Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Thinking about voting for JoAnne Kloppenburg? Think again.

There will be an election in Wisconsin a week from today.

One of the races is for Supreme Court Justice.

This is, allegedly, a non-partisan race. It should be, but obviously it isn't according to each contenders' campaign.

The contenders: JoAnne Kloppenburg and Judge David Prosser.

If you are thinking of voting for Kloppenburg only because you are mad at Governor Walker and the Republican legislators, and want to get "even" with them, think again.

"Time to get even" is what all the people pissed at Walker are chanting right now.

But there are a few things to consider here:

The issue with Walker is only one issue. And who knows how that would end or how long it will last.

On the other hand, voting for a Supreme Court Justice is to decide how the highest court in the State of Wisconsin will handle cases in the next two to ten years, as this is not a short appointment. Cases that will range between many issues, not only issues that have to do with Scott Walker and his "evil" bill.

JoAnne Kloppenburg has demonstrated she is far from being "non-partisan". She is an activist whose husband made monetary contributions to Democratic senators, and both have been very vocal in their opinion of Governor Walker's bill.

Her supporters have made it clear that a vote for her will be a step against Walker. Go and do your research. You will find it all over the Internet.

Now, there are some things that the mainstream media do not talk much about. How Kloppenburg has never been a judge and applied to be one three times. Even Obama took a pass on her.

Her main accomplishments: being a Government attorney, representing the DNR and the State, going after property and small business owners.

Because of her vendetta-like actions, a restaurant owner in Oconomowoc, Wisconsin ended up filing for bankruptcy, because he could not afford the attorney fees to keep defending himself against Kloppenburg's harassment. 34 employees lost their jobs, all because the DNR and Kloppenburg would not leave him alone.

An 80-year old land owner was thrown in jail two months after having open heart surgery, because he would not follow an order to plant certain weeds in his OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY to prevent soil run off. Now, I get the worry about protecting Mother Earth and the environment, blah, blah, blah. But, throwing a sick, elderly man in jail, and draining his savings account to pay a lien on the property while in jail? I mean, come on! That sounds to me more like what a communist regime, not an attorney - much less a judge! - in Wisconsin would do.

So these are just a couple of examples. You can read more about it on the link below (please cut and paste to your browser, as my hyperlinks are acting up again!) or you can do your own research.

http://bit.ly/esFI9i

Our freedoms are at stake here. Actually, if you DISLIKE Walker, you then should think about this: is he really worth putting the citizens of Wisconsin in the hands of an incompetent and obviously misguided candidate to Supreme Court Judge? You have the power of preventing that from happening. She will not have your best interest in mind. What will she do when there is no Walker issue to pursue?

Think about it.

And don't forget to vote!

ETA: Tonight, an Anonymous party attempted to post here information that may be - or not - pertinent to my readers. It will be for the readers to decide. However, this weasel started this way:"I bet you do not have enough guts to post this." I find this insulting and disrespectful, but even more so, hypocritical. How dare you accuse me of not having enough guts when you don't identify yourself? I have accepted comments in the past from anonymous sources; that is not the problem. If you want me to post the info, you show yourself, then I will see if I feel like posting it, since I have no obligation to post anything. But at least, the whole world can see who you are if I decide to. This is my house, my rules. COMPRENDE? In any case, the one that does not have cojones is you.

4 comments:

Charlie said...

I thought I was the only Puerto Rican who even cared about this election! Lol! Love your blog and you are spot on! Prosser has shown to be an independent thinker. Yes, he may lack some tact and social skills but independent nonetheless. You can bet, based on her history, that she will be a liberal activist judge. Regardless of where you sit, left or right, we need a judge who will vote according to the law and not along party lines. I feel there is no place for activism in the court room. And BTW, I would feel the same...MY HOUSE, MY RULES! :)

Charlie- A PR Conservative WOMAN in WI

La Jibara said...

Thank you, Charlie! Glad to see there are others like me outthere. Thanks for your comment and have a wonderful day!

Tine said...

You were upset about the bad treatment of Prosser in special interest ads, so I'd think you'd feel the same way about lies about Kloppenburg. The story about her and the 80 year old farmer is a "pants on fire" lie. I'm sure that you have enough other reasons to vote for who you prefer and don't need to use that one.

La Jibara said...

Tine, I did see the Milw. Journal Sentinel PolitiFact analysis. I had also seen an interview of Kloppenburg where she attempts to clarify the story, which matches EXACTLY with the PolitiFact article. Couple of thoughts:

Seems ironic to me how the PolitiFact chooses carefully their "Barely True" and their "Pants on Fire" conclusions. Wayne Hensler did exist. The case exists. Kloppenburg's involvement is real.

While the analysis is correct on the story, and I agree the judge ordered the arrest, not Ms. Kloppenburg, given her history, I do not believe that she was entirely innocent and did not have a hand in his arrest. That is, of course, my personal opinion and gut feeling. I also think she could have prevented the man from going to jail, but that is just me. Again, this to me is a case of too much regulation and invasion of private property rights. Whether it started the same day or ten years ago. Please! With all due respect, this man could have been senile!

Also, just as many other people, I have a problem with the partiality of mainstream media. Again, the PolitiFact analysis have been accurate in some instances, not so in others. And the fact alone that it is coming from the Journal, which is a publication that has proved to be not reliable - just as FoxNews is unreliable to many others - does not make the last word for me.

However, I do want to thank you for being honest and calling me out on it while showing who you are. I want to point out this is the same issue the anonymous person I spoke of was daring me to post. I did not have a problem with posting it.