July 4, 2011

The local Madison newspaper can't handle the word "all."

Here is the Capital Times's editorial about the Wisconsin Supreme Court:
All of the defenders of Supreme Court Justice David Prosser would have Wisconsinites believe the man who had admitted to shouting obscenities at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson before threatening to “destroy” her, and who now stands accused of trying to choke Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, is just a victim.
All who defend Prosser want people to believe he's just a victim? Why would a newspaper that cares at all about its credibility write like that? The usage collapses on its own lack of internal cohesion. There's no way the Capital Times has checked out everyone who has attempted to defend Prosser. And who could believe that — in amongst all those defenders — not a single person had seen any complexity in the story, that they all said he's just a victim?

It's knee-jerk politics too, but can you even stand to read it long enough to form an opinion of the politics? The first word of the first sentence repels the thinking reader.

72 comments:

galdosiana said...

Simple: The Cap Times has no credibility, and doesn't care.

Mogget said...

All of the defenders of...


I think the best response is straightforward:

None of the readers of Madison's local paper are among those who might be classified as thinking people.

dreams said...

Liberals don't think, liberals feel.

gerry said...

A groupthinking publication evidences it.

Peter Hoh said...

All who would presume to know the extent of other people's thoughts presume too much.

edutcher said...

dreams nails it, but the paper doesn't want people to think; it wants them to take the paper's view.

WV "rearspin" What The Blonde did the day she graduated with her BSN.

Bob Ellison said...

Why would a newspaper that cares at all about its credibility write like that?

Laziness. But this is not a large transgression. It's normal to push argumentative people into groups. I don't like the practice, and the awful "the same people who said...now say..." structure is especially awful.

But most people are sophisticated enough to take this kind of laziness in stride.

Chip S. said...

Just change

All of the defenders of Supreme Court Justice David Prosser would have Wisconsinites believe

to

The fact is

and you've got the format for a garden-variety comment in just about any thread.

And if you disagree with that, you're a deluded, brainwashed fool.

The Crack Emcee said...

Agreed. It's fine for just folks talkin' - then, demanding specificity is tedious - but for a newspaper?

That's unforgivable.

Alex said...

So Ann - are you defending Prosser verbal abuse of a justice?

m stone said...

I'd go so far as to declare that some Wisconsinites believe Prosser was set up and manipulated by some liberals.

Hagar said...

The grown-ups are gone for the 4th of July weekend.

Big Mike said...

Hmmm. I need to add to the list of "inalienable rights" the right to refer to a worthless bitch as a worthless bitch.

rhhardin said...

I could never tell universals from straw men.

Alex said...

We'll see tomorrow who's laughing and crying.

caseym54 said...

New word: Trollpaper.

Alex said...

Like I said - tomorrow ya'll wont be mocking or laughing. You will be supplicants at my boots.

ic said...

The first word of the first sentence repels the thinking reader.

Dear professor, that is precisely the point. They don't want no "thinking reader", and no "thinking reader" reads them.

Sorry for the insinuation, but you need to read them so other thinking readers don't have to.

Old Dad said...

I'd guess the mental age of the writer as about sixteen, although bright sixteen year olds think and write much better.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Yeah, "laziness" it is. But professional writers ordinarily reach a level at which they don't have even to think to avoid train wrecks like that. Instinct kicks in.

wv: perworse. Worse than perverse!

SG said...

The first word of the first sentence repels the thinking reader.

I think that might be their intent. What newspaper wants thinking readers?

Carol_Herman said...

That's "journalism" straight out of PRAVDA's school! But in Russia, back then, people had no choice. So they followed their news by just looking at the pictures. If someone's head was wiped out ... they knew he had met a fatality. The russians, like any mafia run by thugs, doesn't fool around when you make their enemy's list.

On the other hand, "all" people can see here is the hysteria. Justice Prosser is not a "foul language thrower," in the school of Lenny Bruce. No, siree.

And, what he's gone and done, without telling the media ... as soon as he saw Shirley playing her cards ... is that he went to the Judiciary Committee. With a complaint.

This is like holding a lantern up, in a very dark place, to see what just is out there in the foreboding dark.

I'll bet Shirley's at her wit's end! I'll bet all the 20 years she played perfecting "grandma" ... has bitten the dust.

I'll bet Bradley is a loose, incompetent, cannon, that needs removing from the high bench.

And, Crooks has no work ethic. He's going home at 5PM, just as if he worked at a factory. And, he punches in and out, by the clock.

This leaves Shirley STUNNED!

Here's her act, as she had perfected it. She always got out of her car whenever she saw any sized group gathered together. She got out. Stuck her hand out. And, introduced herself. And, by golly, if this wasn't the first time folks got to actually see a Justice of the Supreme Court, first hand.

Then she saw the 30-second spot with her starring as grandma. And, the press asking no questions. While the voters have no idea what's she like on the bench.

But just as "proof is in the pudding," now the spotlight shifts.

It reminds me of Souter. After Kelo. And, now no one misses him at all. It's as if he never served on the big bench.

That's how fast an act can disappear.

timmaguire42 said...

Chip, that's just what I was thinking as I read it--sounds like a blog post.

Curious George said...

Ann:

The CapTimes know their readership...of which nearly 100% agree with this Oped.

It is not the CaptTimes that risks "its credibility", its you for even questioning their "why".

Tom Spaulding said...

Gee, it's almost as if the Veil of Unreality has slipped off the People's Republic of Madison and all of the long-time liberal press organs like the Cap Times and Isthmus are getting national attention/exposure for what used to pass as "common knowledge" and "popular opinion". Did the tenor of the lib rags change or does it simply look more desperate now that Home Tree is under attack?

Perhaps protesting and demonizing the very people that you demand fund your Ponzi-scheme union pensions was a bad idea? I'm waiting for impartial journalists Wms. Leuders/Wineke to tell me what to think.

EDH said...

Remember the TV game show "Concentration," where they'd use a picture of an awl to indicate the word "all"?

Penny said...

It's says this is a '"Cap Times" editorial', which is fine, it's an opinion piece. But why don't we see the name of the person who wrote it?

On the other hand, letters to the editor, which are also opinion pieces, require your full name and home town.

"Anonymous" newspaper editorials strike me as poor form if not just plain wrong.

Is this standard operating procedure in the newspaper business?

Alex said...

Penny - it's the type of anonymouse hit & run trolling we see from Alpha/Garage/Jeremy types.

Phil 3:14 said...

Ditto the laziness comments. It read like a "we need an editorial about Prosser fast!" throwaway editorial.

Why is nuance a word liberals use for their policies and opinions but not for their opponents?

Phil 3:14 said...

Ditto the laziness comments. It read like a "we need an editorial about Prosser fast!" throwaway editorial.

Why is nuance a word liberals use for their policies and opinions but not for their opponents?

windbag said...

When I was a history major, I used to love it when someone started a sentence with "Most historians..." The professor would invariably ask, "Have you spoken with most or all historians?"

I used to always use superlatives, but I learned my lesson and now I never do...ever.

ignatzk said...

Why would a newspaper that cares at all about its credibility write like that?

This begs the question about the Capital Times being a newspaper.

Known locally as the 'Crap Times', the publication's "credibility" is a function of the whatever agenda it can gin up sufficient to rouse its ever shrinking readership.

I'm surprised you gave it the credibility of a mention in your blog.

Chip Ahoy said...

That makes a funny Venn diagram.

Speaking of circles, right now I'm making a paper snake. Two coils, one on top of the other, rotate in opposite directions from the same mechanism. The result looks uncannily like the movement of a snake.

Okay, now see, there's an analogy in there for you.

virgil xenophon said...

And Ann is shocked, shocked! exactly why? The MSM has given up ANY pretense of "objectivity" ever since the Obama Presidential campaign.

Conserve Liberty said...

@Windbag

I used to always use superlatives, but I learned my lesson and now I never do...ever.

Yeah, less frequently than always but more often than rarely, I use comparatives . . . usually.

Fen said...

The Cap Times. Your Progressive Voice

*snicker*

murgatroyd666 said...

Althouse, how honest and impartial do you think the media will be during the 2012 presidential campaign?

Brad said...

@ Ann ...

a thought ....

The point's been made "If Prosser attacked Bradley, he should resign .... and if Bradley attacked Prosser, she should resign."

Perhaps they're worried about the latter scenario, in which case - via "just a victim" - they're trying to create a "enough blame to go around, Bradley shouldn't have to resign" meme.

Alex said...

Althouse, how honest and impartial do you think the media will be during the 2012 presidential campaign?

I wouldn't be surprised to see the MSM calling for assassination on GOP leaders every day... They are that sick and twisted.

Chase said...

Althouse has more than twice as many daily readers than does the Madison Capital Times.

Explain the purpose of the daily Capital Times again . . .

Carol_Herman said...

Me thinks, what worries Abrahamson and Bradley, now, is the secretive nature of the complaint he filed to the Judiciary Committee.

I doubt Abrhamson and Bradley expected that. They were sure they could carry out their battle in the press. Where painting Prosser as a man who flings about curse words ... would overtake the man's actual image.

While Crooks also sweats. People will find out he works half days. Leaves before work is done. Because he punches out by 5PM.

Between Prosser's work habits, and crooks ... Crooks is in hot water. Believe it or not.

While the "grandma mask" isn't working its old magic, either.

Should be interesting, too, to see what happens on August 1st. Now that the unions know there's a big time lack of security at the supreme court!

However, will their members be back from vacation by then? Or will it be too hot to trot?

sorepaw said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Harrington said...

The Capital Times is a joke. It is also the dirtiest newspaper I've ever held. Pick it up once and you have to wash your hands. I have no idea what they use for ink. I spent six months working in Madison once, and the motel gave everyone a "Cap Times" free. I asked the manager why the "Cap Times" and he said, "they give it to us free". Further proof that you get what you pay for.

Michael said...

I have known several journalists, guys who worked for the major dalies, and none of them were that smart. Imagine the intellects of those writing, opining, in a dinky tertiary market. It is not lazy, it is the best they can do.

windbag said...

@conserve energy

Yeah, less frequently than always but more often than rarely, I use comparatives . . . usually.

I avoid cliches like the plague, too.

Jon said...

"All of the defenders of Supreme Court Justice David Prosser would have Wisconsinites believe the man who had admitted to shouting obscenities at Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson".

The rest of the sentence is not free from exaggeration either. He's admitted saying (not necessarily shouting) "You are a total bitch", not "obscenities" (plural).

Carol_Herman said...

In describing Shirley Abrahamson, and you get to pick between "grandma" and "bitch" ... which word would be chosen, now, by the average person?

Prosser's complaint to the Judicary Committee means this won't be solved by having the justices photographed shaking hands.

Prosser upped the ante.

If this were the World Championship of Poker, he'd be credited with the best play, ever, in a high stakes game!

Shirley Abrahamson's mistake was to read him as a pipsqueak.

Michael Haz said...

The Cap Times probably didn't want to offend their subscriber.

murgatroyd666 said...

Explain the purpose of the daily Capital Times again . . .

Agitprop.

From Inwood said...

It's the Pauline Kael factor in reverse.

nevadabob said...

"The first word of the first sentence repels the thinking reader."

The thinking reader long ago left this newspaper. They only have morons left amongst all their subscribers.

nevadabob said...

Prosser IS a victim, by the way.

There are two words that aren't in the editorial: George Soros.

How can a newspaper of any repute NOT be investigating the link between members of the court and a shadowy political group that have been unethically conspiring together to undermine confidence in the Wisconsin Supreme Court?

Mr. Prosser is the victim of a conspiracy amongst renegade justices who are routinely outvoted on the court. Their purpose is to destroy the man in order to change the voting on the court. And they're unethically working with outside political groups to effect that.

Such a conspiracy is unethical and yet current justices are engaging in it.

Prosser is a victim of that cabal. They're deliberately provoking him and in the process have brought the impartiality of the court into disrepute amongst the public - a violation of the judicial canon.

These justices should be investigated by the Legislature and any found participating in the conspiracy with the Soros-funded groups should be impeached.

Ann Althouse said...

If you want to speculate about Justice Crooks, you should look into the history of his role on the court vis a vis the Chief Justice, notably in 1999.

nevadabob said...

"But why don't we see the name of the person who wrote it?"

Because that person is the same person who is also writing the left-slanted by-lined news articles.

But they don't want you knowing that.

They want their bias to be hidden and opaque. So they've removed transparency.

It's unethical, but unsurprising, amongst liberal journalists who have been poorly trained by our nation's colleges and universities.

no santa said...

The new Journalism today is all about creating a lasting myth. They use the myth to herd the uninformed into thinking and voting their way. One such myth is the one that says there were 7000 "found ballots" in Waukesha County. Never mind the fact that those ballots were always there from the beginning on election night...no, since the AP didn't get the correct number on election night, then those 7000 ballots didn't exist until the "Republican" clerk "found" (read, created) them days later. That is the story being pedaled in the MSM, and that is the myth the left wants the uninformed to believe. Since they lost that round, the myth to be created now is that David Prosser is an abusive person and has no credibility. Never mind that Abrahamson and Bradley were the instigators and Prosser was just defending himself. That doesn't play to the agenda, so by reporting "all supporters", it makes the statement stronger that those who support Prosser are ALL evil and not to be trusted. Keep printing a lie long enough and it soon becomes the mythological truth.

Revenant said...

He's admitted saying (not necessarily shouting) "You are a total bitch", not "obscenities" (plural).

For that matter, since when is the word "bitch" an "obscenity"?

Profanity, yes. Obscenity, no.

gail said...

Blogger Ann Althouse said...

If you want to speculate about Justice Crooks, you should look into the history of his role on the court vis a vis the Chief Justice, notably in 1999.

7/4/11 3:00 PM

=========
A goggle search for Justice Crooks, 1999 turns up very little. A hint would help me. thanks

Brad said...

http://mediatrackers.org/2011/03/chief-justice-abrahamsons-stormy-history-on-the-court/

Here ya go.

Carol_Herman said...

Okay, Brad. I read the article. So, yes. Thanks for providing the link. I laughed out loud when I got to the final paragraph ... that described ... back in 1987 ... how Shirley Abrahamson lifted up her middle finger towards other justices on her court.

And, I said to myself, she could have been a little more discreet. And, done it the way Obama did.

Meanwhile, the only real authority a chief justice has ... is something Rehnquist lost ... when Sandra Day O'Connor discovered the power of being "the 5th wheel."

Before that? Every single chief justice, arrayed with the majority ... could purposefully assign tax cases to their least favored colleague. Tax cases, mind you, are a bummer.

So how come Abrahamson never quite comprehended that?

Now, it's also true I jumped to a conclusion about Crooks. (Let alone that his name sets off gales of laughter). Why wasn't he in the building at 5:30 ... When the other justices still were there?)

True. He doesn't need an excuse to just go home. But why? Is there so much traffic he would have to face that he must run by 5PM? In Madison? In all these years he just didn't move closer to work?

You know, as this story broke, I wasn't impressed with a single one of them, really.

Except for Prosser. You know, my admiration just grows and grows in this department.

He saw the storm Shirley could provoke, and all he did was go and file a complaint with the Judiciary Committee.

In a sense this is done "wordlessly." It's done with pen in hand. A thorough understanding of the legal profession ...

And, then like Emeril, BAM! He takes it up a notch. I'd hire him over other lawyers in a minute!

Writ Small said...

Unsigned editorials typically represent the consensus view of the entire editorial staff.

Imagine. A group of news people put that sentence together.

Penny said...

"And, then like Emeril, BAM! He takes it up a notch. I'd hire him over other lawyers in a minute!"

So, Carol? You know that Emeril was just another cook before he said BAM!?

Something bout a big mouth that "lured" you right in?

Penny said...

Might be worse.

MUCH worse!

Far as we know, Carol has only given way to "big mouths".

Next up?

We'll be lookin' for million dollar smiles.

Penny said...

:D

Penny said...

;)

Penny said...

"Unsigned editorials typically represent the consensus view of the entire editorial staff."

I wondered about that?

Actually, I wanted to dismiss this because it felt way too "collective". I like to give the benefit of a doubt as often as I can.

Then I started wondering?

It's one thing to find like minded individuals with names and faces. It's quite another to have someone come in to speak for you with a handle like "Ed Itorial".

lol OK, not exactly like that, but hey? Close enough.

You can quote me on this.

"What a difference a SPACE makes".

So...progress?

Surely doesn't seem so to me, but hey?

"SPACE" has always been rather relative, from Hong Kong to the moon.

Right, Alice?

Carol_Herman said...

Penny, that's just foolish.

Emeril can really cook!

BAM! Was added for flair!

And, you bet, that's a great hook.

Also. Only use Kosher salt. That other stuff? It just wilts your greens.

m stone said...

"Unsigned editorials typically represent the consensus view of the entire editorial staff."

Not true. Consensus in the truest sense is infrequently reached. In that case, the managing editor or publisher likes it and runs with it.

No name attached diffuses any real responsibility or accountability.

If the editorial is well-received, everybody takes credit.

MadisonMan said...

Pick it up once and you have to wash your hands.

Virtually so.

Penny said...

Of course Emeril can cook. So can you, and so can I. Thing is that Emeril ended up in front of a camera on his own show, and supposedly started throwing in the "BAM!" to keep the crew awake.

That must have happened right around the time that workers stopped feeling any personal obligation to be alert while on the job.

So Emeril BAMmed! and bammed and bammed! And I would have fired them after the third BAM.

What can I say? ha ha

Emeril may not be the best cook, but he sure knew how to "spice up" his team while creating a successful show at the same time.

Two thumbs up for Emeril.

gail said...

Brad, thank you for the link.

Is it possible gramma is still using the Supreme Court chambers for aerobics?

How is it the WI Supreme Court has $ to award grants???

from the article:
The Wausau Daily Herald reported in 1999 that four justices – not Prosser – were accusing Abrahamson of “overstepping the bounds of her authority because she approved nearly $1.7 million in grants to groups without the court’s consent.”

Why isn't some of this past behavior being reported now? Gramma's past behavior sheds a different light on the current situation.

ACR said...

MSM reports never indicate how the Justice Commission investigation was instigated. I have seen multiple claims that Justice Prosser requested the investigation by the Justice Commission. Unfortunately for me, the comment section of the Althouse Blog is the only place I've seen that claim. How do we know that Justice Prosser requested the Justice Commission investigation?

traditionalguy said...

Just in: Prosser primly pressed prose of pragmatic profundity prior to proclamation of profanity. Stay tuned.