Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Is this true_ ???????

Posted 5 years ago on June 3, 2012, 11:15 p.m. EST by ericweiss (575)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

University of Minnesota Scientist Drops Bombshell About Walker:
Says He Fathered Child at Marquette

University of Minnesota's Dr. Bernadette Gillick was best known as a nationally recognized scientist for her research into how the brain recovers from injuries.
After today, she will likely be forever known for coming forward and telling the world that Scott Walker fathered a child and refused to take responsibility for it while at Marquette:
Bernadette Gillick was a college freshman in 1988 when she first met Scott Walker. It was spring semester, and she had just transferred to Marquette University. She was assigned a room in O’Donnell Hall (then a women’s dormitory), which she shared with her new roommate, Ruth (not her real name). Ruth was dating Scott Walker, who was 20 at the time, and, according to Bernadette, Ruth was deeply in love with him.
Midway through that spring semester, Bernadette alleges, Ruth found out she was pregnant. She informed her boyfriend, Scott, and initially he was supportive. That support changed to callous indifference for his girlfriend’s predicament after Scott informed his parents of the pregnancy.
Bernadette reports that at this point Scott began denying that he was the father of the baby, and when Ruth said she was considering an abortion, he claimed he didn’t care, as he wasn’t the father anyway.
Bernadette remembers being present when Ruth was dealing with the wrath of Scott’s mother, who allegedly admonished Ruth for trying to “ruin [her son's] reputation.”

“I supported her [Ruth] as he [Scott] went from encouraging her to get an abortion, to telling me it was in my best interest to keep my mouth shut, to denying that he was the father and having his own mother call her and tell her to stop erroneously accusing her son of paternity,” Bernadette recounts.
It was a “horrible time” for her friend. “Imagine her being 18 years old and pregnant, walking around Marquette’s Jesuit Catholic campus with her boyfriend denying he was the father,” says Bernadette.
All this was taking place while Walker was running for student body president. As one of his classmates, Dr. Glenn Barry recalled, Walker’s campaign was, “one of the dirtiest in school history.” The student newspaper Marquette Tribune called him “unfit for office” after his campaign was discovered collecting and throwing out copies of their paper that endorsed his opponent. Commenting on the election and Walker’s political career and style at Marquette, he noted, “Walker lost on all counts, but not before destroying a few people’s reputations, and amassing personal power.”
If Bernadette’s story is true, Ruth – and eventually their child – were just a few of the people who got in the way of Walker’s quest for power.
After consulting with her family, Ruth decided against an abortion. Bernadette was with Ruth in the hospital for the birth of her child later that year (and says Walker was not present), and later stood up as a bridesmaid in Ruth’s 1992 marriage to another man. She says Walker eventually had to concede that he was the father, after the birth and paternity test.
Normally I would roll my eyes at such a story, but considering the impeccable credibility of the source, I can't fathom a scenario where what she is saying isn't true.
Also, keep in mind that Gillick is represented by Michael Fargione, an attorney who is well-credentialed and highly respected, by both his peers and the judiciary.



Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

Even if this doesn't pan out, he's still #1 in dishonesty and that's saying something in this country.


[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 5 years ago

Number 1 over Boehner? That's a toss up.

There's no "a" in Jon Boehner's name.

[-] 0 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

John kept buying them martinis and they lost their place when it came to him...........:)

[-] -2 points by DJnoodles (-136) 5 years ago

Don't bump threads that have nothing to do with OWS. Who cares what child this man fathered, it's not important. The only thing that matters are his politics. Judge him on that. If not, it will mean you'll have to support him if he does something morally good, instead of if his politics are good.

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

He's a big time liar, just like that thrashy fellow.

That was my addition to the thread.

Try and keep up, I know it's difficult when you are obsessed with lizard people, but you can do it.

All you have to do is actually pay attention.

[-] -3 points by DJnoodles (-136) 5 years ago

You attack the proposer's private life in an attempt to show that his politics are wrong. That is weak and useless. It just shows you have no real arguments against his politics. Instead, attack his platform directly. Don't use logical fallacies, they are always weak and won't bring us towards victory, towards the truth.

Learn the proper art of discourse. It will serve you well in life, and will help OWS in the end.

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 5 years ago

C'mon thrashy. Now you want to play naive?

I'm sorry you missed the months worth of threads on Wisconsin and Walker.

You should have. Indeed you should have.

You were just too busy worrying about lizard people, to pay attention to reality..

To me, this is just icing on the cake. I have been commenting in most of those threads.


Not at all.

Good God, you're disingenuous.

[-] -1 points by DJnoodles (-136) 5 years ago

I have read those threads and you did make good comments. These people have indeed crooked politics. The reason I didn't comment is that I am not American, so I do not wish to get involved in the details of American politics. I get involved in the politics from my country. When I comment on this site, it is mostly about generalities that have to do with OWS, not about particular US candidates.

Still, it doesn't matter if you had great comments before, the fact that you indulge in the logical fallacies presented on this thread makes you lose points. Stick to proper discourse, always.

Remember, we are only sharing opinions and ideas. If you don't agree with mine, you can counter-argue. There's no reason for you do shamelessly indulge in name-calling. That's childish and unproductive.

per logica ad astra

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 5 years ago

In the US we hold our politicians to a higher standard in matters related to sex. This may go back to some of our puritan settlers. How many dem presidents have been divorced or single? None that I can think of recently. Since puritans are almost non-existent now it must seem comical that we all suck up to something that doesn't exist. We have to accomodate Dr. Gillick now and share her pain in knowing that another politician might have a love child. The horror, the horror...

[-] 1 points by DJnoodles (-136) 5 years ago

In the US we hold our politicians to a higher standard in matters related to sex.

Indeed. Stop it. Now. This thread should be sunk. Let's talk about the important stuff.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

Right on! His personal ETHICS don't matter. What matters is his politics! Politics without ethics equals...what?

A representative who doesn't give a damn about constituents.

Walker rejected an $11 million federal grant designed to improve Medicaid enrollment systems for the poor this year.

[-] 0 points by DJnoodles (-136) 5 years ago

What matters is politics, not whether Bill Clinton got a blow job from Monica or not. Those are mere distractions not worth our time.

If you're going to judge politicians on their ethics at home, then you also have to give them points when they do good stuff. In the end, this type of analysis is far off course. What's important is what they do in office, not what they do in their tool shed.

I don't care if Hitler was great with animals. I'm not going to give him points for that. I only care about what he did to the people when he was in power.

Does it really matter to you if Bush was a good father? Is that as important as his signing policies to go to war and splurge your tax money on an illegal invasion of Iraq?

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

My Dad always used to say, "Don't ever conduct business with a guy who cheats on his wife. If he's happy to screw over his best friend that way, how is going to treat a stranger?"

After many decades of testing this theory out, it turns out the old man was right again. Easy to see why this country has gone down the tubes.

[-] -1 points by DJnoodles (-136) 5 years ago

I guess there's no reason to talk about politics then. Let's judge all candidates based on moral standards decreed by the church. Bush was better than Clinton because he didn't get a blow job in the oval office.

You're a good example as to why Americans are so messed up. You keep attacking the wrong problems due to lack of logic.

Do you know the logical fallacy called: correlation without a cause.

[-] 1 points by geo (2638) from Concord, NC 5 years ago

Did I mention the church in any way? A marriage is a contract, between two people who merge estates. This is usually done by people who completely trust each other, otherwise why enter in to such a risky deal as to bet your whole estate.

If a man enters into this contract and knowingly screws his partner, then he is not trustworthy. It's simple. How then can he be trustworthy for the concerns of thousands if not millions of more people who he isn't that close to?

It's a simple concept. If you have been found guilty of breaking trust to the most personal contract, why should I trust you with more? It is but one test. There are more, but you are starting out in the hole if you fail that one.

Obviously you have never been in business.

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 5 years ago

Lewinsky/Tripp and now Dr. Gillick/Ruth. Here we go again......

[-] 1 points by PR1 (120) 5 years ago

No, I think we heard everything in the media about the former and will hear next to nothing about the ladder. That's the difference.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

the issue here is not how walker
teated his child and his character

the issue here is how walker
teated YOUR child and his character

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 years ago




[-] -1 points by foreeverLeft (-264) 5 years ago

It was debunked in about an hour, Twitter hilarity ensued...


[-] 2 points by PR1 (120) 5 years ago

Debunked? Naw . . . that's called desperate Republican spin drubbed up by some Republican blogster named Dracula, or some such thing.

Even if Walker is elected (highly unlikely with people finally allerted to what he really wants for Wisconsin and America) it's just a short stop in the Governor's office before shame and prison, and that's just a small harbinger of things to come.

You might take that into account and have another look at where your Judas paycheck might lead you, "foreeverLeft."

[-] -1 points by linker (-241) 5 years ago

and this effects the Wisconsin budget how?

[-] 2 points by PR1 (120) 5 years ago

Who said anything about a budget, you little mouth for hire?

[-] -2 points by Zensmad (5) 5 years ago

Yeah,yeah,keep piss'in in the wind. You haven't yet figured out you're the only one getting wet.