Walker antics land him front page, above the fold

That’s not such a good PR move when the story is giving a generous campaign contributor no-bid contracts. Pay to play is alive and well in Milwaukee County, but no one ever calls it that because it’s not politically correct.

The story, in case you don’t get the MJS, is written by Daniel Bice, and talks about Graef-USA getting the nod to inspect county properties. The firm’s elite have made big plays into Walker’s campaign account in the past.

It’s also less than a year since Walker was found to be offering political contributor Edward M. Aprahamian Jr. a no bid contract to clean county property.

Scott Walker has more baggage than a pack mule – or is that donkey? There’s no way I’d trust the man to be governor.


  1. Given the concern after the recent accident I am sure you would have rather they put out a RFP, wait for responses, award the bid, and then proceed?

    So do what, wait months to begin?

    This is ridiculous.

  2. Read for content, Fred:

    “Walker told a Journal Sentinel reporter shortly after the June 24 accident that the county was comfortable having Graef do all the testing of the parking garage as part of the probe into what happened. But the idea was nixed, Walker said, because the firm had a minor role in the later stages of the $30 million construction project in the early 1990s.”

    Graef isn’t doing anything at all with the garage accident. It’s the other county properties they’ve been hand-picked to inspect.

    The only thing that’s ridiculous is how so many perfectly logical people refuse to see through Walker’s weak record.

  3. I haven’t had tome to dig into it myself, but Jeff Wagner reported that this “major Walker donor” donated $15,000 to Walker… But donated $40,000 to Jim Doyle.

  4. There was something in the MJS article about Graef people donating to Doyle.

    So, what’s your point?

  5. Does the fact that Walker hater, Lee Holloway, backed the deal make any difference?? I think so. Funny how Bice slipped that in at the end and I noticed you didn’t mention it at all….

  6. Silent E. – The Walker spokeswoman said, Holloway didn’t say. You can ferret that one out if it’s important to you. Besides, that’s kind of like the argument that Doyle got money, too.

    Either the practice of rewarding campaign contributors with no-bid contracts is right or it’s wrong. Even if Holloway thought it was a good idea, it would still be wrong in my book. I think it would be interesting to see if Holloway has funds from the Graef folks, too. I’d bet yes.

  7. Cindy, you’re becoming a mini-Capper on your anti-Walker rants. What’s the deal? I feel like I’ve walked into the middle of some long-standing feud between you and Scott Walker.

  8. Tom and Fred, I don’t care for Scott Walker as a candidate for governor. This does not make me a bad person. It makes me a person who won’t vote for Scott Walker in the primary.

    You’ll live.

  9. BrkfldDad says:

    Will be interesting to see if this is above the fold tomorrow – http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/noquarter/98289764.html

    At least Bice looks to be an equal opportunity accuser!

    Frankly, I find both this and the Graef contract to be small potatoes, but a great indication that both men, whether or not we like it, are seasoned politicians.

  10. Is a mess up in a private business the same as pay to play with taxpayer money? It sounds like Neumann’s group is sorting it out and will pay what needs to be paid.

    Perhaps Bice will come up with something about Tom Barrett tomorrow. (Right!)

  11. Oshkosh says:


    I find it interesting that you call Neumann’s tax cheating a “mess up in a private business”. So it is OK for you to defend your candidate for cheating on paying his taxes when he didn’t think anyone would notice but not OK to fast track safety inspection when other people could die while waiting for an RFP to be approved?

    …so much for “in an evenhanded manner”

  12. Hey, if Neumann is found to be deliberately defrauding the government instead of taking an exemption he thought he could, then I’ll have no problem having a go at him. Your asserting his guilt does not make him in any way guilty.

    RE: the fast track. Once again I will remind you that the buildings Graef was hired to inspect did not include the O’Donnell parking garage. Does this mean you know Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker has allowed more county buildings to deteriorate to the point where “other people could die while waiting for an RFP to be approved?”

    I’m heading out for the paper. You can go after these two candidates all you want, Oshkosh, but you will not try to discredit me and win.

  13. If you were fair the Neumann story would have had just as big an emphasis hear as the Walker story.

    (Yes, I know hear should be spelled here, Foust needs something to do)

  14. Fred, you look really silly saying that at 8:18 a.m. when I posted the Neumann story at 7:42 a.m. If you aren’t happy with the equal headline and longer post, why don’t you tell me how I can make it all better for you.

  15. Oshkosh says:


    Your claim of being evenhanded is a hypocracy. On one hand you accuse Walker of wrongdoing over $15,000 in campaign contributions while on the other you defend Neumann claiming he wouldn’t risk tax evasion over a mere $20,000.

    I’m not trying to win anything.. you post an attack blog on someone. claim to be evenhanded and make a big deal out of biased reporting.

    More rubbish.

  16. Oshkosh says:

    So why did Nuemann transfer all that property around between corps and have conflicting filings of who is the owner of the new company (him or his son).

    Is he trying to avoid paying his fair share of inheritence tax or gift tax to his kids?

    I have to pay them, does Neumann think he is somehow above the law?

  17. Oshkosh, breath. How much was the tax paid no-bid Graef-USA contract Walker awarded in his pay to play scheme? Oooh. That might change things, huh? You prove Nuemann was evading taxes and we’ll discuss this issue. Until you can prove your accusation, you are shadow boxing.

    I’m really comfortable with my reputation. You must be rather frightened of it or you wouldn’t be so nasty.

    You’ll have to take your accusations up with Neumann’s attorney. I have to think it’s all a little more complicated than what Dan Bice can manage to put into print and stay at a 5th grade level for readers like you.

    If you read the Neumann post you will see this can happen. In my friend’s case the S corp was taking control of a condo they owned. All perfectly legal. Just not properly executed. And I challenge you to explain how what might soon be a 55% tax on estates is in anyway construed as a “fair” share. This year the “fair” share is 0%, so in that case, no, he couldn’t have been avoiding the payment.

    I love sparring with people who don’t have a clue what they are talking about. Bring it on. 🙂

  18. Cindy, can you prove this was a “pay to play scheme”?

    No, you can’t.

    A pay to play scheme is a I’ll do this for you if you do that for me… For example, the current Blagojevich trial.

    So a company gave Walker a few bucks over the years, the same company gave far more to Democrats (four times as much to Doyle).

    Unless you can prove that donation directly led to the work that was rewarded there is no pay to play.

    The head of public works made the decision, not Walker. This was fast tracked due to the recent tragedy. This shows a responsive government instead of one that gets bogged down with crap.

    So here is the larger point. You made a big deal out of a nothing with Walker (whom you do not support) and you are minimizing a something against Neumann (who you do support).

    On the brighter side seeing how Neumann has been proven to be a tax cheat he is now qualified for a position in the Obama cabinet.

  19. Pay to play: I’ll give you money for your political spending and you give me contracts from taxpayers.

    I thought Bice laid this at Walker’s feet. But I’ll read the story again.

    Plus, if Walker’s a bad candidate and Neumann’s a bad candidate, I guess that makes Barrett the only choice.

    Be careful what you wish for, man.

  20. Who said Walker was a bad candidate?

    Just because Bice is doing his One Wisconsin Now imitation does not mean Walker is a bad candidate.

    No comment yet on Neumann’s push polling?


  21. Charlie Sykes as the source? Dude, try harder.

    You know, just for fun I hopped over to your blog, fred. No mention of Walker’s no-bid contracts to campaign contributors at all. Heck, even you have to come here for real debate. 🙂

  22. You remind me of Ellsworth Touhy, and if you don’t konw who that is, YOU are not even Fairly Conservative. How are you connected with Neuman? High school? Affair? Do you just think he’s dreamy? Everyone knows this is yellow journalism at best, and any candidate can be linked with scandal…………Haliburton, Whitewater,BP. The point is we need to be free to move on something like this, and a no bid contract is allowed by law, it’s not illegal. As far as real debate goes, you are obviously a muckraker, and have no intelligence whatsoever. Your bl0g is trash, dressed up as relevance. I think you should do us a favor and end it all, because we see through the charade. Stop being a shill for the dynamite HACK, that is Mark Neuman. PS Pitting the two candidates against each other, and giving the illusion of a real race only charges up the liberals. You know that though don’t you, and thats why you want it.

  23. Josh. Howdy. You win the new award for Jerks I Never Hope to Meet.

    The Walker Wankers have really decided to show up en force, eh?

  24. Well that was a wonderful flourish. I am saddened to be right, I was hoping you would have some evidence to prove my statements wrong. I am obviously right, and have your number, or else you would have protested. If I am right then I am not a jerk, for the reason you think I am is that I reflect your true image. In truth I can be a wonderful person, I just have a severe allergic reaction to manure spread by hacks.

  25. Josh, you want me to prove I didn’t have an affair with Mark Neumann, and you continue to argue your comments are legitimate?


  26. Well that WAS intelligent. Well not really, I was asking you how you were connected to him. Funny you should focus on that one, Freudian slip? I think you just showed you inability to comprehend the English language, or should the Walker camp look in to that? I don’t need to argue my comments are legitimate, but you do have to prove you are literate. Will you sleep tonight now that I have shown you who you really are, or will you toss and turn as my words thump in the back of your mind? hack…….hack…….shill…….awful truth……….illiterate………fake……… sweet dreams Cin. ;o)

  27. Wank off somewhere else, Josh. You simply don’t have the power to influence me.

  28. Short answers, not much in that head of yours is there? I will walk off somewhere else because YOU are nothing. Enjoy your narcissism, and your lil ol blog, I don’t need one to feel loved. Remember the truth and all of your inadequacies tonight as your black heart thumps like a Telltale Heart.

  29. Walk wasn’t the word I used. 😉

  30. Cindy,

    It’s interesting that Doyle just accepted the same company to do repairs on the Hoan Bridge. http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/98320894.html

    Perhaps they are the best group around? Or perhaps you just hate Walker so much that you’re starting to look really foolish.

    Keep up the good Capper imitation. It fits you well.

  31. Put on your big boy pants, Aaron. You Walker Wankers are something else.

    1) Was this a no bid contract?
    2) Does Graef USA have money in Doyle’s kitty?

    Just asking.

  32. BrkfldDad says:

    Cindy – FYI, it was in Bice’s article – “Over the years, Democratic Gov. Jim Doyle has received more than $40,000 in political donations from Graef employees, who have received a variety of contracts from the state.”

  33. Brkflddad,

    Cindy would rather nobody use Graef except perhaps Neumann of course, since this company makes contributions to everyone and their mom.

  34. “1) Was this a no bid contract?”

    What do you think?

  35. Aaron: I think I asked you if this was a no-bid contract.

  36. (Psst. Bdad, it was rhetorical)

    ERGO: Walker is just like Doyle.


  37. “Aaron: I think I asked you if this was a no-bid contract.”


  38. As I said, then that makes Walker just like Doyle.

    It doesn’t make either one of them right.

  39. Cindy,

    What if Graef is the most qualified? Would you expect them to use less qualified companies to do something this important?

  40. Hey Aaron. I have an idea! Why don’t you hop out there and prove that Graef USA was the most qualified for both Walker’s project and Doyle’s project and that campaign contributions by Graef-USA elite had nothing to do with it all and in the end Walker will still have behaved exactly like Doyle. Or Doyle exactly like Walker. I guess I’ll let that be your choice.

  41. BrkfldDad says:

    Rhetorical… missed that nuance (kicks self in head… :))

  42. That’s ok bdad. It was so much more fun the way it worked out.

  43. Hey Cindy, why don’t you hop out there and prove that Walker participated in a pay to play scheme instead of making stupid statements you can’t back up.

    It is entirely within Graef’s right to contribute money to whomever they want. And it is within both Walker’s and Doyle’s right to use whomever they want.

    And furthermore, it is within your right to provide evidence that hiring Graef had more to do with campaign contributions than being the best qualified to do the job.

    Either put up, or shut up.

  44. Bice showed the details on Walker’s pay to play. As I said in the original post, no one calls it what it is because that’s not politically correct.

    If Walker and Doyle want to avoid the appearance of impropriety, they should avoid the behavior that creates such appearance.

    Put up or shut up? Really?

  45. Cindy, this was something that needed to get done quickly, there was not time for the whole bid process.

    Even Lee Holloway had no problem with this process, and he complains about everything that Walker does.

    Perhaps you should tell the class why you think they should have delayed the inspection process for months just to satisfy your want for a bid process.

  46. Why the urgency? This contract covers county buildings that have been well maintained according to Walker’s staff. The O’Donnell Garage is not a part of this inspection contract according to the article.

    A peek into Holloway’s campaign statements will likely show why he did not object.

    One could easily argue that Walker used the O’Donnell Garage tragedy as a crisis that shouldn’t go to waste. After all, it’s provided the cover for him to reward a no-bid contract to campaign contributors.

    oohh ooohh! Wait! Unless Walker desperately needs an all clear report before September’s primary. That’s a reason to choose a campaign contributor, too.

  47. Dear God!!!

  48. Why the urgency?

    Chairman Holloway for one called for this ASAP, as did your guy Mark Neumann.

  49. Fred,

    I explained it here.

    (Edited: Arod provided a link to a post on his blog. You can dig it up if you’re interested. I have no desire to provide free advertising.)

  50. Boy aren’t we a little touchy. And Walker supporters are the evil ones, right?

  51. Not really. It’s just that you’re a user Aaron and I am no co-dependent. I’m sure you’ll manage.

  52. User? Get off your pedestal, Cindy. My website out ranks yours on Google, I don’t need your site for anything.

    Oh, and by the way, links via the comments section on blogs are really of no worth in terms of helping my site. In fact, links on your comments section are “no follow” in the eyes of Google.

  53. Aaron, I never cut anyone off. It’s just not what I do. I sure wish you’d give it a rest, though.

    Imagine such a self professed conservative like yourself behaving the way you do. Too bad. You make so much work for the rest of us who are trying to really do the right thing.