Liberals, against unpaid internships…except for them.
Rolling on the floor hilarious.
Will our alleged resident judgmental liberal, with a hairless screen name, call out this hilarious liberal hypocrisy?
old baldy
on March 23, 2016 at 2:27 pm
Hypocrisy is neither right nor left, liberal or conservative, as kevin proves with every post.
If shilling has an unpaid intern she is a hypocrite. You happy now?
That being said, if that intern gets college credits for that internship then they are paid. Years ago I supervised one that got credits worth ~$1000 at that time. No paycheck, but credits. Big difference.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 23, 2016 at 8:01 pm
Avoiding overinflated college expense is getting paid?
We should be taxing that: FICA, Medicare, federal withholding, state withholding, state SUTA, Federal FUTA etc.
I don’t like idea of Democratic Senator using internships as a tax dodge.
old baldy
on March 23, 2016 at 8:11 pm
The intern I had went to Lawrence. If you have a problem with the tuition a private school charged back in 1996 you should take it up with them. By the way, I didn’t want him, but his parents were big Thompson contributors and forced the issue.
Fine with me.
Any R’s have unpaid interns? Maybe you could ask lame duck Gudex.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 24, 2016 at 3:58 am
Baldy,
Just going with your premise that these are paid interns because they avoid college expense for credit.
Good Democrats should want to income tax that!
Conservatives are against taxes in this situation. Also, Gudex was not against unpaid internships like this hypocritical liberal.
old baldy
on March 24, 2016 at 7:42 am
kev:
“We should be taxing that: FICA, Medicare, federal withholding, state withholding, state SUTA, Federal FUTA etc”.
“Good Democrats should want to income tax that!”.
Both of these statements are yours. Are you now coming out of the closet ? Does it feel any better. It must be a big load off your shoulders, finally being able to say you are a democrat. So who is it, Hillary or Bern ?
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 24, 2016 at 2:36 pm
Baldy,
If forced to choose, I’d take the Bern. He is honest about who he is. Stupid policy wise, but honest.
Hillary is a dishonest liberal. Dishonesty is far worse that stupid.
old baldy
on March 24, 2016 at 3:28 pm
Good to know you have both qualifications.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 24, 2016 at 9:50 pm
Baldy,
Channeling your inner Trump I see.
old baldy
on March 25, 2016 at 9:04 am
kev:
Nope, just pointing out your qualifications for making the types of comments that you make. I have none of the bluster, bad (awful) hair, nor stubby fingers of trump. You can ask anyone up here .
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 25, 2016 at 11:50 am
Baldy,
Explain the “qualifications” you are looking for?
I’ll be fascinated by that list.
old baldy
on March 25, 2016 at 4:27 pm
kev:
See above, but I’ll put them in quotes so you won’t have to work so hard.
You said, “Dishonesty is far worse that stupid”.
I said, “Good to know you have both qualifications”.
To paraphrase, you have both.
Remedial reading is offered at all local technical colleges.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 26, 2016 at 10:00 am
Baldy,
I’ll bite.
Examples of where I am allegedly “dishonest”?
old baldy
on March 26, 2016 at 11:05 am
kev:
Start with your multitude of dishonest statements about how Doyle and DNR treated your POTW. Work forward from there.
Just your inference that you are “honest” is a dishonest statement.
RSO Warning
on March 26, 2016 at 11:07 am
Warning:
Poster “old baldy” is a registered sex offender.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 26, 2016 at 11:19 am
Baldy,
You have not denied any of the heavy handed DNR mandates and standards, costing the taxpayers of Kewaskum over $10 million in unneeded Pumphouse and sewer plant upgrades in that disucssion.
I voted against the DNR thuggery.
However, 5 of my fellow board members who voted for it, certainly felt the DNR regulatory gun on the mandates.
For me to be “dishonest” in our DNR discussion, you would have to show me those 5 members of the Kewaskum Village board, did not feel intimidated by the DNR mandate and all them said they felt like they were forced to vote “yes” under DNR threat. I;m not intimidated by DNR, so I was 1 of 2 that voted “no”.
Unless you can get all 5 of those elected officials to say otherwise, you would be the “dishonest” one in that discussion.
Try again?
old baldy
on March 26, 2016 at 12:49 pm
kev:
If you go back and look I told you that the process you claimed took place just wasn’t correct. I don’t know if you are just uninformed, willfully ignorant, or puposefully deceitful. Your choice. But regardless, the statements you made regarding the upgrade were false. When I asked you to prove them by providing the files that would be in your municipal office you changed the subject. Dishonest, ignorant, uninformed, all work in your favor.
Try again. Or better yet, don’t be so averse to new information or knowledge. Life is a lot more fun when you know what is going on.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 26, 2016 at 1:23 pm
Baldy,
If what you say is true, then you are saying the 5 Trustees who voted “yes”, unwillingly, are complete dupes about DNR mandates.
They are smart people.
I will believe a room full of elected officials who knew the DNR gun was to our head, cocked and loaded to fire, and the DNR was pulling the trigger.
The final discussion on the pumphouse and sewer plant was: I was willing to take the DNR fines, penalties, or any other liberal punishment nonsense for NOT doing the forced DNR upgrades. I told my fellow trustees to get a backbone on this.
The other trustees were not willing to risk the penalties, fines, and other DNR threatened regulatory punishment when it came to the DNR thuggery.
So you are saying these 5 fine people are the biggest dupes in the history of Wisconsin when it comes to the DNR?
Even though I disagreed with all 5 of them, they all voted “yes”, unwillingly, under complete DNR threat.
No one can dispute that fact.
It is you who need to prove otherwise.
If you are correct, get the DNR secretary to say wastewater permit mandates are “optional” in a letter ruling, and I will circulate it to every water/sewer department in Wisconsin!
You can’t even come close to doing that, so quit being dishonest about DNR regulation.
So which is it? I’m correct and honest about the discussion, or indicating the 5 trustees who felt the intimidation of the DNR threats and voted “yes” are the biggest dupes in WI?
You really argue its the latter?
No one in the room at the time will back your fairy tale up in any possible way.
old baldy
on March 26, 2016 at 1:30 pm
kev:
Your entire statement proves without a doubt that either: You have absolutely no clue as to how the permit process works or, you are purposefully being dishonest. And that you maintain the dishonest line of argument just proves again your feeling of invincible ignorance.
In short. The WPDES process doesn’t work that way, now or in the past. Put a link to the files if you can prove otherwise.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 26, 2016 at 1:42 pm
Baldy,
The permit renewal process sets out x,y,z for renewal.
If municipality fails, or refuses, to do x,y,z, the municipal taxpayers are punished with fines, penalities, threats, and other liberal regulatory abuse.
What is so hard to understand?
Why don’t you share the details of your magical fairy tale on the process?
(So I can show how public officials who are intimidated by DNR are just dupes about the process.)
Either way. I win.
(I’ll be more than willing to be “wrong”, if I can demonstrate the DNR mandates are optional and we can ignore them to every other local official in WI. I’ll take that bullet if it means relieving the cost and stress from taxpayers across this state associated with DNR mandates, especially on the poor).
old baldy
on March 26, 2016 at 4:29 pm
kev:
WPDES permits aren’t optional. If you have a discharge you need a permit. If WI didn’t require one the feds would via NPDES. And that permit will have effluent limits. If you don’t meet the permit limits you need to fix the problem. Fines are a last resort and very rarely come into play after all other remedial actions, maintenance, operations, etc don’t work and the permit holder can’t or won’t comply. It is a long process, everybody and their brother knows what is going on and what the compliance schedule is. If you personally were up to speed that is on your shoulders or your consultant.
You continue to confuse “mandate” with “permit”. If you want to discharge into waters of the state you need permission (i.e., a permit) since those receiving waters do not belong to you. This applies to any discharge. No one was picking on your community.
If you feel you “won”, fine, take your little trophy and ego and strut. But you have continued to misrepresent the issue, the process, and the result. Your constituents are worse off because of your invincible ignorance.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 27, 2016 at 10:32 am
You accuse me of “dishonesty” when you say “permit” and “mandate” are not the same thing?
Let’s take a survey. If we asked 100 people, if you need a permit for something, and that permit demands a litany of actions be taken, even if they are cost prohibitive, is that a mandate?
99.999% will say it is.
Only dishonest bureaucrats attempt to draw a distinction between stepping in the warm cow patty, and the wet cow patty. You still have crap on your shoes.
old baldy
on March 27, 2016 at 12:38 pm
kev:
Thanks for proving my point. A survey won’t help you a bit. A dictionary will.
P.S. : We learned the difference in our public school pretty early on. To bad your voucher school failed you.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 28, 2016 at 9:25 am
Too bad your public school failed you.
The mere idea that a government required permit is not mandate; destroys basic meaning in the English language.
That is what is “dishonest”.
old baldy
on March 28, 2016 at 10:17 am
kev:
Sorry, but my Webster’s New World Dictionary, my grandfathers Webster’s Unabridged law dictionary, and Wikipedia all disagree with you. As does the definition section of the CWA. So in addition to you being the ultimate arbiter of all religious dogma you are now in charge of re-defining the English language. That is a pretty big job, maybe you should quit the DQ and take on the new job full time.
So I guess you win. Take your trophy and go home.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 28, 2016 at 11:05 am
Baldy,
For kicks and giggles, why don’t you post the dictionary meaning, you found, of both words.
old baldy
on March 28, 2016 at 2:15 pm
“But, but, but”, stammered kevin as he tried in vain to prolong a discussion that he lost long ago….
Nope, you do your own research.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 28, 2016 at 3:27 pm
Baldy,
I don’t want to be accused of using a skewered dictionary.
However, since you are channeling your inner Trump 2 year old:
PERMIT-
noun
an authoritative or official certificate of permission; license:
a fishing permit.
a written order granting special permission to do something.
MANDATE-
noun
a command or authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative:
The president had a clear mandate to end the war.
a command from a superior court or official to a lower one:
The appellate court resolved the appeal and issued a mandate to the district judge.
an authoritative order or command:
a royal mandate.
———-
You really want to argue A bureaucratic difference between the 2?
Please point out my “dishonesty”, given these definitions, in ANY of my conversation when it comes to the DNR.
Are you just mad that I point out the DNR is severely hurtful to the poor when it comes to affordable water?
old baldy
on March 28, 2016 at 4:15 pm
kev:
If you can’t tell the difference then you really do need the remedial reading class.
In the context of a WPDES permit :
Permit: a written order granting special permission to do something.
Mandate isn’t mentioned in WPDES language, but:
Mandate: an authoritative order or command.
I can see the difference, as can my golden retriever, but then he is pretty smart.
You really want to argue A bureaucratic difference between the 2?
No, it would be wasting my time trying to enlighten someone so dedicated to ignorance.
Please point out my “dishonesty”, given these definitions, in ANY of my conversation when it comes to the DNR.
You try to distort any comment that disagrees with your own narrow world view. And I am pretty disgusted with the way DNR is managed right now. You can quote me on that.
Are you just mad that I point out the DNR is severely hurtful to the poor when it comes to affordable water?
No, just disgusted by your serial lying about what happened in your community.
So now, declare victory, grab you tiny little trophy and immense ego and head for the barn.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 28, 2016 at 4:43 pm
Baldy,
The part you fail to explain is: The WPES permit has a laundry list of mandates that has cost prohibitive requirements in them!
It’s a distinction without a difference.
Nothing I said was dishonest.
You are upset because DNR under Walker is giving poor people a break on clean water demands that defy cost/benefit analysis?
Seeker
on March 28, 2016 at 4:43 pm
Way past time to ban old baldy. Gaslighting and bullying have no place here.
Kevin Scheunemann
on March 28, 2016 at 4:48 pm
When it comes to “serial lying” about what happened in Kewaskum, you are essentially calling the 5 trustees dupes for believing in punishment, fines, and threats for not doing what the DNR demanded?
You are saying they should not have felt threatened by DNR if they voted NO.
Billiam
on March 29, 2016 at 6:13 am
Seeker, Kevin and Baldy are doing just fine. Do you need a trigger warning, or something? Grow up.
Wow.
Thanks for posting this.
Liberals, against unpaid internships…except for them.
Rolling on the floor hilarious.
Will our alleged resident judgmental liberal, with a hairless screen name, call out this hilarious liberal hypocrisy?
Hypocrisy is neither right nor left, liberal or conservative, as kevin proves with every post.
If shilling has an unpaid intern she is a hypocrite. You happy now?
That being said, if that intern gets college credits for that internship then they are paid. Years ago I supervised one that got credits worth ~$1000 at that time. No paycheck, but credits. Big difference.
Avoiding overinflated college expense is getting paid?
We should be taxing that: FICA, Medicare, federal withholding, state withholding, state SUTA, Federal FUTA etc.
I don’t like idea of Democratic Senator using internships as a tax dodge.
The intern I had went to Lawrence. If you have a problem with the tuition a private school charged back in 1996 you should take it up with them. By the way, I didn’t want him, but his parents were big Thompson contributors and forced the issue.
Fine with me.
Any R’s have unpaid interns? Maybe you could ask lame duck Gudex.
Baldy,
Just going with your premise that these are paid interns because they avoid college expense for credit.
Good Democrats should want to income tax that!
Conservatives are against taxes in this situation. Also, Gudex was not against unpaid internships like this hypocritical liberal.
kev:
“We should be taxing that: FICA, Medicare, federal withholding, state withholding, state SUTA, Federal FUTA etc”.
“Good Democrats should want to income tax that!”.
Both of these statements are yours. Are you now coming out of the closet ? Does it feel any better. It must be a big load off your shoulders, finally being able to say you are a democrat. So who is it, Hillary or Bern ?
Baldy,
If forced to choose, I’d take the Bern. He is honest about who he is. Stupid policy wise, but honest.
Hillary is a dishonest liberal. Dishonesty is far worse that stupid.
Good to know you have both qualifications.
Baldy,
Channeling your inner Trump I see.
kev:
Nope, just pointing out your qualifications for making the types of comments that you make. I have none of the bluster, bad (awful) hair, nor stubby fingers of trump. You can ask anyone up here .
Baldy,
Explain the “qualifications” you are looking for?
I’ll be fascinated by that list.
kev:
See above, but I’ll put them in quotes so you won’t have to work so hard.
You said, “Dishonesty is far worse that stupid”.
I said, “Good to know you have both qualifications”.
To paraphrase, you have both.
Remedial reading is offered at all local technical colleges.
Baldy,
I’ll bite.
Examples of where I am allegedly “dishonest”?
kev:
Start with your multitude of dishonest statements about how Doyle and DNR treated your POTW. Work forward from there.
Just your inference that you are “honest” is a dishonest statement.
Warning:
Poster “old baldy” is a registered sex offender.
Baldy,
You have not denied any of the heavy handed DNR mandates and standards, costing the taxpayers of Kewaskum over $10 million in unneeded Pumphouse and sewer plant upgrades in that disucssion.
I voted against the DNR thuggery.
However, 5 of my fellow board members who voted for it, certainly felt the DNR regulatory gun on the mandates.
For me to be “dishonest” in our DNR discussion, you would have to show me those 5 members of the Kewaskum Village board, did not feel intimidated by the DNR mandate and all them said they felt like they were forced to vote “yes” under DNR threat. I;m not intimidated by DNR, so I was 1 of 2 that voted “no”.
Unless you can get all 5 of those elected officials to say otherwise, you would be the “dishonest” one in that discussion.
Try again?
kev:
If you go back and look I told you that the process you claimed took place just wasn’t correct. I don’t know if you are just uninformed, willfully ignorant, or puposefully deceitful. Your choice. But regardless, the statements you made regarding the upgrade were false. When I asked you to prove them by providing the files that would be in your municipal office you changed the subject. Dishonest, ignorant, uninformed, all work in your favor.
Try again. Or better yet, don’t be so averse to new information or knowledge. Life is a lot more fun when you know what is going on.
Baldy,
If what you say is true, then you are saying the 5 Trustees who voted “yes”, unwillingly, are complete dupes about DNR mandates.
They are smart people.
I will believe a room full of elected officials who knew the DNR gun was to our head, cocked and loaded to fire, and the DNR was pulling the trigger.
The final discussion on the pumphouse and sewer plant was: I was willing to take the DNR fines, penalties, or any other liberal punishment nonsense for NOT doing the forced DNR upgrades. I told my fellow trustees to get a backbone on this.
The other trustees were not willing to risk the penalties, fines, and other DNR threatened regulatory punishment when it came to the DNR thuggery.
So you are saying these 5 fine people are the biggest dupes in the history of Wisconsin when it comes to the DNR?
Even though I disagreed with all 5 of them, they all voted “yes”, unwillingly, under complete DNR threat.
No one can dispute that fact.
It is you who need to prove otherwise.
If you are correct, get the DNR secretary to say wastewater permit mandates are “optional” in a letter ruling, and I will circulate it to every water/sewer department in Wisconsin!
You can’t even come close to doing that, so quit being dishonest about DNR regulation.
So which is it? I’m correct and honest about the discussion, or indicating the 5 trustees who felt the intimidation of the DNR threats and voted “yes” are the biggest dupes in WI?
You really argue its the latter?
No one in the room at the time will back your fairy tale up in any possible way.
kev:
Your entire statement proves without a doubt that either: You have absolutely no clue as to how the permit process works or, you are purposefully being dishonest. And that you maintain the dishonest line of argument just proves again your feeling of invincible ignorance.
In short. The WPDES process doesn’t work that way, now or in the past. Put a link to the files if you can prove otherwise.
Baldy,
The permit renewal process sets out x,y,z for renewal.
If municipality fails, or refuses, to do x,y,z, the municipal taxpayers are punished with fines, penalities, threats, and other liberal regulatory abuse.
What is so hard to understand?
Why don’t you share the details of your magical fairy tale on the process?
(So I can show how public officials who are intimidated by DNR are just dupes about the process.)
Either way. I win.
(I’ll be more than willing to be “wrong”, if I can demonstrate the DNR mandates are optional and we can ignore them to every other local official in WI. I’ll take that bullet if it means relieving the cost and stress from taxpayers across this state associated with DNR mandates, especially on the poor).
kev:
WPDES permits aren’t optional. If you have a discharge you need a permit. If WI didn’t require one the feds would via NPDES. And that permit will have effluent limits. If you don’t meet the permit limits you need to fix the problem. Fines are a last resort and very rarely come into play after all other remedial actions, maintenance, operations, etc don’t work and the permit holder can’t or won’t comply. It is a long process, everybody and their brother knows what is going on and what the compliance schedule is. If you personally were up to speed that is on your shoulders or your consultant.
You continue to confuse “mandate” with “permit”. If you want to discharge into waters of the state you need permission (i.e., a permit) since those receiving waters do not belong to you. This applies to any discharge. No one was picking on your community.
If you feel you “won”, fine, take your little trophy and ego and strut. But you have continued to misrepresent the issue, the process, and the result. Your constituents are worse off because of your invincible ignorance.
You accuse me of “dishonesty” when you say “permit” and “mandate” are not the same thing?
Let’s take a survey. If we asked 100 people, if you need a permit for something, and that permit demands a litany of actions be taken, even if they are cost prohibitive, is that a mandate?
99.999% will say it is.
Only dishonest bureaucrats attempt to draw a distinction between stepping in the warm cow patty, and the wet cow patty. You still have crap on your shoes.
kev:
Thanks for proving my point. A survey won’t help you a bit. A dictionary will.
P.S. : We learned the difference in our public school pretty early on. To bad your voucher school failed you.
Too bad your public school failed you.
The mere idea that a government required permit is not mandate; destroys basic meaning in the English language.
That is what is “dishonest”.
kev:
Sorry, but my Webster’s New World Dictionary, my grandfathers Webster’s Unabridged law dictionary, and Wikipedia all disagree with you. As does the definition section of the CWA. So in addition to you being the ultimate arbiter of all religious dogma you are now in charge of re-defining the English language. That is a pretty big job, maybe you should quit the DQ and take on the new job full time.
So I guess you win. Take your trophy and go home.
Baldy,
For kicks and giggles, why don’t you post the dictionary meaning, you found, of both words.
“But, but, but”, stammered kevin as he tried in vain to prolong a discussion that he lost long ago….
Nope, you do your own research.
Baldy,
I don’t want to be accused of using a skewered dictionary.
However, since you are channeling your inner Trump 2 year old:
PERMIT-
noun
an authoritative or official certificate of permission; license:
a fishing permit.
a written order granting special permission to do something.
MANDATE-
noun
a command or authorization to act in a particular way on a public issue given by the electorate to its representative:
The president had a clear mandate to end the war.
a command from a superior court or official to a lower one:
The appellate court resolved the appeal and issued a mandate to the district judge.
an authoritative order or command:
a royal mandate.
———-
You really want to argue A bureaucratic difference between the 2?
Please point out my “dishonesty”, given these definitions, in ANY of my conversation when it comes to the DNR.
Are you just mad that I point out the DNR is severely hurtful to the poor when it comes to affordable water?
kev:
If you can’t tell the difference then you really do need the remedial reading class.
In the context of a WPDES permit :
Permit: a written order granting special permission to do something.
Mandate isn’t mentioned in WPDES language, but:
Mandate: an authoritative order or command.
I can see the difference, as can my golden retriever, but then he is pretty smart.
You really want to argue A bureaucratic difference between the 2?
No, it would be wasting my time trying to enlighten someone so dedicated to ignorance.
Please point out my “dishonesty”, given these definitions, in ANY of my conversation when it comes to the DNR.
You try to distort any comment that disagrees with your own narrow world view. And I am pretty disgusted with the way DNR is managed right now. You can quote me on that.
Are you just mad that I point out the DNR is severely hurtful to the poor when it comes to affordable water?
No, just disgusted by your serial lying about what happened in your community.
So now, declare victory, grab you tiny little trophy and immense ego and head for the barn.
Baldy,
The part you fail to explain is: The WPES permit has a laundry list of mandates that has cost prohibitive requirements in them!
It’s a distinction without a difference.
Nothing I said was dishonest.
You are upset because DNR under Walker is giving poor people a break on clean water demands that defy cost/benefit analysis?
Way past time to ban old baldy. Gaslighting and bullying have no place here.
When it comes to “serial lying” about what happened in Kewaskum, you are essentially calling the 5 trustees dupes for believing in punishment, fines, and threats for not doing what the DNR demanded?
You are saying they should not have felt threatened by DNR if they voted NO.
Seeker, Kevin and Baldy are doing just fine. Do you need a trigger warning, or something? Grow up.