My Photo


Feeds and more

  • [ BadgerLink logo ]
Blog powered by Typepad


Uppity Wisconsin - Progressive Webmasters

« Waxing America's Wisconsin Readership Losing It | Main | Overture's Problems Start With the Structure »

April 07, 2008


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

Keith Schmitz

We have been hypocritically chided by the right wing for not respecting the will of the voters. Once again the right deals out their inane "liberal elitist" card, that us are disrespectful of the intelligent choice the voters of Wisconsin made in this election.

The factor that should not be overlooked are the 22 -- 25% of our population who John Dean refers to as authoritarian. These are the folks who see things in black and white and tend to be conservative.

We might point to the notion that the fear of crime ads that Gabelman and the third party groups ground out had a role in convincing voters. In reality for many -- the 70% of the electorate that did not vote -- they were unable to see how the state supreme court election had anything to do with their lives.

For the authoritarian voters, these ads were a bugle call to head on down to the polls and put on the bench someone who would alleviate their fears about criminals who are everywhere, and vote against someone whose only focus was to get people off.

This is something every political strategist knows. You don't have to appeal to all of the voters to win. Only those you need to go to the polls to win, especially in a low turnout election.

Michael J. Cheaney

Those significant reasons are the heinous Wisconsin Manufacturing & Commerce's negative ads that lead many voters to believe than Butler worked to free a rapist in his capacity as a judge, not as a public defender, and similar ads that even Michael Gableman refused to embrace or condone.

Lets pretend for a moment that this is/was the case. Don't you think that the voters should have gone out and tried to educate themselves on whether or not this was the case? After all one of the most basic tenants of A democracy is having a well informed electorate.

And Question number 2...Why didn't Butlers campaign try harder to make a distinction between what Butler did as a Public Defender and as a Judge?
That on its very face seems to show a degree of ineptitude on the part of the campaign, WHICH IS NOT THE FAULT OF THE VOTERS!

And then John Fund goes and writes an Opinion piece on the Wisconsin Elections DAYS after they take place, and you think its a good idea to try and trash the mans reputation by asking such hard hitting questions like:

-Did John Fund, a member of the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal contribute to any of the Wisconsin front organizations?

-Did the Wall Street Journal make such contributions through any of the front organizations in Wisconsin,. New York, Washington D.C., etc?

-Did Fund assist in raising any money to influence the Wisconsin Gableman campaign?

Big PICTURE here Paul, FOCUS! WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? This is all taking place AFTER the FACT when it really doesn't make any difference anymore.

Looking for new material to write about, how about writing something about your poll on the left side? inquiring minds wanna know how which way we stand in the shower can somehow be a predictor of our political leanings.


Did you notice on the same page of the Wall Street Journal the article titled "No Lawyers, Please. The overwhelming majority of people surveyed have no confidence in the Courts or in Lawyers. I think anyone can do there own survey and get the same results, my neighbors opinion is that there all crooks.

People do not want only unions, businesses and other special interests represented in Courts. They want them to be fair and impartial and are willing to keep trying new people until we get some that are.


"Lets pretend for a moment that this is/was the case. Don't you think that the voters should have gone out and tried to educate themselves on whether or not this was the case? After all one of the most basic tenants of A democracy is having a well informed electorate."

So lets allow for all types of slanted, biased and out right lying in campagin adds and then be surprised when people don't go out and get the right information. Most people get their information on who to vote for from TV ads. You know this, the WMC knows this and front groups for large organizations know this.

"Big PICTURE here Paul, FOCUS! WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? This is all taking place AFTER the FACT when it really doesn't make any difference anymore."

YOur right, Gableman will be an justice for ten years, plenty long enough to get a track record that can then be exploited. The real question is what types of elections do we want to have. Ones based on ideas where voters are educated to make intelligent choices. Or ones based on propaganda and lies. We know where the right falls on this one.


I'm concerned that the backlash from this race will be promotion of merit selection of judges. I think we need more discussion on public financing of these elections rather than a media blitz like WSJ put on for the worthless Frankenstein Veto amendment. The paper is floating the idea of merit selection and serious people are giving it some blog time. All governors and members of the party in power like merit selection. It puts power into a few hands on the favored side of the aisle. What do you all think about public financing of elections?

Sure Paul, Sure....

The right wing zombies simply looked at the Gableman adds and raised their arms out in front of themselves and marched lock-step to their local school or church and blindly voted for the zombie candidate. The left in this state has alot more shady interventions in state politics than the right has ever produced.

What I find funny is that WMC and the conservative action commitees are deemed nefarious, but WEAC, The Greater Wisconsin Committee, the HUGE Lawyer lobby, and The Potowatomi slush fund are simply propelling discourse and get a free pass from discussion.Funny how you ALWAYS fail to address these cabals.Criticize the left and speak the truth and it's a national conspiricy, question the left and you are somehow not nuanced enough and simply a two dimensinal black or white individual.

Like it or not, the people are familiar with Butler from his Defense days and are well aware of the political activism creeping into the courts, on the local (Butler and his silly lead-paint ruling)and national (Justice Suter and his disgusting "Emminent Domain" ruling) level.

Keith, It wasn't the FEAR FACTOR that sent people to the polls to vote for Gableman, it was the total opposite of your assumption that it was the 20 to 25% of the hard-core Black and Whiters heeding the clarion call to the polls and the other 70% just sat on their hands. People are tired of activist judges and are looking for judges to rule from the bench (Robertson and Alito)not interpert the meaning of laws (Constitution as a LIVING DOCUMENT, Stevens).

The Electorite did not want Butler when he ran against Diane Sykes and they booted his but out first chance they got. People are starting to understand that when the left can not make policy through the legislative process, they gain control of the judiciary and make policy from the bench. The people of Wisconsin, every one outside of Racine, Milwaukee, and Madison, clearly spoke with their votes, and assuming they were simply swayed by fear is ludicrous. No one in my circles voted now or ever, based on fear, we tend to vote based on facts, not emotions.

Keith Schmitz

Anybody? What is wrong with so-called "judicial activism?" Nice conservative concept but it runs counter to the foundations of our govenment.

Remember the concept of balance of powers? The founding fathers gave the courts these powers to counter impulsive legislation or the tranny of the majority.

Keith Schmitz

PS Katrina. If this election was not about fear then why were the Gablel/WMC/Americans for Prosperity (Of the Few) advertising pumping fear?

Give me a break. I did some campaigning for a Republican out in Brookfield and what was their big issue? Conceal and carry -- in an area with very little crime.

Michael J. Cheaney

I did some campaigning for a Republican out in Brookfield....

What in hopes of getting the people who supported him to vote Democrat?

Isn't democracy based on the idea of majority rule??

What is wrong with judicial Activism? I'll ask what is right about judicial activism?

What is good about four people disenfranchising the policies of the many people who voted their representatives into office to make that policy?

That is the purpose of the legislature, to legislate. The purpose of the bench is to rule according to laws passed by the legislature, not change the meaning of those laws due to the influence of special ineterests.

Impulsive legislation and majority tyranny are rather subjective, don't you think Keith.

Majority tyranny is viewed as such only by the minority.

Michael J. Cheaney

My last post to Keith was written facetiously.

Keith actually does work occasionally for all political parties


We live in a Republic where minority rights are protected, from the majority. It's up to the judges to do that because often times legislators and executives bend to the pressure from the majority. Without activist judges, I am convinced the south would still practice segregation.


I may be a little late with this link, but it is part 4 of a series. I am fascinated by the scripting of the Supreme Court race, although it happened many years ago.

The comments to this entry are closed.