Council Appointment Catfight

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.
Brenda Konkel
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2424
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:35 am
Contact:

Postby Brenda Konkel » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:32 pm

So, Daisy, are you confirming, it has nothing to do with me being a "consensus builder" as the Mayor has claimed? Rather, he just doens't like my style.

Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby Daisy » Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:40 pm

Brenda Konkel wrote:So, Daisy, are you confirming, it has nothing to do with me being a "consensus builder" as the Mayor has claimed? Rather, he just doens't like my style.
They're hardly mutually exclusive. That is, your style is not that of a consensus builder. :D

Brenda Konkel
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2424
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 11:35 am
Contact:

Postby Brenda Konkel » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:06 pm

Daisy wrote:
Brenda Konkel wrote:So, Daisy, are you confirming, it has nothing to do with me being a "consensus builder" as the Mayor has claimed? Rather, he just doens't like my style.
They're hardly mutually exclusive. That is, your style is not that of a consensus builder. :D


According to whom? The mayor's idea of compromise and working with people is really warped. He bullies people into voting the way he wants, and if not, then you are deemed uncooperative and dismissed. And that's fine, that's the way slick politicians work. I just think we should be honest about it. I'd like to hear the Mayor say it.

I bet, if you ask around, you will hear a different story about my ability to work with people in the community - including from several developers, lobbyists and the business community. In fact, I've recieved several calls from people you would least expect expressing frustration with the Mayor's characterization of the situation and taking me off the plan commission. Those on the inside, know a different story. And its a slick manuever to refuse to talk to someone and then say that you can't work with them and therefore they are not a consensus builder.

And, as I write this, I am fully aware that this is the very reason the Mayor doesn't like me - I refuse to play the silly politician backscratching games and I will tell people what is really going on - and he finds that annoying - it ruins his "message". So he's trying to discredit the messenger by saying I am not a consensus builder, knowing full well, after experiencing it first hand, that it simply isn't true.

Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby Daisy » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:43 pm

Brenda Konkel wrote:I am fully aware that this is the very reason the Mayor doesn't like me - I refuse to play the silly politician backscratching games and I will tell people what is really going on
Not to be self-aggrandizing or anything, right? "He doesn't like me because I have too much integrity and speak truth to power!"

But you may wanna be careful about your notions of righteous grandeur unwittingly resulting in the alianation of whatever allies you have left. Because your above comment suggests that your fellow PD womyn whom Dave does like and speak to - Satya, Vicky!, Lisa et al - "play silly backscratching games" and don't "tell people what is really going on."

If I were them, I'd be pretty pissed at your charge that the cost of a decent relationship with the mayor is the abdication of one's principles.

Nasty Gurl
Senior Member
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:51 pm

Postby Nasty Gurl » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:45 pm

Brenda Konkel wrote:And, as I write this, I am fully aware that this is the very reason the Mayor doesn't like me - I refuse to play the silly politician backscratching games

Instead you choose your very own silly playground namecalling games. Take a step back from the keyboard. Read what you write here. Read what you write on that blog of yours. Read what you have been quoted saying in the newspapers. And ask yourself again if you are a consensus builder.

piltdown
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:41 pm

Postby piltdown » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:54 pm

Daisy wrote:
piltdown wrote:What about Golden? He openly supported Soglin over Cheesewiz the first time, and still got Plan Commission! Hell, he even was on Soglin's commercials.
He was returned to the Plan Cmsn 2 years into Dave's term. After the election in which he did his star turn in Soglin commercials, he was pulled off.

Yes, good. Could one deduce from that that Golden was indeed punished? Let's re-frame that: one can disagree with me without being disagreable, but if they piss me off I may punish them for two years. It certainly doesn't mean that I'm disagreable, I'm just cutting your nuts off short-term. I understand that.
Disagree-ableness is something that someone else does to you. Got it.
piltdown wrote:Besides, if my memory serves me correctly, wasn't it Dave who said during his campaign (as a slight to Soglin) that politicians could "disagree without being disagreeable?"
Daisy wrote:Right. I'm guessing he may find being called a jackass, 2-yr old etc etc to be "disagreeable.".
piltdown wrote:No question. Disagree-ableness is something someone else does to you.

piltdown wrote:Now, as for whether he is sexist or not, I can't say clearly, but all of the examples that have been raised as evidence that he is not, are women that he is either married to or who work underneath him. I'm not quite sure how that blunts the charge
True, the mayor does not in fact have the power to appoint the governor. (If he did, my money would be on Kathleen.) Among the people he does get to appoint, there's a consistent track record of appointing women to the most important positions. The notion that this is somehow meaningless is sheer idiocy.[/quote]
If I may follow your logic: Dave is not sexist because he appoints women underneath him. Because he cannot appoint women above him, he is therefore not sexist. Solid.
Last edited by piltdown on Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Twofer4
Forum Addict
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:50 am

Postby Twofer4 » Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:58 pm

Gosh the sour grapes sure are getting rank, time to throw them out and move on.

The only problem here is the delusional sense of entitlement.

piltdown
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:41 pm

Postby piltdown » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:00 pm

piltdown wrote:
Daisy wrote:
piltdown wrote:What about Golden? He openly supported Soglin over Cheesewiz the first time, and still got Plan Commission! Hell, he even was on Soglin's commercials.
He was returned to the Plan Cmsn 2 years into Dave's term. After the election in which he did his star turn in Soglin commercials, he was pulled off.

Yes, good. Could one deduce from that that Golden was indeed punished? Let's re-frame that: one can disagree with me without being disagreable, but if they piss me off I may punish them for two years. It certainly doesn't mean that I'm disagreable, I'm just cutting your nuts off short-term. I understand that.
Disagree-ableness is something that someone else does to you. Got it.
piltdown wrote:Besides, if my memory serves me correctly, wasn't it Dave who said during his campaign (as a slight to Soglin) that politicians could "disagree without being disagreeable?"
Daisy wrote:Right. I'm guessing he may find being called a jackass, 2-yr old etc etc to be "disagreeable.".
piltdown wrote:No question. Disagree-ableness is something someone else does to you.

piltdown wrote:Now, as for whether he is sexist or not, I can't say clearly, but all of the examples that have been raised as evidence that he is not, are women that he is either married to or who work underneath him. I'm not quite sure how that blunts the charge
piltdown wrote:True, the mayor does not in fact have the power to appoint the governor. (If he did, my money would be on Kathleen.) Among the people he does get to appoint, there's a consistent track record of appointing women to the most important positions. The notion that this is somehow meaningless is sheer idiocy.

If I may follow your logic: Dave is not sexist because he appoints women underneath him. Because he cannot appoint women above him, he is therefore not sexist. Solid.
[/quote]
Last edited by piltdown on Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Oprah
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1087
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 3:20 pm
Location: On the Down Low

Postby Oprah » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:03 pm

Brenda Konkel wrote:Sometimes, its all the sports-obsesed analogies and references and jokes that exclude me (I know this doesn't apply to all women).

It's tough being demoted to second string, yes, but you have to suck it up and give 110%. There's no crying in baseball.

piltdown
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 1:41 pm

Postby piltdown » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:09 pm

piltdown wrote:
piltdown wrote:
Daisy wrote:
piltdown wrote:What about Golden? He openly supported Soglin over Cheesewiz the first time, and still got Plan Commission! Hell, he even was on Soglin's commercials.
He was returned to the Plan Cmsn 2 years into Dave's term. After the election in which he did his star turn in Soglin commercials, he was pulled off.

Yes, good. Could one deduce from that that Golden was indeed punished? Let's re-frame that: one can disagree with me without being disagreable, but if they piss me off I may punish them for two years. It certainly doesn't mean that I'm disagreable, I'm just cutting your nuts off short-term. I understand that.
Disagree-ableness is something that someone else does to you. Got it.
piltdown wrote:Besides, if my memory serves me correctly, wasn't it Dave who said during his campaign (as a slight to Soglin) that politicians could "disagree without being disagreeable?"
Daisy wrote:Right. I'm guessing he may find being called a jackass, 2-yr old etc etc to be "disagreeable.".
piltdown wrote:No question. Disagree-ableness is something someone else does to you.

piltdown wrote:Now, as for whether he is sexist or not, I can't say clearly, but all of the examples that have been raised as evidence that he is not, are women that he is either married to or who work underneath him. I'm not quite sure how that blunts the charge. True, the mayor does not in fact have the power to appoint the governor. (If he did, my money would be on Kathleen.) Among the people he does get to appoint, there's a consistent track record of appointing women to the most important positions. The notion that this is somehow meaningless is sheer idiocy.
If I may follow your logic: Dave is not sexist because he appoints women underneath him. Because he cannot appoint women above him, he is therefore not sexist. Solid.

Twofer4
Forum Addict
Posts: 158
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:50 am

Re: Post Election Blues

Postby Twofer4 » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:10 pm

Andy Olsen wrote:
lifelongmadison wrote:and the unending and vitriolic campaign against Alder Palm, who was clearly liked by his constituents, ultimately left a wide open door for PD's opponents.

More like Palm clearly benfitted from the contributions of Dem Party of Wisconsin and AFSCME phonebanks and other help.

His challenger ran a spirited campaign but the award for vitriol in that race goes to Larry for his red-baiting adn scare tactics. There's a thread here dedicated to just that subject.


Yet the constituents of District 15 clearly didn't see it that way. Palm handily won over that "spirited" campaign from Vicky! Perhaps someone should inform them about their recent hoodwinking. While you're at it, perhaps you could inform Vicky! and gang that she lost and it's time to accept that fact.

Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby Daisy » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:15 pm

piltdown wrote:Yes, good. Could one deduce from that that Golden was indeed punished? Let's re-frame that: one can disagree with me without being disagreable...
Golden's case wasn't one of "disagreement" over some issue. It was one of personal betrayal followed by a broken promise. That warrants a smackdown in anyone's book.
piltdown wrote:If I may follow your logic: Dave is not sexist because he appoints women underneath him. Because he cannot appoint women above him, he is therefore not sexist.
Nice try. Your dismissal of these women via your "underneath him" fixation notwithstanding, I'm pointing out to your willfully slow self that the mayor can only make the appointments he can make, as can any elected official. That hardly makes whom they choose as their chief of staff, whom they designate to make land use and transit policy somehow insignificant.

Besides, the burden of proof is on the accuser. Let's have some plausible indication that he is in fact sexist.

om
Forum Addict
Posts: 168
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:19 pm

Postby om » Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:55 pm

Daisy wrote:
Brenda Konkel wrote:So, Daisy, are you confirming, it has nothing to do with me being a "consensus builder" as the Mayor has claimed? Rather, he just doens't like my style.
They're hardly mutually exclusive. That is, your style is not that of a consensus builder. :D


Well, I hate to burst a bubble, but Brenda is pretty much the closest thing you come to a consensus builder on the council. She actually sits down with builders and developers and TALKS TO THEM, unlike 99% of the rest of the council seat-warmers.
You may disagree with her stands on issues, but that has little to nothing to do with the act of consensus building.

If I may hazard a guess, Brenda was taken off the Plan Commission for exactly the same reason that Stuart Levitan was taken off the Plan Commssion.
They both asked tough questions because they both read and studied the agenda and reports. They both had a clear set of principles. They both had high standards, and didn't mind insisting that others have similar standards. They didn't mind making motions to change things they didn't like. They didn't just rubber-stamp every piece of shit that came down the pike.

The problem with mayors, whether Baumann or Dave, is that people like that make life difficult for them. Flies easily swatted.

Daisy
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2001 10:51 am
Location: New York, NY

Postby Daisy » Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:23 pm

om wrote:You may disagree with her stands on issues...
I generally don't, actually. With a couple of exceptions like the forming of the DCR, I pretty much agree with her issue positions.
om wrote:If I may hazard a guess, Brenda was taken off the Plan Commission for exactly the same reason that Stuart Levitan was taken off the Plan Commssion...They didn't just rubber-stamp every piece of shit that came down the pike.
I don't really know Baumann or why exactly she yanked Stu, but to suggest that a mayor who came from the enviro/land use movement wants people who rubberstamp bad development is just absurd on its face. Were that the case, he would have never appointed Brenda in the first place (whose reputation as a gadfly who asks tough questions of developers was hardly a secret four years ago), nor would he have appointed any number of other people who are PD-affiliated and aren't exactly known to be rubberstamps for Terrence Wall.

Stu Levitan
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3479
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 8:40 pm
Location: Studio B of the historic Abernathy Building
Contact:

Postby Stu Levitan » Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:45 pm

Daisy wrote:I don't really know Baumann or why exactly she yanked Stu ...


You maybe could have used a different verb??


Return to “Local Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest