In 2005, Mary Burke was appointed Secretary of Commerce by then Governor Jim Doyle.  Wisconsin Democrats had mixed reactions when she announced her candidacy for governor earlier this year.  Despite her private and public sector experience, relatively unknown policy record, and the ability to self-finance her campaign, even some liberals are wary of her.

 Mary Burke is often hailed as the ‘Mitt Romney of the left.’  She enjoys an extravagant lifestyle that is out of touch with most Wisconsinites.  Burke’s wealth has allowed her to make large donations to non-profit organizations.  However, her wealth is a double-edged sword.  Her philanthropy propelled her to a set on the Madison School Board; an election which she financed with $128,631 of her own money.  She has also donated over $220,000 to campaigns of progressive Democrats, the same people aligned with the failing Obama presidency.  Many Wisconsinites see this as the definition of buying an election.

 Burke was handpicked and persuaded to run for governor by Mike Tate, Chairman of the Democrat Party of Wisconsin.  Tate believed she would pose the greatest threat against Scott Walker.  In normal circumstances, party officials are absent from the primary process.  She was presumably handpicked by the Democrat party chairman because of her ability to finance her own campaign, allowing political donations to focus on state senate and assembly seats.  After an embarrassing four years, the Democrats saw a need to cement one candidate early.  However, Mary Burke even has some liberals worried.

While Burke is exceedingly successful at keeping hush on the issues, her record is not completely spotless.  For the left, her $2.5 million support for a charter school is worrisome.  Yet she denounces the expanded voucher system under Walker that has exceeded expectations.  She holds wishy-washy views on education, amongst other issues, despite her school board seat.  Mary Burke was also a part of the mess that Governor Walker fixed.  During her tenure as Secretary of Commerce, there were more than 150 economic development programs that were not properly tracked, and often overlapped.  This wasteful spending and lack of oversight on her office’s behalf helped create the $3.6 billion budget deficit.  As Secretary of Commerce under Doyle, Burke allowed Wisconsin to hemorrhage more than 130,000 jobs, forcing Wisconsin to the bottom of economic outlook lists.  Even her own company Trek outsourced Wisconsin jobs to China.  Today, almost 99% of all bicycles are imported to the United States.  One must question if a Burke governorship would be any different.  While Walker makes trade deals for exporting billions in Wisconsin grown crops, Burke sent China Wisconsin jobs.

  Much like President Obama, Burke may have several scandals already brewing.  The Republican Party of Wisconsin filed a campaign finance complaint in June because a telephone poll refused to disclose who had paid for the poll.  Wisconsin GOP director Joe Fadness told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in a June, “We don’t know a lot about Mary Burke right now but she and the Democratic Party of Wisconsin are apparently willing to break the law in testing her viability against Scott Walker.” 

Mary Burke has also come under fire recently for not paying state taxes in 1990, 1992, and 1993.  Liberals believe in the rich paying their ‘fair share,’ and it seems Burke failed to follow her own party’s rhetoric.

 Mary Burke is far from the ideal progressive candidate to take on a strong Scott Walker in 2014.  Ultimately, she may always be perceived as a Madison millionaire heiress who is out of touch with Wisconsinites.  Our leaders have often been elected because they share a special connection with the people, the common folk.  It is elitist arrogance to assume Mary Burke will face Scott Walker.  The same arrogance could very well backfire against Burke in the Democrat primary.  This is Wisconsin, not Illinois.  Wisconsin elections are simply not for sale.

Published: Freedom Weekly December 11, 2013, Vol. 003 Issue 025

See also: MaryBurke.com

Violent Crime: Chicago-ification Of Milwaukee

  Over the past few months, the number violent crimes in the city of Milwaukee have dramatically increased.  While robberies, aggravated assaults, stabbings, and shootings are on the rise, seemingly little has actually been done to relieve the city of crime.  While it is easy to lay the blame on one contributing factor, a torrent of problems such as poverty, lack of education, and general failure of city leaders all play a part in the South Chicago-ification of crime in Milwaukee.

  The city’s north side is plagued with a high poverty level.  In fact, Milwaukee’s middle class fell to 25% of the population, as those living in poverty have risen to around 30%.  While much of the blame lays on a 40% decline in manufacturing jobs since the 1970’s, the city has trouble even acknowledging the employment issue.  In a recent radio interview covered by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Mayor Tom Barrett stated, “There's a lot of poverty here and we're trying to do everything we can to create jobs. But bear in mind, there are still places on this planet where there's more poverty than there is here, and we don't have the level of violence.”  In the interview, he explained that poverty is not the sole reason for increases in violent crimes.  While he is correct that poverty isn’t the only cause, stating his administration is attempting to stimulate job growth is incorrect.  In fact, it is Governor Scott Walker’s administration that pledged $100 million to stimulate the Milwaukee economy.  Meanwhile, Barrett brushes off the notion that poverty is a large contributing factor to crime.
 

Crime Stats Courtesy of TMJ4

  Along with high poverty levels, Milwaukee contends with a deplorable public education system.  The school district recently earned a grade of D- by the state of Wisconsin.  The number of failing schools is on the rise with a top 5 national dropout rate and a graduation rate of only 62%.  With an uneducated and unskilled potential workforce, education is a direct contributing factor to the high poverty level in the city.  It comes as no surprise that in cities with high poverty and poor education, violent crime rates are high. 

Fortunately, Scott Walker’s Act 10 will begin to break down union grip on the city’s education system; along with an expanded school voucher system that will ultimately help the city’s failing schools.

  Despite Governor Walker’s best efforts, the city of Milwaukee continues to allow progressive ideology to lead.  Mayor Tom Barrett pointed out potential factors in crime, yet sweeps them under the rug.  Barrett offers no real solutions, and allows himself credit for the achievements of the Republican governor.  Pointing out an increasing problem with crime, yet not acting on it is not leadership.  Another failure of leadership is seen with Police Chief Ed Flynn.  Violent crime is the highest since Flynn became chief, which may be misleading.  Despite being exonerated, evidence shows that Flynn failed to accurately report assaults as violent crime, and in some cases, may have not reported them at all.  Chief Flynn is also an anti-gun advocate; the opposite opinion of his counterpart Sherriff David Clarke Jr.  Sheriff Clarke issued a statement urging law abiding citizens to legally carry weapons for defense.  Flynn wants guns off the streets altogether.  However, we all should be aware that criminals break laws, including gun laws. 

  Recently, Flynn announced the police department will initiate a crime prevention initiative that was seemingly successful in the past.  The basic concept of the program is to have more officers visible in high crime areas.  This method saw a decrease in crime by nearly 67% in high crime areas.  However, Flynn stopped the crime prevention initiative when the crime rate seemed more manageable.  If this initiative worked in the past, one must question why Flynn and other city leaders decided to halt the program at all.  The blatant disregard for the safety of Milwaukee’s law abiding citizens by city leaders such as Chief Flynn and Mayor Barrett is astounding. 

  Poverty, appalling public education, and poor liberal leadership are a few of the many dynamics triggering the increase in violent crime in Milwaukee.  The city’s north side is no longer a safe place to live or work.  Ignoring the problems at hand will only cause further increases in violent crimes.  Perhaps Milwaukee could take a page from neighboring cities, such as Waukesha; where economic policies encourage job growth, public education is one of the best in the nation, and where city leaders like Waukesha Mayor Jeff Scrima actually identify issues, offer solutions and act on problems.  Until then, Milwaukee’s crime problem may only become worse.


Published: Freedom Weekly, August 17, 2013, Vol. 003 Issue 017

See Also:

• Violent Crime In Milwaukee This Year Is Highest Since 2008; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
• Milwaukee Police Unveil Detailed Response To Recent Gun Violence; Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
• Free Falling in Milwaukee: A Close-Up on One City's Middle Class Decline; The Atlantic

 

Obama Reactive, Not Proactive On Terror

   

Photo: Heritage.org

  President Obama and his administration are not being proactive, but reactive once again in foreign policy issues such as international terrorism.  The US received intelligence on potential terror attacks at U.S. embassies, tourist locations, or on infrastructure in the Middle East.  The US government issued a travel alert on August 2 in response to credible threats by terrorist groups, which will remain in effect until August 31.  In addition to the alert, multiple embassies are to close August 4.  The closed embassies focus around the Middle East and northern Africa.  While the Obama administration is taking genuine precautions with the alerts and closures, Obama’s continuous downplaying of the stranglehold that extremist groups still have in the region has put American lives in constant danger.

  The attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 is still being investigated as a failure of response on part of both the White House and State Department with the subsequent cover-up of the event as a terror attack.  The President, former US ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton all cited a video as the cause of protests that became violent.  We now know that was a complete fallacy conjured up by the administration.  

Photo: NPR.org

CNN recently confirmed that there were CIA agents on the ground at the time of the attack.  This raises more questions, and verifies that the motives for a cover-up may be even worse than the initial reelection strategy theory.  Even after President Obama proclaimed the demise of Al-Qaeda, American civilians and soldiers alike are still being killed by this gross negligence of foreign enemies. 

  Almost one year after the Benghazi terror attack, the most recent alerts were issued at a time when Secretary of State John Kerry is in the preliminary stages of Middle East peace talks.  One could find it quite ironic Secretary Kerry is beginning peace talks for a region where the State Department issued alerts and embassy closures.   One must contemplate how the Obama administration plans to use US influence to continue peace talks and see progress when the government is closing embassies and issuing severe alerts.  While it is important to protect the safety of Americans both abroad and at home, especially with credible threats, it seems Obama is abandoning American power in the region.  With fledgling democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan, a possible nuclear Iran, and civil unrest in Egypt, Syria, and many other Middle Eastern nations, decreasing American influence may increase the impact extremists have. 

  The Obama administration may have ‘learned’ not to abandon Americans in need of assistance with the Benghazi attack.  However, President Obama, as usual, may be taking this lesson to a whole new level.  With credible threats, it would seem plausible to increase visible security forces at our embassies; and should a situation occur, to protect and defend the lives of Americans.  Obama has no plans to do so.  He had led from behind on many previous issues in the region, and this is no exception.  Obama is simply being reactive to terrorist threats, not proactively providing increased security and tracking down the actual terrorists accordingly. 

  The administration may believe they are taking necessary steps to provide safety to Americans abroad; however, closing embassies for one day will not simply eradicate the threat of terrorism, especially when the closures are broadcasted to the whole world.  It is this mindset of a diminished threat from Al-Qaeda of which may have been the root cause of Benghazi as well as the lies that followed, the Boston Marathon bombing, and countless other situations. 

Boston Herald Cover - Obama knows 'nothing.'

The President needs to be more proactive with American influence throughout the world; particularly in the Middle East, not reactive to potentialities.  Closing embassies may give the terrorists ammunition in recruitment, saying Americans are scared of them.  That’s precisely what extremists want –a weak or even non-existent American influence.  Downplaying the strength extremist groups still have is ultimately dangerous to the safety of Americans.  It is unsettling the country reelected a leader without a backbone, who time and time again seems to have no clue about what’s going on in the world, much less in his own administration.   However, Americans should remain strong, and continue to proactively defend and promote ideals like liberty, justice, and freedom; even if our president won’t. 


Published: Freedom Weekly, August 7, 2013, Vol. 003 Issue 016

 

SCOTUS Upholds Election Integrity

   

Photo Courtesy Of NPR.org

    Election integrity is essential in American politics.  Many see the Voting Rights Act as a step to ensure election integrity; however, the Supreme Court disagreed.  On Tuesday, June 25, the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Voting Rights Act in a 5-4 decision.  The Supreme Court decided to strike down section 4 of the act, which requires nine mostly Southern states with histories of minority voter intimidation or disenfranchisement to seek federal approval before changing election laws.  Required federal approval was needed to change election procedures such as registration, redistricting, and Voter ID laws.  This may not mean the end of complete federal oversight, but it is improbable that the lack of federal oversight will damage election integrity in modern times. 

  While the GOP was relatively content with the decision, Democrats were highly disappointed in the court’s ruling, often citing civil rights movements and leaders.  Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated the progress achieved in civil rights was “disserved by today’s decision” about her dissenting opinion.  Chief Justice John G. Roberts wrote in the majority opinion, “Our country has changed.  While any racial discrimination in voting is too much, Congress must ensure that the legislation it passes to remedy that problem speaks to current conditions.”  The majority opinion holds that any required federal oversight of voter laws must be based on current information.  However, with Democrats controlling the Senate, and Republicans controlling the House, it is unlikely an agreement for any federal oversight on state voter laws will be found.

Voting Rights Act Clearance Required - Wall Street Journal

  Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia are now able to change voting laws without required federal approval.  On June 27, the Supreme Court threw out a lower court’s ruling that Texas voter identification laws and redistricting could not take effect without federal approval.  The court’s ruling may also affect other states enacting voter identification laws.  

 Wisconsin’s voter ID bill was passed in 2011, but was ordered stopped from taking effect by Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess.  On May 30, 2013, the 4^th District Court of Appeals in Madison overturned the circuit court’s decision in a unanimous decision that it did not violate the Constitution.  The groups who initiated the lawsuit against the bill are considering challenging Wisconsin voter ID in the Supreme Court.  However, because the Supreme Court recently threw out a similar lawsuit blocking Texas voter ID, it is unlikely they will hear the case.  The Supreme Court also upheld the Constitutionality of voter identification laws in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board in 2008.  This signals that the Wisconsin voter identification law will indeed go into effect. 

 The Supreme Court’s decision to strike down required federal oversight is a victory for election integrity.  In these modern times, racial prejudices and minority voter disenfranchisement at the polls simply does not happen on a large scale.  Indeed, it is time to stop punishing Southern states for the injustices of a generation ago.  The ruling will help many states to enact voter identification laws to ensure the integrity of elections, without much, if any, federal oversight.  Implications of the decision will not only affect those nine states that used to require federal approval in election law changes, but will affect all 50 states.  States can now enact laws which benefit election integrity, which ultimately will ensure the integrity of American politics. 


See also:

• Supreme Court throws out lower court's ruling on Texas voter ID law - Fox News  
• Supreme Court Invalidates Key Part of Voting Rights Act - NYT  

Freedom Weekly News 

Published: Freedom Weekly, July 24, 2013 Vol. 003 Issue 015