Posts
Well, it is the morning after and like the pill, another life has been taken. The life of a fair Judiciary. 59% of the people of Wisconsin have decided to impale the rest of us with a self inflicted wound that will be felt for 10 years...or will it?
Now that its all over... the timer starts on how long it will be before Shirley Abrahamson announces her retirement or dies of old age. It certainly won’t be that her conviction is true that she will not only finish the next ten years in good health full of vigor but is considering another 10 year run! This statement alone shows she is a few fries short of a happy meal. I've heard of positive thinking before but this is truly ridiculous.
I just hope the 59% who were swayed by her $1,000,000 understand what they just did. They renewed an activist Judge that will ultimately rule as she personally sees fit and ignores the actual will of the people. This will ultimately come back to haunt them all in one way or another...political liberal or conservative, both are not safe from Judicial activism.
To all the groups that did not get involved, you’re about to get more of what you paid for...enjoy.
WMC, Mark Belling and Charlie Sykes to some extent (he did comment a little at the end, but too little too late Charlie)...you guys?...I don't understand, sorry. You have lost your image as true conservatives. You’re now seen as just another mode of entertainment and not really as embattled in a cause with worthwhile values. You were more concerned with being on the winning side that actually living your values. Actually, you are seen now as media idiots and ultimately got what you wanted...the most activist Judge in the country right in your backyard for another 10 years, cool...thanks. You all managed to marginalize yourselves.
It's amazing what $1,000,000 can buy these days...that was the only difference in the race and the margin of victory was the money. Big money wins again...not right, but the way the machine works...for both sides.
Tick tock tick tock....
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Abrahamson: CONVICTED of being an activist Judge! Vote Tuesday April 7th 2009 to return the power to the peope!
Please vote Tuesday April 7th 2009. The Wisconsin Supreme Court race is between current activist Judge Shirley Abrahamson and strict constructionist Judge Randy Koschnick. Unlike commonly in a national election, your 1 vote can make a HUGE difference! There is expected to be a relatively low voter turnout (estimated to be between 10-20%) and that helps the underdog, Judge Randy Koschnick. The big special interest group/activist/big labor/union controlled Shirley is almost bought and paid for....$1,000,000 to secure another 10 years of activist rule on the state’s highest court. Don't let it happen, vote Tuesday for Judge Randy Koschnick. He will enforce the constitution as it is written, not how the people who pay Shirley’s bills will want it interpreted. And she owes them BIG TIME now...$1,000,000 plus!
We have a lot of important issues coming before the court in the near future and we don't want an activist Judge (politically conservative or liberal for that matter) bending our sacred constitution to their personal will.
Our founding fathers, along with many other brave men and women since them, have fought and died to create and then preserve our way of life, borders, language and culture. A major cornerstone in the success of that culture is the three branches of government. An activist Judge usurps the power invested in the ordinary everyday people of this great state of Wisconsin by reading things into it that are not there but that they personally wish were there. If a law needs to be changed, we already have an avenue for that, it's called the legislature. That is also where the partisan things should play out also....we are a republic, not a democracy. Our elected official vote for us and if we don’t like them, we vote them out. I am perfectly ok with that because then we have a system of checks and balances. An activist Judge is unbridled power and devastates the rest of the system.
Judge Koschnick does a brilliant job of outlining the writing on the wall of what has been happening and what will continue to happen if we don’t' stop Shirley from driving us further down that path. Visit http://www.koschnickforjustice.com/
Vote Koschnick on Tuesday for change and say "NO!" to special interest big money controlling your judicial system!
Two down, one big inJUSTICE to go!
We have a lot of important issues coming before the court in the near future and we don't want an activist Judge (politically conservative or liberal for that matter) bending our sacred constitution to their personal will.
Our founding fathers, along with many other brave men and women since them, have fought and died to create and then preserve our way of life, borders, language and culture. A major cornerstone in the success of that culture is the three branches of government. An activist Judge usurps the power invested in the ordinary everyday people of this great state of Wisconsin by reading things into it that are not there but that they personally wish were there. If a law needs to be changed, we already have an avenue for that, it's called the legislature. That is also where the partisan things should play out also....we are a republic, not a democracy. Our elected official vote for us and if we don’t like them, we vote them out. I am perfectly ok with that because then we have a system of checks and balances. An activist Judge is unbridled power and devastates the rest of the system.
Judge Koschnick does a brilliant job of outlining the writing on the wall of what has been happening and what will continue to happen if we don’t' stop Shirley from driving us further down that path. Visit http://www.koschnickforjustice.com/
Vote Koschnick on Tuesday for change and say "NO!" to special interest big money controlling your judicial system!
Two down, one big inJUSTICE to go!
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Stop Shirley Abrahamson supreme court constitutional cluster$#*@
The Shirley Abrahamson Randy Koschnick supreme court of wisconsin race heats up and new facts are uncovered...
For more info please visit http://www.stopshirley.com/
Friday, March 27, 2009
Abrahamson pioneer in activist "new Federalism"
Shirley Abrahamson, nationally renowned Activist vs Randy Koschnick in the Wisconsin Supreme court race ...more evidence, now from the major media! Finally some actual investigative reporting with facts and everything....
Quotes in a recent article by Patrick McIlheran entitled "Who knew? Abrahamson remodels law" Posted: Mar. 26, 2009 jsonline.com
"That ad says Abrahamson has a national reputation; what it doesn't say is that it's a reputation for a progressive take on the law. When a U.S. Supreme Court spot opened in 1993, President Bill Clinton short-listed Abrahamson - but eventually opted for moderation by going with Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the U.S. Supreme Court's present left wingtip."
"When her challenger, the bright and capable Jefferson County Circuit Judge Randy Koschnick, calls her an activist, she pleads that most of her cases are incontrovertible. True, of most Supreme Court decisions. It's the few close ones that shake things up. Abrahamson has some dandies, especially from 2005, her rare moment in the majority.That's when, for instance, she tossed out the Legislature's limits on malpractice jackpots against doctors. Usually, courts have to defer to lawmakers' judgments on policy, as long as they're rational. Abrahamson redefined the test of rationality so as to gain a free hand."
" That idea that even if the U.S. Supreme Court says no, a state court can finagle a yes is called "new Federalism...Abrahamson's a big name in it"
"...sympathy in hard cases is a good way to get bad law. Abrahamson needs to remember she's not a TV judge dispensing satisfactory endings. She's fiddling with the law."
"For years, Abrahamson's been writing that legal principle and reason sometimes just won't do. "A judge must judge different people differently," she once wrote, and elsewhere, she wrote that female judges "should make a special effort to understand other outsiders - the poor, the differently abled, . . . minorities." "
"Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson says she just can't grasp why critics call her an activist judge. "I don't know what these labels mean," she told editors and reporters recently.
If she actually believed that, I'd doubt her legendary intelligence. Law school professors, appeals court judges and colleagues of Abrahamson have in crystalline detail fleshed out the meaning: Activists stretch the law and the limits of courts' power to reach a desired result."
Full article here:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/41942497.html
Quotes in a recent article by Patrick McIlheran entitled "Who knew? Abrahamson remodels law" Posted: Mar. 26, 2009 jsonline.com
"That ad says Abrahamson has a national reputation; what it doesn't say is that it's a reputation for a progressive take on the law. When a U.S. Supreme Court spot opened in 1993, President Bill Clinton short-listed Abrahamson - but eventually opted for moderation by going with Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the U.S. Supreme Court's present left wingtip."
"When her challenger, the bright and capable Jefferson County Circuit Judge Randy Koschnick, calls her an activist, she pleads that most of her cases are incontrovertible. True, of most Supreme Court decisions. It's the few close ones that shake things up. Abrahamson has some dandies, especially from 2005, her rare moment in the majority.That's when, for instance, she tossed out the Legislature's limits on malpractice jackpots against doctors. Usually, courts have to defer to lawmakers' judgments on policy, as long as they're rational. Abrahamson redefined the test of rationality so as to gain a free hand."
" That idea that even if the U.S. Supreme Court says no, a state court can finagle a yes is called "new Federalism...Abrahamson's a big name in it"
"...sympathy in hard cases is a good way to get bad law. Abrahamson needs to remember she's not a TV judge dispensing satisfactory endings. She's fiddling with the law."
"For years, Abrahamson's been writing that legal principle and reason sometimes just won't do. "A judge must judge different people differently," she once wrote, and elsewhere, she wrote that female judges "should make a special effort to understand other outsiders - the poor, the differently abled, . . . minorities." "
"Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson says she just can't grasp why critics call her an activist judge. "I don't know what these labels mean," she told editors and reporters recently.
If she actually believed that, I'd doubt her legendary intelligence. Law school professors, appeals court judges and colleagues of Abrahamson have in crystalline detail fleshed out the meaning: Activists stretch the law and the limits of courts' power to reach a desired result."
Full article here:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/41942497.html
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Chief Justice Abrahamson is going to help you wiggle out of your bad mortgage - regardless of any kind of contract you signed
The ongoing saga of Shirley Abrahamson running for the Wisconsin Supreme against challenger Randy Koschnick. Abrahamson is a Judicial activist in action....again, and again, and again....we need change, not more of the same!
"Abrahamson said “The best thing a judge can do is to help people. That’s what I do.”
Is she serious? The best thing a judge can do is to apply the law as written to certain facts of a case. The judge’s role isn’t to “stand up” for anyone. “Standing up” for people means writing your own new laws to generate a favorable outcome... "
Read the full story here:
http://www.wpri.org/blog/?p=608
I agree....these are programs for the legislature...why is a judge initiating a "program" on mortages? Because she is an activist....the facts are yelling at us!
"Abrahamson said “The best thing a judge can do is to help people. That’s what I do.”
Is she serious? The best thing a judge can do is to apply the law as written to certain facts of a case. The judge’s role isn’t to “stand up” for anyone. “Standing up” for people means writing your own new laws to generate a favorable outcome... "
Read the full story here:
http://www.wpri.org/blog/?p=608
I agree....these are programs for the legislature...why is a judge initiating a "program" on mortages? Because she is an activist....the facts are yelling at us!
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Third party ad attacking Koschnick runs in Supreme Court race
Clean campaign commercials?....Too good to be true....Liberals START a mudslinging fight...until now there have been no attack ads....leave it to the radical liberals Shirley is honored by...these are the people on her side! Oh...that's right...she isn't on a side.....
http://www.fox6now.com/news/sns-ap-wi--supremecourt-ad,0,4975146.story
Why would liberals run an attack ad on behalf of Shirley if they did not like her rulings better? She has a side after all....she won’t admit it honestly but her "peeps" speak loudly for her. All I ask is that she embrace her Liberal nature. It's so obvious to the rest of the world.
http://www.fox6now.com/news/sns-ap-wi--supremecourt-ad,0,4975146.story
Why would liberals run an attack ad on behalf of Shirley if they did not like her rulings better? She has a side after all....she won’t admit it honestly but her "peeps" speak loudly for her. All I ask is that she embrace her Liberal nature. It's so obvious to the rest of the world.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Shirley Abrahamson age is a concern, but not why you might think.
Shirley Abrahamson is 75 and running for another 10 year term on the Wisconsin Supreme against challenger Randy Koschnick 49. Now, they say age is a subject that should be off limits, and I agree if you are talking about their ability to do the job. I am questioning her desire to complete the full term. That isn't and should not be off limits. Shirley is obviously not going to be on the bench at 85 and will likely retire in the next 2-3 years. We have seen this time and time again. Therefore, she would win the election as a placeholder for the Governor to appoint a new Justice for a majority of the term…by the way...did you know that’s how Shirley got into this gig? yeah...she's an appointment....yes, she has run several successful elections since that time, but only after being appointed....should incumbency be the sole reason to keep someone in office? Her record is definitely not the reason as she is clearly out of touch with what the citizens of Wisconsin want as pointed out by the cases cited here: http://www.koschnickforjustice.com/cases.html
Yeah I know, the source above is her opponents site, but that doesn't change the cited cases facts...you could look them up yourself if you prefer.
Let's vote to change the status quo and get someone who understands their place in the 3 branches...understands that they are but one, not 2 and/or 3 of the branches....not just another elite judicial activist living in an ivory tower in Madison...keeping her simply because she is already there.
Yeah I know, the source above is her opponents site, but that doesn't change the cited cases facts...you could look them up yourself if you prefer.
Let's vote to change the status quo and get someone who understands their place in the 3 branches...understands that they are but one, not 2 and/or 3 of the branches....not just another elite judicial activist living in an ivory tower in Madison...keeping her simply because she is already there.
70 cases cited showing Abrahamson true activist colors are overwhelming
Check out the long long list of cases (otherwise known as facts for your judicial liberals) which affirm the true activist colors of Shirley Abrahamson....cited on Randy Koschnick's web site...just the facts maam...really Shirley...come on...."denial" it's not just a river in Egypt!
http://www.koschnickforjustice.com/cases.html
Abrahamson is an activist..."past performance is the best indication of future performance"
Wisconsin needs a Justice that will uphold the constitution as it was written by the people, period.
http://www.koschnickforjustice.com/cases.html
Abrahamson is an activist..."past performance is the best indication of future performance"
Wisconsin needs a Justice that will uphold the constitution as it was written by the people, period.
Friday, March 13, 2009
"The best conservative contender in years...." direct from The Isthmus, in the belly of the liberal beast - Madison WI
A recent article in the Isthmus talks about the strong advantages of Judge Koschnick over his opponent Abrahamson for the Wisconsin Supreme Court race.
"He's a far better candidate than any of the last three victorious conservatives. And, more to the point, he's a far better candidate than Shirley Abrahamson"
"Abrahamson, for her part, fervently rejects the suggestion that she approaches cases with any ideological predispositions: "I do what the facts and law require."
It's a good argument to make, but unconvincing. While a surprisingly large share of Supreme Court cases are decided unanimously, some do break down along obviously ideological lines. At least some of Abrahamson's supporters believe she'll apply the law in ways that favor injured people over corporations and the rights of the criminal defendants, some innocent, over the power of the state. That's why they support her. "
Again, a push for Shirley to agree to run a clean campaign failed:
"Here's the exact question Abrahamson declined to answer: "Will you denounce any outside group that makes untrue statements on your behalf or tries to sully your opponent?" Here's Koschnick, asked the same question: "Yes. I don't want to see her personally attacked. I don't want people lying about her. I would correct any misinformation."
Read the full article here:
http://www.isthmus.com/isthmus/article.php?article=25334
"He's a far better candidate than any of the last three victorious conservatives. And, more to the point, he's a far better candidate than Shirley Abrahamson"
"Abrahamson, for her part, fervently rejects the suggestion that she approaches cases with any ideological predispositions: "I do what the facts and law require."
It's a good argument to make, but unconvincing. While a surprisingly large share of Supreme Court cases are decided unanimously, some do break down along obviously ideological lines. At least some of Abrahamson's supporters believe she'll apply the law in ways that favor injured people over corporations and the rights of the criminal defendants, some innocent, over the power of the state. That's why they support her. "
Again, a push for Shirley to agree to run a clean campaign failed:
"Here's the exact question Abrahamson declined to answer: "Will you denounce any outside group that makes untrue statements on your behalf or tries to sully your opponent?" Here's Koschnick, asked the same question: "Yes. I don't want to see her personally attacked. I don't want people lying about her. I would correct any misinformation."
Read the full article here:
http://www.isthmus.com/isthmus/article.php?article=25334
Friday, March 6, 2009
Abrahamson "liberal ideolog" even Bill Clinton passed
No Hiding Shirley's philosophy after this nugget was uncovered!...do read on....
The Milwaukee Journal
June 15, 1993
Earlier choices hurt Abrahamson
PATRICK JASPERSE
Journal Washington bureau
Washington, D.C. President Clinton wanted a safe nominee for the US Supreme Court, and Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Shirley Abrahamson would have been too controversial, according to several sources familiar with Clinton's selection process.
The sources said Abrahamson was under serious consideration, but in the end was viewed as too liberal to be nominated by a weakened president who is trying to project a moderate image.
"The administration is a little gun-shy about any even slightly risky nominations right now," said a Senate aide who asked not to be identified. "I think they would like to have Shirley Abrahamson on the court, but I think the timing is bad because of the disasters they've had in the recent past with nominations."
During the first five months of his presidency, Clinton has had to withdraw his nomination of Zoe Baird to be attorney general and of Lani Guinier to head the Justice Department's civil rights division. Clinton on Monday nominated federal appeals Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to succeed the retiring Justice Byron White.
Abrahamson said in a telephone interview that she "was flattered to have been considered; it's good to be on almost anybody's list for almost anything."
She said she had worked with Ginsburg on several judicial committees. "I am impressed with her intellect," Abrahamson said. "The president has submitted a distinguished and very well-qualified nominee."
Nominating Abrahamson would have resulted in "judicial Armageddon," said Clint Bolick, vice president of the conservative Institute for Justice, who spearheaded the opposition to Guinier. "I think that the Guinier nomination demonstrated to Bill Clinton how much capital it would cost him if he nominated a liberal ideolog like Abrahamson."
A second Senate aide said, "Clinton wanted a moderate and Abrahamson is perceived to be more of a liberal."
The aide added: "Anybody who got as far as Justice Abrahamson did, which we think was down to the single digits {in remaining candidates}, certainly is in the ballpark the next time there's a vacancy, and we expect to have a vacancy in the next couple of years."
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) said Monday that he was pleased with the choice of Ginsburg. But he also said of Abrahamson, "As far as I'm concerned, she should be on the Supreme Court. If it isn't this time, it should be next time."
Feingold was backing Abrahamson along with Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) and Health and Human Services Secretary Donna E. Shalala, who knew Abrahamson from her days as chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Kohl, who as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee will take part in Ginsburg's nomination hearings, also praised Clinton's choice of Ginsburg.
Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
The Milwaukee Journal
June 15, 1993
Earlier choices hurt Abrahamson
PATRICK JASPERSE
Journal Washington bureau
Washington, D.C. President Clinton wanted a safe nominee for the US Supreme Court, and Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Shirley Abrahamson would have been too controversial, according to several sources familiar with Clinton's selection process.
The sources said Abrahamson was under serious consideration, but in the end was viewed as too liberal to be nominated by a weakened president who is trying to project a moderate image.
"The administration is a little gun-shy about any even slightly risky nominations right now," said a Senate aide who asked not to be identified. "I think they would like to have Shirley Abrahamson on the court, but I think the timing is bad because of the disasters they've had in the recent past with nominations."
During the first five months of his presidency, Clinton has had to withdraw his nomination of Zoe Baird to be attorney general and of Lani Guinier to head the Justice Department's civil rights division. Clinton on Monday nominated federal appeals Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to succeed the retiring Justice Byron White.
Abrahamson said in a telephone interview that she "was flattered to have been considered; it's good to be on almost anybody's list for almost anything."
She said she had worked with Ginsburg on several judicial committees. "I am impressed with her intellect," Abrahamson said. "The president has submitted a distinguished and very well-qualified nominee."
Nominating Abrahamson would have resulted in "judicial Armageddon," said Clint Bolick, vice president of the conservative Institute for Justice, who spearheaded the opposition to Guinier. "I think that the Guinier nomination demonstrated to Bill Clinton how much capital it would cost him if he nominated a liberal ideolog like Abrahamson."
A second Senate aide said, "Clinton wanted a moderate and Abrahamson is perceived to be more of a liberal."
The aide added: "Anybody who got as far as Justice Abrahamson did, which we think was down to the single digits {in remaining candidates}, certainly is in the ballpark the next time there's a vacancy, and we expect to have a vacancy in the next couple of years."
Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) said Monday that he was pleased with the choice of Ginsburg. But he also said of Abrahamson, "As far as I'm concerned, she should be on the Supreme Court. If it isn't this time, it should be next time."
Feingold was backing Abrahamson along with Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) and Health and Human Services Secretary Donna E. Shalala, who knew Abrahamson from her days as chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Kohl, who as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee will take part in Ginsburg's nomination hearings, also praised Clinton's choice of Ginsburg.
Copyright. All Rights Reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)