My Photo


Feeds and more

  • [ BadgerLink logo ]
Blog powered by Typepad


Uppity Wisconsin - Progressive Webmasters

« Gablemean Surrogates Punched Out in Green Bay | Main | Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce Tries Socialism »

March 10, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


It will be difficult to lose Justice Butler to a political insider like Mike Gableman. We are losing a gifted member of our society, capable , creative, and thoughtful. We will replace Butler with a mediocre political gamesman who's only skill is the ability to play the game of politics and incompetence. Wisconsin as a whole loses a great wealth.


antpoppa -

What has J. Butler done that you think has made our Courts more, fair, just and inpartial?


I'll let him speak for himself.
I'd be interested in similar views of Judge Gableman


Neither link answered the question.

Gableman has never sat on the high court and had the responsibilty for all the courts in the state. As far as I know, he has ran a fair and inpartial circuit court. On the other hand, J. Butler has been on the Supreme Court now for over 4 years. During that time we have learned that J. Ziegler was breaking rules left and right without concern of the Supreme Court, it appears. Butler was no deterrent and appears to to be just another go along to get along type that doesn't have the guts to stand up for justice in our courts. I'm willing to try someone new until we find people that are willing to stand up for justice, fairness and inpartiality.

It's history, but Clifford at least showed she had the guts. We need people like that.


Anonymous, if Butler doesn't have the guts to stand up for justice, as you put it, then why is he being criticized for taking all of these stands that seem to be so unpopular with Michael Gableman and his supporters?

How about State v. Jensen, where Butler is being raked over the coals for being the lone dissenter? That doesn't sound like a go along to get along guy to me.

Butler was not a policeman to Annette Ziegler when she was a circuit court judge. To put the onus of responsibility on him for Ziegler's ethical failures is absurd. She only has herself to blame for those.

The Supreme Court is a court of review. Its members don't spend their time peeking into courtrooms in West Bend to make sure circuit court judges are complying with minimal ethical standards.

Rick Esenberg

Paul, since you are so committed to truth and candor, would you please tell your readers what the state Supreme Court actually did decide in the Brown, the case which you say Margaret Farrow "completely fabricated?" Will you do that and will you give it the same prominence in your blog as your suggestion that our former Lieutenant Governor is a liar? Because, you know, Wisconsin demands more.


it -

it's absurd for you to suggest that the circuit courts are not accountable to the Supreme Court. You must like the free for all, let the courts do whatever they please.


Go to this address. A complaint form is available. Actually, it's all up to you citizen!


That isn't at all what I said.


antpoppa -

Thanks, but I prefer the ballot box, which is why we have elections to replace these rascals.

it - as you know that's what this turns on.

pisces catgirl

These kinds of political ads always seem to work with the general public because they are aimed at our primal fears and emotions. The only way to fight back successfully is to educate our citizens to always QUESTION what they see and hear. It's too easy to fall victim to our own emotions instead of being rational and think things through.

Another comment - we just watched the first episode of the John Adams miniseries on HBO. In it, he defended British soldiers who were accused of murdering some local citizens during a mob protest. In spite of the fact that the British soldiers were extremely unpopular, he defended them anyway, and was successful. He incurred the wrath of a lot of people, but he did the right thing. The point is, I want my justices to stand up for what's right, even if it might not be a particularly popular position.

I've noticed that in most campaigns, slinging half-truths around seems to be the norm for all sides. It's unfortunate because most people don't have the time or inclination to 'fact check' what they see and hear.

The comments to this entry are closed.