You're right, I misread about the exec.

But I don't get the dual standard you're holding the left and the right to. The right had already appointed a bunch of pro-life appointees to the board - the entire board was. How is that _not political_ while Walker, who is pro-life, appointing one (1!) appointee who is pro women's rights and choice _is_?

It sounds like you're saying that it only became political when the politics didn't align with what you thought it should be?