As I wrote in an update at the first link, above, I've been able to figure out that one of the "conservative bloggers" was Christian Schneider. Someone in the comments states flatly: "You were not one of the bloggers." Meade responds:
Who were the bloggers? Kloppenburg used the plural, so she clearly meant more than one. Or was she not accurate with her facts?Indeed. I'm not being vain and narcissistic about the campaign's failure to respond to my email. I'm commenting on the meaning of the absence of a response. In my post, I note that Kloppenburg listed 4 reasons being suspicious of what happened with the reporting of the votes in Waukesha, but "2 of the items are the absence of anything." I added:
Also, why would her campaign not reply to Althouse?
Now that the question of Althouse being the "conservative blogger" is becoming an internet meme, it appears that the Kloppenburg campaign is incompetent and unprepared for the questions and scrutiny that lie ahead.
That "15 second" pregnant pause may be only the beginning of awkward moments for JoAnne Kloppenburg.
An absence of evidence might be probative of something that matters, but you have to build a foundation for why it matters.Now, I'm talking about an absence: the failure to provide the names of the bloggers and the links to the blog posts that show the "prior knowledge" of the missing votes. And I have built the foundation for why this absence is probative of something that matters. The internet meme is hurting Kloppenburg's credibility and undermining the assertion that an independent investigation is needed.
My working theory at this point is that there was only one blogger, Christian Schneider, and the Kloppenburg campaign is afraid to admit that the plural "bloggers" was false.
Or they really were talking about me.
Posts
287 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 287 of 287Trooper: if a haircut diminishes your power for god's sake stay away from back crack and sack waxes (I am sure titus would endorse if he were awake)
AA was targeted by death threat by left wing loon supporter of the Klopp. She deserves an answer. Klopp should distance herself from left wing haters.
WV:nicessly
Leftist: please act nicessly for a change.
Nickolaus didn't tell at least one of the offical members of the canvass board about the missing votes. Ramona didn't know until the press conference started. Nickolaus didn't tell anyone until 2 days later. Why, I wonder?
On the contrary Wispolitics reported that Ramona Kitzinger did know about the error before the press conference. She claims she didn't know the magnitude, but she certainly knew about the error.
http://elections.wispolitics.com/2011/04/dem-member-of-waukesha-county-canvass.html
"At the news conference, she said, "We went over everything and made sure all the numbers jibed up and they did. Those numbers jibed up, and we're satisfied they're correct." She added, "I'm not going to stand here and tell you something that's not true."
Kitzinger said today there was no mention last week of the mistake while the canvass was conducted Wednesday and Thursday.
"In retrospect, it seems both shocking and somewhat appalling there was no mention of discovery of this 15,000 vote 'human error' that ultimately had the potential to tip the balance of an entire statewide election. How is this possible?" she said.
One the canvass was complete, she was pulled into a meeting with Nickolaus and the GOP member of the canvass board where they were told of an upcoming news conference and the mistake, though not the magnitude. Nickolaus explained what happened and showed them different tapes "where the numbers seemed to add up, though I have no idea where the numbers were coming from." She also said she was instructed she would not say anything at the news conference. "
policing up roadkill.
In these parts, that's called grocery shopping.
Didn't some commission already go to Waukesha and determine that the votes in question were legitimate?
Yes, but Ms. Kloppenburg has already impugned the independence of the Government Accountability Board.
Well they had faces then.
James-
I'd vote her out. Her main job is counting votes in elections. She couldn't do it right, and cast doubt on the entire statewide process.
I'd vote her out.
She might still get a Judge's save.
Well, except they wasted it on that weirdo Casey.
You throw out some innuendo ("I wonder why"), but let's stop pussyfooting around. What do you think happened, and what is your basis for it?
Here is what I think. I would be shocked if Governor Shitwhistle didn't pull some kind of shit in this election with the likes of Kathy Nickolaus, who remember took immunity from prosection from a prior election scandal? [WHY is she fucking still in charge of election data???]
Her explanation of it made no sense that she forgot to hit save when Acess saves it automatically, and not telling anyone about it for 2 days sends up screaming red flags to me. No I don't trust the votes coming from Waukesha county especially, and I really don't trust any vote counts from any other county that aren't hand counted from paper ballots by human beings. Walker said on Weds the day after the election that "there might be “ballots somewhere, somehow found out of the blue that weren’t counted before”
"Ann does pay taxes to Wisconsin, but Wisconsin pays Ann's salary to run this blog 24/7, since the majority of tenured law professors at our esteemed law school work about 10 hours per week to be paid in excess of $100k per year. So ironically, this is a de facto government sponsored blog."
That sounds a little smeary.
>"Majority of tenured law professors" are excessively paid by the taxpayers of the state of Wisconsin for the number of hours they work.
>Ann Althouse is a tenured law professor who writes a blog.
>Therefore, Ann Althouse is a law professor and blogger who is stealing from the taxpayers of the state of Wisconsin.
Additionally, if you say that "Wisconsin pays Ann's salary to run this blog 24/7," "constantly updating," why not also say that Wisconsin pays Ann's salary to breath 24/7, constantly resting her eyes from time to time? Or that your own employer pays your salary to be a law-abiding, creative, and decent citizen who sometimes comments on a so-called "conservative" blog 24/7?
But it's Friday afternoon, the workweek is nearly over. She'll be home in a few hours - unless she stays at her office and works late today - and so she'll be able to defend herself.
If she wishes to.
"(the clerk who screwed up should be fired)"
Lousy idea. If clerks were fired for making errors, the next time a clerk makes an error (and obviously there will be a next time), rather than come clean and do their best to correct the error in a timely manner, they will have incentive to hush it up. If nobody knows about it, they won't be fired. Q.E.D. Unfortunately we have more than enough coverups to go around already without manufacturing reasons for more.
and so she'll be able to defend herself.
If she wishes to.
She rarely does as she has a conservative flock, like yourself, at the ready to do her bidding.
It's quite a good set-up she has here ie daily lemming worship!
Brian: Please, please, please listen! I've got one or two things to say.
The Crowd: Tell us! Tell us both of them!
Brian: Look, you've got it all wrong! You don't NEED to follow ME, You don't NEED to follow ANYBODY! You've got to think for your selves! You're ALL individuals!
The Crowd: Yes! We're all individuals!
Brian: You're all different!
The Crowd: Yes, we ARE all different!
Man in crowd: I'm not...
Shiloh: No you're not!
(Life of Brian, 1979)
I'd rather my taxes went to Althouse blogging than air traffic controllers napping. Just sayin'.
Well if we are going to revisit phony shit revolving around Wisconsin then I think they should replay the last quarter of the Super Bowl because some funky stuff was happening there. Just sayn'
Grand Inquisitor, "It is pretty hilarious that you're so upset that a professor has a blog in her off time."
Query, when is her "on time."
I used to do research for a faculty member at the UW back in the day. You could literally lay dead in the faculty wing of the law school, and maybe someone would find you after a week or two. Nothing has changed since then. It's not that Ann isn't doing her job. There is simply little to no work for a tenured law professor to do. The law taught to law students rarely changes. It is like teaching kindergarten. Except rather than having a class full of students all day, you teach a handful of hours all week, and spend the "off time," blogging 24/7. Not that there is anything wrong with that. Except my point from the beginning is that if you choose to game the state by living on the dole, then you lack standing to bitch about wasting tax payer dollars.
Kloppie the Mealy-Mouthed Mouse
Caught Lying By Slammin' Annie Althouse
And in Her De-Pantsed State
She Remains an Ingrate
'Tis Election Theft She Deigns to Espouse
The commenters here surely do blow a lot of kisses to each other. But that's not what bothers me ... it's that they're so often larded up with vintage pop lyrics. I don't mind that they're tediously irrelevant, so much as that anyone could consider them worth quoting in any context outside of a PBS documentary about nostalgia as an antibiotic-resistant contagion.
All of which makes me suspect that the Internet rumors are true; a disturbingly high percentage of Althouse readers still have working 8-track tape machines.
Maybe Barry can issue a fiat - sorry, executive order - to rectify this fundamental flaw in American society. Or at least set up a new bureaucracy, complete with Czar, to fret about it.
Yes a new executive order that all music will ONLY be accessible on the cloud through your iPhone. Anything else is just uncool and gross.
tom swift, your buzzkill post aside ~ what a longgg strange trip it's been!
Actually, rock lyrics is one of this blogs few redeeming qualities. :-P
take care
By the way-- the 13 second pause is something people should give a rest.
Yes, Kloppenburg is behaving exactly like a partisan Democrat, and not in the manner one would want as a (supposedly non-partisan) Supreme Court justice.
But at the same time, she is within the law requesting a recount. The legislature of Wisconsin deemed the margin to be one where there would still be some possibility that a recount would be meaningful, or else they would have made the threshold be even less of a margin.
So she didn't have an answer ready. Yada yada, that shows how she didn't think through preparing for statements yada yada. So? She very easily could have lied, and lied quickly. Instead, she searched for a way to not lie and also not destroy herself politically (and if she loses this election as it appears she has, she goes back to the political realm).
That actually impressed me, quite a bit.
"So my comment was in response to the complaint that Althouse is "taxpayer."
Ann Althouse is NOT a net taxpayer. She receives (a lot) more in taxpayer dollars given to her than she pays back in.
Therefore, she is a tax-recipient; not a taxpayer.
"So she didn't have an answer ready. Yada yada, that shows how she didn't think through preparing for statements."
Isn't that the point. Here you have a politician who wants to be a Supreme Court justice and she can't even bother to properly prepare herself for a press conference she herself called.
If this sort of sloppiness is any indication of the quality of her legal capabilities maybe she should withdraw since she's clearly not up to the requirements of the position.
Look: Kleptoberg tried to steal the election by claiming she'd won with a 200-vote margin (even though she knew some votes were missing).
The final margin is now over 7,000 votes ... but now she wants to start all over and waste $1.2 million taxpayer dollars on a recount even she admits after the most painful 13 seconds in Wisconsin deer hunting history won't change the outcome of the election.
It's a pointless waste of taxpayer dollars. Is she "within her rights?" Perhaps technically, but she is also within her rights to forgo a recount and not waste Wisconsin taxpayers' hard-earned money on a pointless wild goose chase just to satisfy her lust for power.
Ann Althouse is NOT a net taxpayer. She receives (a lot) more in taxpayer dollars given to her than she pays back in.
I don't think that's true at all.
State support for the UW is pretty small -- less than 25%. Much of the law school funding comes from tuition, not Wisconsin taxpayers. In addition, since Althouse has a named chair, I suspect there is some endowment money paying for her salary as well. I'd be surprised if more than 10% of her salary came from Wisconsin taxpayers.
You would have a better argument if Althouse were a professor in, say, Womyn's Studies or French and Italian (or both!) as those professorial types are more likely to be gathering instructional dollars from the State.
Ut said...
"So my comment was in response to the complaint that Althouse is "taxpayer."
Ann Althouse is NOT a net taxpayer. She receives (a lot) more in taxpayer dollars given to her than she pays back in.
Therefore, she is a tax-recipient; not a taxpayer.
True, but if you want to do a complete financial analysis, you should probably factor in the income to the UW Law School that she and other professors generate. After all, no professors - no law school.
So, from what you guys are saying, I guess when you tell your waiter or the waitress you want a KloppenBurger, the first thing you get is a thirteen-second blank stare.
We'll have to negotiate the rest (good ideas!), but that sounds like a good start to me.
P.S. So when you pay, they count your money twice, unnecessarily, and charge a fee for having done it?
Also, unlike some students, her students graduate with credentials that allow them to go right out into the world and, you know, earn livings.
"
Query, when is her "on time.""
I don't care. I'm not in her school. But I bet it's on a syllabus somewhere.
My school has professors too, though, and truly great law professors often do something with their spare time that is interesting and stimulating. A blog is her hobby. Gardening is mine.
A lot of law professors actually advise law firms in their spare time, too. It's certainly something her employer was aware of when contracting for Althouse's work. I bet she answers email from students all day long, if they ask. What does it matter, though? This is a pathetic attempt to distract from the fact she's a taxpayer and journalist asking a legitimate question of a public servant who made a strange claim.
And I think Althouse is involved with this election and the other protests, to the point where kloppenburg supporters are threatening her, and she should do what she can to clarify that she's not somehow stealing elections. It's not Althouse's fault that *many* interpreted Klopp's clumsy remarks that way.
Klopp needs to answer the questions. If not to Althouse, then to her beloved MSM.
ugh, fascism.
Liberal expecting liberal to fes up and state the facts is like watching a couple 2 years olds explain the internal combustion engine to each other...ain't gonna happen!
"Ann Althouse is NOT a net taxpayer. She receives (a lot) more in taxpayer dollars given to her than she pays back in."
I disagree with Meade. This is not true at all. She works for a living in an arrangement where both sides benefit. She doesn't lose her rights as a taxpaying citizen just because she trades her services for a University salary.
No, you can't say she gets more than she pays back in unless you add in her labor too. Otherwise you have stacked the deck. She gives her labor and is paid a salary, minus taxes. The labor and salary nullify one another. It's like saying you bought an apple from the store, so the store owes you the $1 you paid. That's not true... you got the apple.
The levels some go to just to be unfair.
Well we have a bunch of new commenters lately. Thanks for stopping by Saul we often talk about your rules.
One thing. Watch out for the Dave guy. I hear he is after your gig.
to fes up and state the facts
Much like John Ensign's song and dance upon resigning, and oh yea mama grizzly's too.
Again, AA's everlasting search for the perfect politician will leave her disappointed!
>
As one inane generalization deserves a comparable, truthful deflection.
"Here you have a politician who wants to be a Supreme Court justice and she can't even bother to properly prepare herself for a press conference she herself called."
Meaningless. I am not nearly as concerned with if a judge can think quickly if the judge can think well upon reflection, and is judicious in nature and sufficiently qualified.
She did not lie when she could have, quickly and easily. And the idea that she is too dim to have thought of lying is absurd.
Kloppy is only telling her followers the things they want to hear. Whether that's a more damning indictment of her or the followers is another question.
"If this sort of sloppiness is any indication of the quality of her legal capabilities"
You seem to think it is obvious that it is some sort of indication. It's not.
Here, chick:
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Changeling
WI GOP, staying classy as always
The Jobs First Coalition has been associated with Scott Jensen, the former Republican state Assembly speaker who left office in 2002 after being convicted of misconduct, later overturned in appeals court.
The website lists a post office box address in Brookfield, Wis., but no telephone number for contact. An email sent Thursday afternoon drew no response.
Brookfield. Surprise surprise.
Tail Gunner Klopp has a list of those bloggers is her pocketbook that she will release when he is ready.
My Kloppenburger comes loaded with multiple conflicting statements and a liberal helping of angry lefties on the side
deborah
TOS ~ Changeling
"True, but if you want to do a complete financial analysis, you should probably factor in the income to the UW Law School that she and other professors generate."
Who (or what) receives this "income"?
P.S.
I don't begrudge Ann Althouse her $172,000 salary, lucious benefits and 7-figure pension even though I think the world has too many Goddamned lawyers in it already and the last thing we need are more unless we're prepared to start using them as boat anchors, a use to which most lawyers are best fitted.
I was just correcting the record.
Ann Althouse is not a taxpayer. She's a tax getter.
WE are the taxpayers.
@Garage: "I really don't trust any vote counts from any other county that aren't hand counted from paper ballots by human beings."
Me neither.
That, and voter ID, and we can both trust the vote again.
You in?
Waaaaitaminnit.... Why just "from any other county"?
Sumpin' to hide in Dane Co., bro?
Garage, why are you whining about an innocent man? Are you a fascist who hate the rule of law? Do you hate the constitution and the bill of rights? Why should anyone respect someone as uncivil as you?
"She works for a living in an arrangement where both sides benefit."
Then taxpayers should not be footing this bill.
If Ann Althouse's labors are worth something in a free market, let her go there and earn a living.
The question is why is the government producing lawyers with taxpayer dollars using overpaid professors? Are lawyers necessary? If so, the free market will produce them and private law schools may educate them.
You claim taxpayers are benefiting by Ms. Althouse's labors. I think that claim is not supportable in a free market.
If not for taxpayers, Ms. Althouse might not be employable as a professor since we have too many of them (seeing as how they are government-subsidized and everything the government subsidizes is unsustainable on its own).
>"Most of the higher paying public sector jobs require time and effort, and a lot of money for college. Have you ever thought of that?"
Garage, you're a leach - sucking blood from the rest of us.
Get comfortable with that.
I don't begrudge Ann Althouse her $172,000 salary, lucious benefits and 7-figure pension
How bout you get a decent education, [or even a job?] and perhaps you can apply for these high paying public sector jobs too. If it's so easy it shouldn't any trouble at all.
Hint: Most of the higher paying public sector jobs require time and effort, and a lot of money for college. That's why they pay well.
Garage, you're a leach - sucking blood from the rest of us.
I'm guessing I paid more taxes than you earned last year.
"I just hope she doesn't peel off her human skin after she loses the recount. I hate Visitors."
Lincolntf,
I think you owe me some monitor cleaner.
But, more seriously - I suspect a "Visitor" might have a bit better grip on reality than she does.
"I'm guessing I paid more taxes than you earned last year."
You certainly paid more in taxes than I paid in taxes because I've decided enough is enough and I'm no longer volunteering to pay taxes.
I hope hundreds of millions of my fellow countrymen and patriots will do the same.
It is the only way we'll break the spine of the union you belong to. We'll have to bankrupt America to save her from Democrats.
"Then taxpayers should not be footing this bill.
If Ann Althouse's labors are worth something in a free market, let her go there and earn a living."
HAHAHAHAHA
Her services turn a huge profit. Law schools are not a burden on the tax payer. They subsidize the other departments quite a bit.
Universities are businesses, and while I grant there is a legit point that they could be privatized, we have decided, as a people, all together, whether you like it or not, to have public education systems.
Ann is not a net tax getter unless you claim her labor is worthless. Which perhaps you do, but I think she trades her labor for a salary, and then paid taxes on that salary, and is thus a productive tax payer.
Is education a legitimate thing for government to be involved with? By all means, have your own opinion on it, but the government's obligation to its employees for labor is not a gift.
How can one "volunteer" to pay taxes?
Well said, Grand Inquisitor !
"How can one "volunteer" to pay taxes?"
Our tax system only functions because people voluntarily pay exorbitant amounts of taxes.
That's dumb.
And it's the voluntary nature of our tax system that allows government employees to grow their salaries to the point where they are making $1 million every three or four years and retiring at 50 with 7-figure pensions.
Cops in Boston are making over $200,000 a year ... only because people keep volunteering their paychecks.
It's asinine.
Stop doing it.
garage mahal said...
How can one "volunteer" to pay taxes?
By paying them before anyone shows up at your door with a gun and an arrest warrant.
TGI wrote: Law schools are not a burden on the taxpayer.
Here's where I differ. Those costs, primarily bourne by the student, are recouped by the student in the marketplace for legal services. We all pay for those services indirectly--those costs are passed on. Now, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with that--it's free market capitalism! But keep in mind that much of the money pools and gathers at the Universities due soley to their gatekeeper status.
Here's an insightful comment made at a post Althouse linked yesterday along those lines: link
@TGI:
Sorry, the link doesn't go right to the comments but the one I meant is the very first one.
"By paying them before anyone shows up at your door with a gun and an arrest warrant."
Precisely.
I'm not suggesting that anyone NOT pay their taxes.
I'm advocating that people stop VOLUNTARILY paying their taxes.
I'll pay - but only after I've exhausted every single legal delaying tactic that is afforded to me by the law. And by that time, the government will have lost money on the transaction owing to all the lawyers they thankfully educated for me.
I refuse to volunteer any longer.
Garage: Some taxes are indeed voluntary and those are capital gains. You are only taxed when you sell an asset at a profit and then the profit is taxed at a lower rate than ordinary income. But it is entirely up to the owner as to whether and when she sells thus triggering the tax. Other taxes are not so voluntary unless you are a fucking criminal or a tax cheat both categories of which are not cute, not cool and not revolutionary. Any dickhead that cheats on his taxes deserves whatever happens.
"Some taxes are indeed voluntary and those are capital gains."
Capital gains taxes are not the only voluntary taxes.
I deliberately have limited my income by working less so as to avoid taxes and will continue to do so as long as Barack Obama is president.
I've also stopped voluntarily paying Massachusetts sales tax, which was recently raised from 5% to 6.5%. I've stopped voluntarily paying that tax by doing all my shopping in New Hampshire - which does not punish its residents for creating economic activity by taxing that activity.
I also stopped voluntarily paying so much in gasoline taxes. I bought a scooter (in New Hampshire, where I saved $400 in sales taxes). Now, I do all my "around town" driving at 100 mpg for the express purpose of depriving Massachusetts of money to fix roads and bridges (mainly because cops are parked on them earning $200,000 a year to sleep in their cars).
There are lots of ways to stop being a fucking sap who volunteers to pay taxes.
People who voluntarily pay taxes are fucking morons and deserve to have their income taken from them by union thugs and corrupt cops.
I deliberately have limited my income by working less
There's a shocker.
I deliberately have limited my income by working less so as to avoid taxes and will continue to do so as long as Barack Obama is president.
Taxes reach historic low
For the past two years, a family of four earning the median income has paid less in federal income taxes than at any time since at least 1955, according to the Tax Policy Center. All federal, state and local taxes combined are a lower percentage of per-capita income than at any time since the 1960s, according to the Tax Foundation. The highest income-tax bracket is its lowest since 1992. At 35 percent, it's well below the 50 percent mark of much of the 1980s and the 70 percent bracket of the 1970s.
~~~~~
take care, blessings
Here's the story of a Massachusetts politician who still gets a pension ... while he's in jail for official corruption.
He fucking stole coins out of government copy machines at his workplace - and yet, taxpayers are still paying his pension to him in jail.
I've stopped volunteering and if you're still volunteering you deserve to get ripped off.
http://bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/2011_0422buonomos_pension_a_steal/srvc=home&position=0
--------Nickolaus didn't tell at least one of the offical members of the canvass board about the missing votes. Ramona didn't know until the press conference started. Nickolaus didn't tell anyone until 2 days later. -------
Here's the direct quote from the live press conference....
"Everything that we went over yesterday afternoon and today, it jived up, and we're satisfied that it's correct. And I'm with the Democratic Party, vice-chair of Waukesha County, so I'm not gonna stand here and tell you something that's incorrect," said Democrat Ramona Kitzinger.
http://slatest.slate.com/id/2290785
Everyone, please observe that Garage is posting a falsehood about the timeline for the announcement of the error posting the UNOFFICIAL totals. Ms Kitzinger was clearly informed the day before the press conference.
I deliberately have limited my income by working less so as to avoid taxes and will continue to do so as long as Barack Obama is president.
What a fucking loser. My accountant told me yrs ago to worry about making more income and let him worry about the taxes. Good advice.
But you're too fucking stupid to realize all the wrangling back and forth on the national level between Democrats and Republicans on the tax code is all kabuki theater. Wall St isn't stupid enough to put all their eggs in one basket.
Garage sez
-----Most of the higher paying public sector jobs require time and effort, and a lot of money for college. That's why they pay well. ----
John E. Nelson made more than the city's mayor and police chief in 2009 by sitting behind the wheel of a bus. His $159,258 compensation includes $109,892 in overtime and other pay. (Wisconsin State Journal)
Here's one of your highly educated colleagues Garrraagggghhhh
"At 35 percent, it's well below the 50 percent mark of much of the 1980s and the 70 percent bracket of the 1970s."
That's because the government has determined that 35% generates the most income.
Higher than that, and people stop working.
Lower than that, and you leave money on the table.
Cops in Boston are making $200,000 a year. That's OBSCENE.
I'm not volunteering just because some Democrat at the Orange County Register thinks I don't pay much tax.
"But you're too fucking stupid to realize all the wrangling back and forth on the national level between Democrats and Republicans on the tax code is all kabuki theater."
Of course I realize that. Democrats and Republicans long ago got together and figured out how to split the loot.
That's why I'm not volunteering as long as Barack W. Bush is president.
John E. Nelson made more than the city's mayor and police chief in 2009 by sitting behind the wheel of a bus. His $159,258 compensation includes $109,892 in overtime and other pay. (Wisconsin State Journal)
John E Nelson makes less than Scott Walker, and actually works for a living [if you're unlinked story is true], contributes much more to society than Scott Walker, and probably isn't a complete douchebag. That'll have to be it for now, I'm off to have a few beers with some hippie thugs at the Le Tigre Lounge. Ha.
Here's the link to the John E. Nelson story.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_24af32d4-13f4-11df-86b2-001cc4c002e0.html
For those who don't know ... Mr. Nelson is the highest paid government employee in the city of Madison, Wisconsin.
He's a fucking bus driver.
He was paid $159,258 in 2009 to drive a fucking bus. And we wonder why our country is fucking bankrupt?
This is why I'm not volunteering my childrens future to a government that is out of control with this kind of fucking blatant thievery.
Not. Volunteering.
Original Mike said...
There weren't any bloggers. She made it up.
That's right, she was shotgunning her alleged enemies to appear to be a victim. From a leftard? Shocking.
"I'm not being vain and narcissistic about the campaign's failure to respond to my email."
Where is the evidence that proves this assertion?
What possible purpose would it serve her or her campaign to respond to you?
For those that claim she is trying to "steal" the election - why do you say that? The rule of law in this state allows for a recount under the circumstances presented and the two campaigns have agreed upon an appropriate method. What is the problem with that?
toodaloo
@ Shiloh: oh, snap!
"-Most of the higher paying public sector jobs require time and effort, and a lot of money for college. That's why they pay well. "
Of course, most jobs in teh public sector are paid not on the credentials, but the value they contribute.
Reagan, I agree there is no indication Klopp is trying to steal the election. I'm not sure what her motivations are. If she's serious about her professed claims, I think it's very important she offer the specifics (that she must have if she's telling the truth).
Otherwise, I guess this is meant to raise money. Though recounts cost a lot in legal fees, so I don't really get that either.
Althouse can't 'prove' to you her issue isn't vanity. I think she offered enough reasons why it may not be, though my gut tells me that of course vanity plays a role. Althouse has done a good job with covering WI recently, and that has to impact things a bit.
The morning after the election Schneider posted this piece at NRO which had the AP reported 200 vote margin. The next day, Thursday he posted on the vote mess-up here. Including the fact that the local paper's blog reported the correct numbers just after midnight on election night when they got them from the City of Brookfield.
Perhaps Kloppenburg means that local news blog the one since they had the numbers posted first.
Althouse says: I'm not being vain and narcissistic about the campaign's failure to respond to my email."
That's exactly what Althouse is: vain and narcissistic. I would add thin-skinned and defensive to the list, too.
sarge here everybuddy what knew shit from shinola knew it wuz charlie sykes 2 days after thar election where ya been miss anne
sarge here @ garagemahal sarge loves el tigre lounge almost makes up fer thar closing of the 602
How could somebody have a blog like this and not be vain and narcissistic? Too much personal commentary and insight into personal life to not be both. This blog is not about "public service, shining light into corrupt dark spots". Ann thinks she has thoughts that she needs to share with us, that we will ponder and comment on. A professor looking for a classroom. Of course she's right, because she's a lawyer. Doesn't Ann ask us to use her Amazon portal for our fun and her profit? I read and comment here, but hopefully not under the illusions that I'm not both vain and narcisstic.
"You're so vain, I bet you think this blog is about you, don't you?"
No Conspiracy In Wisconsin Supreme Court Election, Brookfield Vote Totals Posted On Election Night By AOL/Huffington Post Reporter
I'm not sure what her motivations are.
If you ask her, make sure you figure in an extra 13 seconds for her answer to start.
WV - "pancersi" a beef dish recipe by Tyrion's sister.
JoAnne Kloppenburg is apparently one of this year's major meme-makers.
Here is another one she launched . . . twice.
"In a videotaped interview on March 16, 2011, Kloppenburg declared that Prosser had "prejudged matters that are likely to come before the court."
She repeated the charge in a debate six days later, saying: "I, unlike my opponent, will approach cases with an open mind and without having prejudged the matters that come before the court."
When her campaign was challenged over the statements, they came up small:
We asked Kloppenburg campaign spokeswoman Melissa Mulliken for evidence that Prosser has prejudged matters that are likely to be brought to the high court -- more specifically, which matters. Mulliken said there were none. Kloppenburg’s allegation against Prosser, she said, was made as a broader statement.
Even though Politi-fact somehow risibly turned that into a "barely true," it is very obvious that JoAnne Kloppenburg not only demonstrates bad judgement, but also a reckless tendency for engaging in fabulism.
Regarding Kloppenburg's false charge (made twice by her during the campaign) that Prosser had "prejudged matters that are likely to come before the court," here is an interesting attorney ethics rule in Wisconsin at pg. 43:
SCR 20:8.2 Judicial and legal officials.
(a) A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office.
(b) A lawyer who is a candidate for judicial office shall comply
with the applicable provisions of the code of judicial conduct.
Post a Comment