Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

M
Category: Politics – Wisconsin

Selling Samaritan

by | 0745, 18 Apr 23 | | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. I think the decision regarding Samaritan was a tough one, but they got it right.

In the end, the decision was really about whether or not the county, and the county taxpayers, want to be in the business of running a long-term care facility. At one time there were over 100 county-run long-term facilities in Wisconsin. Now there are only 35. The private sector fills this care needs of elderly folks throughout the state and can leverage economies of scale that a single county cannot match.

 

For Washington County to continue to run Samaritan, they would need to figure out how to make the math work. They could try something like building out a private care facility in the unused space to subsidize the deficits, but that would put the county government in direct competition with several private care facilities in the county. Or the County Board could just accept that Samaritan would run at a loss and the county taxpayers would have to cover the difference in perpetuity. At a cost ranging into the tens of millions of dollars, this would be an expensive obligation that draws funds from other county obligations.

 

By voting to sell Samaritan, the County Board is seeking to protect county taxpayers from significant financial obligations while allowing a private company to bring significant resources to bear on behalf of the residents. All things considered, the County Board made the best choice.

County to Sell Samaritan Campus

by | 1100, 15 Apr 23 | | 1 Comment

Tough choice.

WASHINGTON COUNTY — The Washington County Board of Supervisors voted 13-8 to authorize Washington County to sell Samaritan Campus during their meeting in the Herbert J. Tennies Government Center on Wednesday night.

 

[…]

 

According to the Ad Hoc committee’s recommendation, their first choice was to renovate Samaritan, the second choice was to replace Samaritan with a new facility, the third choice was to sell Samaritan and the fourth ranked choice was to close (closing was not an option put before the board on Wednesday night).

 

Carroll presented updated cash flow, income and nursing bed demand projections with the board after Roback’s presentation.

 

According to Carroll, the cash flow projections from Wipfli showed Samaritan Campus operating with a positive cash flow balance at a projected average of about $670,000 per year over five years.

 

The bedding analysis showed that with Samaritan Campus operating at 48 skilled nursing facility (SNF) beds, which it would if renovation by the county had been approved, the county would be under-bedded, when combining all SNFs in the county, in 5 to 10 years due to increases in the 74-85-year-old population (a 9.9% increase) and 85 and up population (a 31.6% increase) in the county over that time, showing an increase in demand for nursing beds is coming. At the current SNF bed number for Samaritan, which is 131, the county would be over-bedded by about 50 beds in 5 to 10 years, according to Wipfli.

 

Whoever purchases the bed licenses for Samaritan from Washington County will have the option to continue to purchase all 131 licensed beds.

 

[…]

 

“The reason [I am voting in favor of selling Samaritan] is because I do believe it will take care of everyone [at Samaritan,]” said Kelling. “You are our obligation, we are here for you and we will take care of you. I don’t like when people have been using scare tactics against you saying that you will end up in the street. Legally that is not possible, and morally I would not stand for it.”

I wrote a few months ago about how intolerable it is that this decision has been put off for so long. We’ve known about the issues at Samaritan for years and the County Board has been kicking the can down the road. I’m glad that they have made a decision.

For the decision itself, I think it is the right one. Taxpayers can continue to fund the residents’ care without having to own and operate the means of providing that care. While renovating the campus would have been a fix for the next few years, the taxpayers would still own a facility that will need ongoing maintenance and care down the road. I’d much prefer that taxpayers’ dollars be focused on resident care instead of maintaining facilities.

I do think that the supervisors approached the issue with compassion. There were no easy or perfect choices, but they had to do something. Some direction is better than no direction.

Now they just have to find a buyer…

Democrat machine is a well-tuned juggernaut

by | 1016, 15 Apr 23 | | 2 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

There’s no need to sugarcoat it. The Supreme Court election result last week will have terrible consequences that are generational in scale. It has been 15 years since the Wisconsin Supreme Court had a leftist majority, and the leftists of today are far, far more radical than those of the past. We knew that this election was important, which is why it became the most expensive judicial campaign ever waged in the history of our nation. While the consequences will surely be the subject of future columns, we should first understand the past.

 

Although Supreme Court races are officially nonpartisan, they are really completely partisan. The increasing polarization of the two major parties has made the battleground for judicial races a bloody mess of ideological carnage instead of the staid legal philosophical debates of the past. Furthermore, the more leftist forces in our nation have put a concerted effort into electing radicals in judicial and prosecutor races in the last few years as a means to advance their ideology through the judicial branch when they fail in the legislative branch. Against this backdrop, Wisconsin’s Democrats were vocal and unapologetic about supporting Janet Protasiewicz. On the other side, the state Republicans were vocal and unapologetic about supporting Daniel Kelly. There was the faintest whisper to acknowledge the official nonpartisan nature of the race, but it was drowned out by the shouts of partisanship. As campaigners, Protasiewicz ran a campaign appealing to the political issues that strike an emotional chord with leftist voters. She continually implied, and sometimes outright stated, that she would be the deciding vote on issues like abortion, Act 10, political redistricting, and the like. Lost was any indication that she would respect the separation of powers and the role of the court. That was purposeful and it worked. Emotional political issues drive enthusiasm and turnout far more than a dry discussion of constitutional niceties. I wish that it were not so, but it is.

 

Daniel Kelly, on the other hand, ran a campaign that would have worked in the previous decade. It focused on a dry discussion of constitutional niceties and the appropriate role of a justice of the Supreme Court. While correct, it left his supporters in a rear-guard action trying to generate excitement with cries of what will be lost with an activist leftist court.

 

Beyond the candidates and their individual campaign strategies, the respective political parties waged entirely different battles. Truly, hats off to Ben Wikler, the chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. He is an organizational, messaging, and fundraising powerhouse. He has a knack for nationalizing state races to attract national money and for maintaining intramural discipline during primaries.

 

The Democrats also have an electoral structural advantage in that their voters are more concentrated. This makes it easier to concentrate resources to drive turnout. For example, the turnout in Dane County in recent years — a county whose voters vote 80% or more for leftists — has been phenomenal. Only 36% of Protasiewicz’s vote total came from Dane and Milwaukee Counties. By contrast, the top two counties for Kelly were just 19.3% of his vote total.

 

The Democrats have also been tremendous at turning out their key voting groups like college students. For example, the dorms at the University of Wisconsin- La Crosse are in two wards. Turnout was over 54% in those wards last week compared to less than 20% in the previous spring election.

 

The Democrats have also taken full advantage of campaign finance and election laws. They funneled over $10 million to Protasiewicz’s campaign through the Democratic Party while Kelly eschewed any Republican Party money. The Democrats push hard for mail-in voting, early voting, ballot harvesting, and any other means to get people to vote who otherwise would not. Meanwhile, Republicans bicker over the appropriateness of these means and continue to lose elections.

 

Anecdotally, I also saw a marked difference in how each side was reaching out to voters. I received at least five texts from leftists for every one from righties urging me to vote or pushing an issue. Online, the ads were 10 to one in favor of leftists. Meanwhile, I received several mailers from righty groups and none from leftists. Democrats are putting their resources into reaching voters where they are while Republicans are spending their money and time on the campaign tactics of 2004.

 

Republicans have lost 14 of the last 17 statewide elections. On the issues, Wisconsin remains very evenly divided as evidenced by statewide referendum results, national election results, and general polling. But Republicans are getting blown out in statewide elections because of antiquated campaign strategies, bad candidates, intraparty squabbling, and terrible leadership. Wisconsin will continue to trend toward Illinois until the Republicans figure out how to match the Democrats’ campaigning prowess.

Democrat machine is a well-tuned juggernaut

by | 0716, 11 Apr 23 | | 21 Comments

I suppose that I’ll pile on in the aftermath of the election last week. My column in the Washington County Daily News not only highlights some of the Righties’ failures, but also the phenomenal machine that the Democrats have built. Republicans are still fighting the last war as the Democrats are winning this one. Here’s a part:

Beyond the candidates and their individual campaign strategies, the respective political parties waged entirely different battles. Truly, hats off to Ben Wikler, the chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin. He is an organizational, messaging, and fundraising powerhouse. He has a knack for nationalizing state races to attract national money and for maintaining intramural discipline during primaries.

 

The Democrats also have an electoral structural advantage in that their voters are more concentrated. This makes it easier to concentrate resources to drive turnout. For example, the turnout in Dane County in recent years — a county whose voters vote 80% or more for leftists — has been phenomenal. Only 36% of Protasiewicz’s vote total came from Dane and Milwaukee Counties. By contrast, the top two counties for Kelly were just 19.3% of his vote total.

 

The Democrats have also been tremendous at turning out their key voting groups like college students. For example, the dorms at the University of Wisconsin- La Crosse are in two wards. Turnout was over 54% in those wards last week compared to less than 20% in the previous spring election.

 

The Democrats have also taken full advantage of campaign finance and election laws. They funneled over $10 million to Protasiewicz’s campaign through the Democratic Party while Kelly eschewed any Republican Party money. The Democrats push hard for mail-in voting, early voting, ballot harvesting, and any other means to get people to vote who otherwise would not. Meanwhile, Republicans bicker over the appropriateness of these means and continue to lose elections.

Anecdotally, I also saw a marked difference in how each side was reaching out to voters. I received at least five texts from leftists for every one from righties urging me to vote or pushing an issue. Online, the ads were 10 to one in favor of leftists. Meanwhile, I received several mailers from righty groups and none from leftists. Democrats are putting their resources into reaching voters where they are while Republicans are spending their money and time on the campaign tactics of 2004.

 

Allowing Teachers to Arm Themselves is the Way

by | 2026, 10 Apr 23 | | 1 Comment

It’ll never make it into law, but it is the correct policy.

Rep. Scott Allen of Waukesha and Sen. Cory Tomczyk of Mosinee on Monday released a bill that would create an exception to the state’s law banning firearms on school grounds if the person holds a concealed carry license, is employed by the school, and the school board has adopted a policy that allows employees who are licensees to possess a firearm.

 

The proposal also waives for teachers the fees associated with obtaining a concealed carry license.

 

“School shootings are tragedies we hate to see. The reality is that schools are often soft targets for those looking to do harm. The knowledge that no one on the premise has the firepower to stop them emboldens bad actors,” Allen and Tomczyk wrote in a co-sponsorship memo to colleagues seeking support.

Everything is on the table in Wisconsin Supreme Court election

by | 2138, 30 Mar 23 | , | 1 Comment

Here is my full column for the Washington County Daily News that ran earlier this week.

Early voting for the spring election is in full swing and the future of Wisconsin sits on the razor’s edge. If Daniel Kelly is elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the court will retain its slight lean to the left with changeling Justice Brian Hagedorn siding with the court’s liberal bloc more often than not on 4-3 rulings. If Janet Protasiewicz is elected, then expect the court’s new majority liberal activist bloc to abandon any pretense of government restraint and run roughshod over citizens’ rights.

 

It is regrettable that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has had to serve as the last bastion of defense against government overreach, but that has increasingly been its role as government officials progressively don the mantle of a ruling class. In just the last few years, the court has often (not often enough) stood athwart the path of government tyranny. During the pandemic, Gov. Tony Evers went to extraordinary lengths to exert government control over our lives. Even after it was clear that the virus was not nearly as lethal as originally thought and was primarily a threat to the elderly and immunocompromised, Evers sought to extend his personal arbitrary rule over our lives by suspending regular order with perpetual emergency health orders.

 

Under the threat of using the violent power of government, Evers illegally extended his emergency dictatorial orders to force citizens to stay in their homes, close their businesses, restrain their freedom of movement, force everyone to wear masks, and close their schools. In a ruling that should have been unanimous, only four of the court’s seven justices ruled that Evers had violated the law and returned the state to constitutional rule and the rule of law. How much more damage would Evers’ have illegally wrought had the court not stepped in?

 

With all of the other overreaches, we scarcely remember that Governor Evers also tried to suspend Wisconsinites’ right to self-governance. Just three years ago, Evers ordered that Wisconsin indefinitely delay the April election, thus denying citizens the right to elect their leaders in a despotic abandonment of democracy. Again, the Wisconsin Supreme Court had to act to ensure that the election would be held and that democracy would not be suspended by the orders of a single man.

 

Governor Evers’ attempts to enact dictatorial rule to the cheers of elected Democrats is the most dramatic recent example of the Supreme Court protecting citizens from government overreach, but there are dozens of other examples.

 

For decades, Wisconsinites have trembled at the regulatory despotism of the Department of Natural Resources.

 

Whether hunting, fishing, farming, or simply trying to enjoy a lake cottage, the DNR has long stretched its statutory mandates into private lives and properties. The Supreme Court has stepped in a number of times to check the DNR’s overreaches.

 

Last decade, the DNR tried to extend its public-trust jurisdiction to include non-navigable waters and land and to use “scenic beauty” as a benchmark for regulation. This overreach would have the DNR exercising authority over virtually all private property and able to base regulations on the agency’s aesthetic preferences. In 2013, the court ruled that the DNR did not have this authority.

 

Similarly, the DNR attempted to use its regulatory power to unilaterally change pier permits even after a pier had been installed. This had the impact of forcing homeowners to spend thousands of dollars to comply with arbitrary and shifting regulations. In 2019, the court ruled that the DNR was overreaching again and is not allowed to issue ex-post-facto regulations.

 

Wisconsin’s leftists have be unrestrained in their glee for using the court to unbind the overreaching claws of government by electing Protasiewicz to the high court.

 

Everything is on the table. Unrestrained tax increases by invalidating Act 10. Making it easier to cheat in elections by striking down voter ID. Disarming citizens by ignoring Second Amendment rights. Unleashing regulatory agencies like the DNR or Department of Transportation by allowing them to interpret their own authority. Liberating criminals at the expense of victims. Democratic gerrymandering on the scale of Illinois. Crushing business with regulations in the name of equity. Forced unionization by striking down right to work. Unrestrained indoctrination and abuse of parental rights through our government schools.

 

It is all on the table.

 

The question to be decided next week is whether Wisconsin will try to continue on the messy road of representative government and constitutional restraint, or whether it will take the road of arbitrary rule of unrestrained government by judicial decree.

 

Vote for Daniel Kelly. Vote for the continuation of this grand experiment in self-governance.

 

Everything is on the table in Wisconsin Supreme Court election

by | 0652, 28 Mar 23 | | 6 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

 

Early voting for the spring election is in full swing and the future of Wisconsin sits on the razor’s edge. If Daniel Kelly is elected to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the court will retain its slight lean to the left with changeling Justice Brian Hagedorn siding with the court’s liberal bloc more often than not on 4-3 rulings. If Janet Protasiewicz is elected, then expect the court’s new majority liberal activist bloc to abandon any pretense of government restraint and run roughshod over citizens’ rights.

 

It is regrettable that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has had to serve as the last bastion of defense against government overreach, but that has increasingly been its role as government officials progressively don the mantle of a ruling class. In just the last few years, the court has often (not often enough) stood athwart the path of government tyranny. During the pandemic, Gov. Tony Evers went to extraordinary lengths to exert government control over our lives. Even after it was clear that the virus was not nearly as lethal as originally thought and was primarily a threat to the elderly and immunocompromised, Evers sought to extend his personal arbitrary rule over our lives by suspending regular order with perpetual emergency health orders.

 

Under the threat of using the violent power of government, Evers illegally extended his emergency dictatorial orders to force citizens to stay in their homes, close their businesses, restrain their freedom of movement, force everyone to wear masks, and close their schools. In a ruling that should have been unanimous, only four of the court’s seven justices ruled that Evers had violated the law and returned the state to constitutional rule and the rule of law. How much more damage would Evers’ have illegally wrought had the court not stepped in?

 

With all of the other overreaches, we scarcely remember that Governor Evers also tried to suspend Wisconsinites’ right to self-governance. Just three years ago, Evers ordered that Wisconsin indefinitely delay the April election, thus denying citizens the right to elect their leaders in a despotic abandonment of democracy. Again, the Wisconsin Supreme Court had to act to ensure that the election would be held and that democ racy would not be suspended by the orders of a single man.

 

Governor Evers’ attempts to enact dictatorial rule to the cheers of elected Democrats is the most dramatic recent example of the Supreme Court protecting citizens from government overreach, but there are dozens of other examples.

An activist court is a dangerous court

by | 1043, 25 Mar 23 | , , , | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News last week:

The election on April 4 presents an unambiguous choice for voters about the future of Wisconsin. Daniel Kelly would keep the Wisconsin Supreme Court on its constitutionally humble and conservative path. Janet Protasiewicz has already trumpeted the kind of activism she would wage to turn the high court into a political weapon for leftist causes. As we have seen in other states, leftists do not have any qualms about muscling political victories through the courts when their ideas fail to win public support at the ballot box.

 

In recent weeks we have learned that Protasiewicz is not just the ardent activist who protested against Act 10 and giddily shares how she will tip the scales of justice when her “values” demand it. Not only have we learned that her long judicial record is one of callous disregard for victims of violent crime as she coddled felons. We also learned from Wisconsin Right Now’s reporting that she allegedly abused her first husband, who was over thirty years older than she, and that two witnesses have come forward who heard her regularly use racial slurs when she was a Milwaukee prosecutor.

 

The optimist in me hopes that some of Wisconsin’s leftists would feel the twang of guilt about voting for someone with such deep character flaws, but the realist in me understands that they are more interested in outcomes even if the vessel that delivers them is cracked. They will vote for Protasiewicz in droves. The rest of this column, therefore, is directed at conservatives who need to understand the gravity of the election and get off their duffs to vote.

 

The thing about judicial activists is that nothing is safe. Policies that were correctly adjudicated long ago by the court and considered settled will be resurfaced by activists to get a different outcome. Protasiewicz has already said that she considers Act 10 to be unconstitutional and Wisconsin’s electoral maps rigged, so expect those to be overturned by a Protasiewicz-led court. That will just be the start of an avalanche of legal activism to roll back important policies.

 

During Gov. Scott Walker’s administration, Wisconsin made giant strides to being Wisconsin closer to the Founders’ guarantees in the Second Amendment. The Legislature passed Wisconsin’s first concealed carry law to allow law-abiding citizens to exercise their Second Amendment protection to “keep and bear arms.” The Legislature further protected citizens by enacting the castle doctrine, a simple, but important, law that presumes that someone is under imminent threat if a thug forcibly enters their home, vehicle, or business.

 

As is their compulsion, leftists sued to overturn both concealed carry and castle doctrine policies when they lost the policy debate at the ballot box. Both policies were upheld by the courts. According to the Wisconsin Department of Justice, over 700,000 Wisconsinites have been issued concealed carry permits since 2011. If Protasiewicz is elected, we can expect those hundreds of thousands of licenses to be canceled. And no, it does not matter what the law or Constitution actually says. Judicial activists care not for the constraints of law. That is the point.

 

One thing that the pandemic reminded us is that in times of trouble, our government schools will choose institutional interests over the welfare of children every time. Given the decades of declining performance, increasing violence, and curricular malfeasance, this bureaucratic colonialism should have been obvious, but their collective response to the pandemic has crystalized their priorities.

 

Wisconsin’s school choice programs have been offering children an alternative path to getting a quality education and a successful future. When Gov. Tommy Thompson pioneered school choice in Milwaukee, the leftist institutional interests fought back in court. After a heated legal battle, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutionally permissible for religious schools to participate in the Milwaukee School Choice program. The U.S. Supreme Court later declined to hear a challenge to the law, thus ending the legal challenge. The vote on the Wisconsin Supreme Court was decided by a single vote. Had one justice ruled the other way, generations of Wisconsin’s children would still be trapped in failing schools and doomed to navigating life without a quality education.

 

Since that Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in 1998, the Legislature has steadily expanded Wisconsin’s school choice programs to benefit hundreds of thousands of children throughout the state. Should Protasiewicz be elected, expect those monied interests who want to build barbed-wire fences to keep our children in their failed institutions to relaunch their legal challenges to school choice knowing that a Protasiewicz-led court will rule in their favor. Janet Protasiewicz is telling anyone who will listen how she will vote on issues brought before the court and how she considers it her duty to put her finger on the scales of justice when the law says otherwise. Listen to her. In this, she is telling the truth.

LTE: Vote Dan Kelly and Russ Jones

by | 1732, 21 Mar 23 | , | 1 Comment

From the inbox.

The April 4th election is our chance to put two excellent jurists on the judicial bench upholding our U.S. and Wisconsin Constitutions, applying the law as written, and protecting our rights and freedoms.

 

Dan Kelly is a man of honor and integrity. He served with distinction on the Wisconsin Supreme Court 2016-2020. He made the difference in helping end the illegal lockdowns of us during the CCP Virus “pandemic” by ruling that the executive branch could not keep renewing its 60-day “emergency measures.” Remember those horrible months? Businesses closed (many never reopened), schools and churches were shut, people were forced to wear do-no-good masks, etc. Dan Kelly fought for us and our freedoms. He did not go along with Big Government’s tyrannical suppression of our precious rights and freedoms.

 

By contrast, his opponent vows judicial activism (i.e., inserting her own political values in place of actual law). Putting her thumb on the scale of justice is wrong, dangerous, and can be deadly.

 

Like Justice Kelly, Russ Jones is a constitutional conservative – he honors and follows the law as written. Unlike his compromised opponent, Russ did not sign the Walker recall and was not appointed by Evers. Attorney Jones is an award-winning litigator, with over 250 jury trials during 20 years of service. He has the highest standards of personal conduct and will apply the law fairly and impartially. His honesty and dedication to the rule of law will make him an outstanding circuit court judge.

 

Dan Kelly has earned my total support for election to our Wisconsin Supreme Court. Russ Jones is the best choice for Washington County Circuit Court Judge. Please join me in proudly voting for Dan Kelly and Russ Jones on April 4th. Ask all your adult family members, friends, neighbors, and colleagues to do so, too.

 

Sincerely signed,

 

Bart Williams

An activist court is a dangerous court

by | 0729, 21 Mar 23 | , , , | 7 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a part:

The election on April 4 presents an unambiguous choice for voters about the future of Wisconsin. Daniel Kelly would keep the Wisconsin Supreme Court on its constitutionally humble and conservative path. Janet Protasiewicz has already trumpeted the kind of activism she would wage to turn the high court into a political weapon for leftist causes. As we have seen in other states, leftists do not have any qualms about muscling political victories through the courts when their ideas fail to win public support at the ballot box.

 

In recent weeks we have learned that Protasiewicz is not just the ardent activist who protested against Act 10 and giddily shares how she will tip the scales of justice when her “values” demand it. Not only have we learned that her long judicial record is one of callous disregard for victims of violent crime as she coddled felons. We also learned from Wisconsin Right Now’s reporting that she allegedly abused her first husband, who was over thirty years older than she, and that two witnesses have come forward who heard her regularly use racial slurs when she was a Milwaukee prosecutor.

 

The optimist in me hopes that some of Wisconsin’s leftists would feel the twang of guilt about voting for someone with such deep character flaws, but the realist in me understands that they are more interested in outcomes even if the vessel that delivers them is cracked. They will vote for Protasiewicz in droves. The rest of this column, therefore, is directed at conservatives who need to understand the gravity of the election and get off their duffs to vote.

 

The thing about judicial activists is that nothing is safe. Policies that were correctly adjudicated long ago by the court and considered settled will be resurfaced by activists to get a different outcome. Protasiewicz has already said that she considers Act 10 to be unconstitutional and Wisconsin’s electoral maps rigged, so expect those to be overturned by a Protasiewicz-led court. That will just be the start of an avalanche of legal activism to roll back important policies.

 

[…]

 

One thing that the pandemic reminded us is that in times of trouble, our government schools will choose institutional interests over the welfare of children every time. Given the decades of declining performance, increasing violence, and curricular malfeasance, this bureaucratic colonialism should have been obvious, but their collective response to the pandemic has crystalized their priorities.

 

Wisconsin’s school choice programs have been offering children an alternative path to getting a quality education and a successful future. When Gov. Tommy Thompson pioneered school choice in Milwaukee, the leftist institutional interests fought back in court. After a heated legal battle, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutionally permissible for religious schools to participate in the Milwaukee School Choice program. The U.S. Supreme Court later declined to hear a challenge to the law, thus ending the legal challenge. The vote on the Wisconsin Supreme Court was decided by a single vote. Had one justice ruled the other way, generations of Wisconsin’s children would still be trapped in failing schools and doomed to navigating life without a quality education.

 

Since that Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling in 1998, the Legislature has steadily expanded Wisconsin’s school choice programs to benefit hundreds of thousands of children throughout the state. Should Protasiewicz be elected, expect those monied interests who want to build barbed-wire fences to keep our children in their failed institutions to relaunch their legal challenges to school choice knowing that a Protasiewicz-led court will rule in their favor. Janet Protasiewicz is telling anyone who will listen how she will vote on issues brought before the court and how she considers it her duty to put her finger on the scales of justice when the law says otherwise. Listen to her. In this, she is telling the truth.

Protasiewicz Remains Silent on Multiple Allegations of Using Racial Slurs

by | 2112, 19 Mar 23 | , | 6 Comments

From Wisconsin Right Now. It seems that Wisconsin’s Democrats are returning to their roots when their party championed the use of the “N” word. Spare me your lectures on bigotry… your silence says everything.

Two people who knew Janet Protasiewicz – her former stepson AND a long-time self-described liberal family friend of her ex-husband – told Wisconsin Right Now in recorded interviews that they heard Protasiewicz use racial slurs when she was a prosecutor in Children’s Court. Both men, Jonathan Ehr and Michael Madden, told Wisconsin Right Now that they personally heard Protasiewicz use the “N word” to refer to blacks.

 

Madden, Protasiewicz’s then stepson, said in a videotaped interview that she used the “N word” to refer to blacks who were involved in court cases while she served as a prosecutor in Milwaukee County Children’s Court, including the parents of black children and blacks accused of crimes.

 

We asked Protasiewicz’s campaign for comment at 10 p.m. on March 15. She has not responded. She has not denied using racial slurs despite being given an opportunity to do so.

In Brazen Political Move, Evers Denies Voters’ Vote

by | 1103, 18 Mar 23 | | 2 Comments

In a practical sense, it makes little difference. La Follette is a lefty who abused the office on behalf of his ideology and Godlewski will do the same. His legacy is that he spent his entire life trading off of a reputation that someone else earned for his name… and squandered it.

But the brazen political maneuvering here to give Godlewski a cushy state job for the next four years when the voters just rejected her is gross. The state Democratic machine is positioning her with a statewide office that she can use to build her profile for future office. It’s transparent. It’s unethical. And it’ll probably work.

MADISON – Doug La Follette, Wisconsin’s Secretary of State and the longest serving statewide elected official in the nation, is retiring after holding the office for nearly five decades.

 

La Follette, 82, is leaving the post he has held onto through election cycles swept by Republicans and survived aggressive primary challenges by members of his own party. His departure comes two months into a new term he narrowly secured in November.

 

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers announced Friday he has appointed former state treasurer and unsuccessful U.S. Senate candidate Sarah Godlewski to replace La Follette and serve the remainder of his term.

Protasiewicz’s Prolific Use of the “N” Word and Other Racial Slurs

by | 2055, 16 Mar 23 | | 5 Comments

I mean… seriously. Isn’t the rest of the media a bit embarrassed yet that Wisconsin Right Now is breaking all of these stories? Don’t they have any professional pride?

Two people who knew Janet Protasiewicz – her former stepson AND a long-time self-described liberal family friend of her ex-husband – told Wisconsin Right Now in recorded interviews that they heard Protasiewicz use racial slurs when she was a prosecutor in Children’s Court. Both men, Jonathan Ehr and Michael Madden, told Wisconsin Right Now that they personally heard Protasiewicz use the “N word” to refer to blacks.

 

Madden, Protasiewicz’s then stepson, said in a videotaped interview that she used the “N word” to refer to blacks who were involved in court cases while she served as a prosecutor in Milwaukee County Children’s Court, including the parents of black children and blacks accused of crimes.

 

[…]

 

In a separate audio recorded interview without Michael Madden present, Ehr, a former Milwaukee restaurant/bar owner and self-described “liberal,” told Wisconsin Right Now that Protasiewicz used the “N word’ in front of him to refer to blacks and also used a racial slur to refer to Hispanics.

 

“I think it was the “N word” and then I thought she said, I could have sworn she said, beaner, or something, beaner,” he said.

Protasiewicz’s record speaks

by | 0739, 16 Mar 23 | | 3 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

The April election is looming and the battle for the balance of the Wisconsin Supreme Court is fully engaged. Fortunately, the voters are being offered a stark choice. Dan Kelly has a long and strong record of judicial restraint and conservatism. Janet Protasiewicz has an equally long and strong record of judicial activism and liberalism. Whichever candidate wins will determine the ideological color of the court for years to come.

 

A funny thing happens when liberals run for court positions. Irrespective of their past statements, actions, or documented history, every liberal suddenly transforms into a virtuous law and order hardliner. One is always best served by looking at a person’s actions instead of their words. Protasiewicz has been a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge for almost a decade. Her record is extensive, and terrible.

 

In 2015 a Milwaukee man was convicted of two Class I felonies for Child Abuse-Recklessly Cause Harm. He was fond of flogging his three children with a dog leash for various transgressions. Class I felonies carry a maximum penalty of 3.5 years and a fine of $10,000 according to Wisconsin statute 939.50(3)(i) meaning that he could have been sentenced to seven years in prison and $20,000 in fines.

 

As reported by Wisconsin Right Now, Judge Protasiewicz stayed any prison time for him, meaning that he would not serve a day in prison if he resisted committing another crime. She sentenced him to nine months, yes months, of work-release jail and probation. Whipping kids does not rise to the level of giving someone prison time in Protasiewicz’s court.

 

In 2016 another Milwaukee man was charged with three felony charges for the brutal assault of his girlfriend. According to the criminal complaint, the man became angry after looking at her phone and proceeded to choke, punch, and kick her repeatedly resulting in severe bruising, lacerations, and lost teeth. Judge Protasiewicz signed off on a lax plea deal from an equally soft-on-crime Milwaukee prosecutor that threw out all of the felony charges. Once again, Protasiewicz stayed any prison time and sentenced him to six months in jail and probation.

 

Tragically, this same violent predator allegedly went on to murder the niece of the Milwaukee Common Council President before killing himself at the end of a careening police chase through the streets of Milwaukee. Had he been sentenced to prison for the original three felonies, he would not have been able to murder another woman.

 

In May of 2020, a 15-year-old girl was walking in Milwaukee when a man in a pickup truck pulled up beside her, grabbed her by the wrist, and forced her into the truck. He took her to a hotel, raped her, and tried to force her to become a prostitute. Thankfully, she escaped and notified police.

 

Originally charged with three felonies for kidnapping, trafficking of a child, and second-degree sexual assault of a child, Protasiewicz signed off on another plea deal that reduced the charges to third-degree sexual assault and child enticement. He was convicted and Protasiewicz then gave him time served for jail time and stayed all of the prison time. He was put on probation for four years. In other words, despite his long criminal history and kidnapping and rape of a child, he did not serve any prison time thanks to Judge Protasiewicz.

 

This monster has since been convicted of a felony for being a felon in possession of a firearm in Washington County. He is still free on the street thanks to a Washington County judge cut from the same cloth as Protasiewicz. For a multiple felon child rapist, Washington County Judge Sandra Giernoth, an appointee of Governor Tony Evers, sentenced him to six months in jail and then gave him time served. The guy is happily living in Milwaukee — free as a bird.

 

In another case, a Milwaukee woman was charged with felony child neglect after she starved her 16-yearold child to the point that he only weighed 42 pounds. The child died due to his mother’s abuse. The woman was convicted of the felony charge. At sentencing, Judge Protasiewicz once again stayed any prison or jail time and gave the felon time served. Despite starving her child to death in 2020, the woman is living free in 2023 thanks to Judge Protasiewicz.

 

When people talk about soft-on-crime liberal judges, Janet Protasiewicz is a prime example. She has been letting violent felons roam free for years because that is who she is. And that is who she will be if Wisconsinites elect her to the Supreme Court.

Janet “Punchout” Protasiewicz Accused of Elder Abuse

by | 0730, 16 Mar 23 | | 0 Comments

Wow. I admit that when I first heard about this story that I thought it was just campaign FUD put out by activists. Thankfully, Wisconsin Right Now posted the videos so that we could see the accuser in his own words. He is incredibly credible.

Short version: When Protasiewicz was in her 30s, she married a man in his 70s, allegedly verbally and physically abused him, and then he divorced her less than a year later. She sought a hefty payout in the divorce settlement.

Is she so soft on violent criminals because she sees herself in them? Is she so willing to let violent criminals off the hook as some sort of warped atonement for her own past behavior? Who is this person?

Go read the whole story. Watch the videos. Use your brain. Judge for yourself.

The former stepson of Wisconsin Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz alleges that Protasiewicz repeatedly assaulted her then-husband – his elderly father Patrick J. Madden – by allegedly slapping Madden with an open hand so hard that she left part of a handprint on his face and aggressively pushing the 70-year-old veteran judge so forcefully that he injured his shoulder and almost fell.

[…]

“I saw it with my own two eyes,” he said.

“It was physical abuse brought on and fueled by alcoholism,” Michael alleged. He said he would “absolutely” characterize the abuse as assaults by Protasiewicz. “I would say it was elder abuse.” He says he would be willing to testify under oath and challenged Protasiewicz to sit with him at a kitchen table with journalists and discuss

[…]

“She was belligerent and pushed him and slapped him dozens of times, dozens of times,” Michael Madden said in an interview this week. “It happened on a fairly regular basis. At night, the whole thing would kind of break down. He was, again, 70 years old.”

“The pushing was close to knocking him over.”

Michael was 35 then, only a year older than Protasiewicz when she married Patrick Madden in 1997. Patrick Madden was 70 when he married Protasiewicz, who was less than half his age.

Wrong Benchmarks

by | 0715, 15 Mar 23 | | 1 Comment

I think that the Republican Chair is using the wrong benchmarks.

“We’ve raised more money in this year alone than we did in all of 2021, and almost all of 2022,” Schimming said. “The fundraising is going really well. And the grassroots support has been terrific.”

 

Kelly is behind in the money race, almost two-to-one.

 

[…]

 

The Democratic Party of Wisconsin already gave Protasiewicz $2.5 million for her campaign, and Wickler said there will be more if necessary.

 

Schimming was quick to say more than 90% of Protasiewicz’s money is from out of state, but added Kelly has been busy raising cash in Wisconsin.

Nobody cares if the Republican side has raised more money than 2021 or 2022. Nobody cares if more of the money is from Wisconsin than the Democrats. The only thing that matters is whether or not Kelly has enough money to get his message out as well as Protasiewicz. It doesn’t necessarily have to be the same, or even more, but it does need to be enough.

Also, I saw some stats from a friend who runs a web presence. The liberals are vastly outspending the conservatives in digital media and engagement. The campaign won’t be won on the television or radio. It will be won on the computer screens and neighborhoods. I don’t know what the ground game looks like, but a dollar spent for a good organizer in a Wisconsin town is far more important than another commercial.

All that being said, Wisconsin and national conservatives need to get off their asses if they want to keep all of the conservative progress we made in the last decade.

Protasiewicz’s record speaks

by | 0711, 14 Mar 23 | , | 0 Comments

My column for the Washington County Daily News is online and in print. Here’s a slice:

A funny thing happens when liberals run for court positions. Irrespective of their past statements, actions, or documented history, every liberal suddenly transforms into a virtuous law and order hardliner. One is always best served by looking at a person’s actions instead of their words. Protasiewicz has been a Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge for almost a decade. Her record is extensive, and terrible.

 

[…]

 

In May of 2020, a 15-year-old girl was walking in Milwaukee when a man in a pickup truck pulled up beside her, grabbed her by the wrist, and forced her into the truck. He took her to a hotel, raped her, and tried to force her to become a prostitute. Thankfully, she escaped and notified police.

 

Originally charged with three felonies for kidnapping, trafficking of a child, and second-degree sexual assault of a child, Protasiewicz signed off on another plea deal that reduced the charges to third-degree sexual assault and child enticement. He was convicted and Protasiewicz then gave him time served for jail time and stayed all of the prison time. He was put on probation for four years. In other words, despite his long criminal history and kidnapping and rape of a child, he did not serve any prison time thanks to Judge Protasiewicz.

 

This monster has since been convicted of a felony for being a felon in possession of a firearm in Washington County. He is still free on the street thanks to a Washington County judge cut from the same cloth as Protasiewicz. For a multiple felon child rapist, Washington County Judge Sandra Giernoth, an appointee of Governor Tony Evers, sentenced him to six months in jail and then gave him time served. The guy is happily living in Milwaukee — free as a bird.

 

[…]

 

When people talk about soft-on-crime liberal judges, Janet Protasiewicz is a prime example. She has been letting violent felons roam free for years because that is who she is. And that is who she will be if Wisconsinites elect her to the Supreme Court.

Homeowners blockaded in Vilas County

by | 0852, 11 Mar 23 | | 0 Comments

Here is my full column that ran in the Washington County Daily News earlier this week.

After years of wrangling through a convoluted mess of contracts, bad record keeping, broken promises, state, local, federal, and tribal laws, the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa has decided to blockade dozens of non-tribal families in the dead of winter. In a dramatic escalation, tribal officials are demanding $20 million in order to lift the blockade.

 

The root of the issue rests in the 19th-century Dawes Act when the federal government broke communal tribal lands into parcels to be allotted to tribal families as private property in exchange for U.S. citizenship. Some of those private parcels wound up in the hands of non-tribal people through sale, foreclosure, and other means by which private property changes hands. Now, more than a century later, those private parcels are owned by non-tribal families who are being blockaded.

 

The conflict is over the roads that traverse tribal land to reach those private parcels. The easement by which the homeowners were granted permission to use the roads expired about ten years ago and a protracted negotiation began. The relevant parties are the Lac du Flambeau tribe, two title companies, the Wisconsin Town of Lac du Flambeau, the U.S. government, and the state of Wisconsin.

 

At the risk of simplifying a very complex legal issue that is imbued with generations of justified distrust and unethical behavior, the disagreement really is straightforward. When the easements expired, the tribe wanted money to grant new easements. The tribe also wants temporary easements to give them the latitude to renegotiate the payments every time they expire. On the other side, the title companies and town wants permanent easements, and they want to pay less money than the tribe wants. Both sides appear to have had their moments of bad behavior and have been unable to resolve the impasse.

 

Complicating the issue is the fact that the roads in question have been largely built with money from federal taxpayers. According to congressman Tom Tiffany, who represents the area, the tribe has received about $213 million in federal funding since 2013 through the Tribal Transportation Program. Since the roads received federal funding, the general public is supposed to have access, but tribal authorities argue that tribal law supersedes such federal requirements.

 

On January 31, in a grotesque escalation, the tribe blockaded the four artery roads with concrete blocks and wire. About 60 homes are sealed off from the outside world except for emergencies. Even then, tribal authorities must be called to open to roadblocks ahead of time. Some residents have been forced to abandon their homes entirely while others are having to use snowmobiles and sleds to cross the frozen lakes to get supplies, medical care, work, and attend school. With the spring thaw looming, they are weeks away from losing that frozen lifeline.

 

To lift the blockade, the tribe is demanding $20 million for a 15-year easement. This is an exorbitant sum for a simple easement, but the tribe seems content to hold non-tribal homeowners hostage in order to extort the sum. For comparison, the most recent offer that the tribe rejected was for about $1.1 million plus all future state gas tax revenues from the town for perpetual access.

 

The most innocent party in this whole dispute is the one suffering the most — the homeowners. They bought their properties in good faith and have been dutifully paying their taxes to maintain the schools, emergency services, and, yes, roads. Yet their property values have been obliterated, their lives are being disrupted, and their safety is being endangered.

 

The situation has reached a crisis point and real leadership will be needed to resolve it. It is unacceptable that one group of Americans should be blockading another group of Americans as a negotiating tactic in a legal dispute. This is not about sovereignty or some noble cause. It is about cold, hard, cash. If the tribe will not immediately lift the blockade and return to the negotiating table, the governor must step in to protect the homeowners from being used as hostages.

 

Time will tell what a fair resolution looks like, but any deal derived from the duress of innocent homeowners is illegitimate and an affront to justice.

The Conservative Protasiewicz?

by | 2104, 8 Mar 23 | , | 5 Comments

Well, this is curious. It feels like a false flag operation.

Michael Madden and Dr. Mark Madden, her former stepsons, of Fox Point and Virginia respectively, don’t buy the reincarnation. They believe it’s a ruse to get liberal voters to put Protasiewicz on the state Supreme Court.

 

“She told us that she was a conservative, and that she was pro-life, and that she was a Catholic,” Michael Madden, the son of Protasiewicz’s ex-husband, the now-deceased conservative Judge Patrick J. Madden, told Wisconsin Right Now in a two-hour interview. He lived with his father and Protasiewicz during their 9-month marriage in Fox Point. It dissolved in ugly recriminations in 1997.

 

“We would sit around these tables and she would mention these things,” Michael Madden said.

 

Michael Madden spoke at the Fox Point home where they all once lived before the brief and quickly disintegrating marriage ended in an extremely contentious divorce and annulment battle that we will reveal in part two.

 

Asked about her current views on abortion and other issues, Michael Madden warned voters, “She’s a chameleon who will do and say whatever is necessary to get what she wants. What she is being promised right now is this job on the Supreme Court if she will do the bidding of the machine.” In his view, because Janet Protasiewicz then is so different ideologically from Janet Protasiewicz of today, Madden believes it’s completely unclear how she would actually rule on the court.

Homeowners blockaded in Vilas County

by | 0743, 7 Mar 23 | , , | 2 Comments

We have a hostage situation going on in Vilas County. I wrote a little about it for the Washington County Daily News. Here’s a part:

After years of wrangling through a convoluted mess of contracts, bad record keeping, broken promises, state, local, federal, and tribal laws, the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa has decided to blockade dozens of non-tribal families in the dead of winter. In a dramatic escalation, tribal officials are demanding $20 million in order to lift the blockade.

 

The root of the issue rests in the 19th-century Dawes Act when the federal government broke communal tribal lands into parcels to be allotted to tribal families as private property in exchange for U.S. citizenship. Some of those private parcels wound up in the hands of non-tribal people through sale, foreclosure, and other means by which private property changes hands. Now, more than a century later, those private parcels are owned by non-tribal families who are being blockaded.

 

[…]

 

On January 31, in a grotesque escalation, the tribe blockaded the four artery roads with concrete blocks and wire. About 60 homes are sealed off from the outside world except for emergencies. Even then, tribal authorities must be called to open to roadblocks ahead of time. Some residents have been forced to abandon their homes entirely while others are having to use snowmobiles and sleds to cross the frozen lakes to get supplies, medical care, work, and attend school. With the spring thaw looming, they are weeks away from losing that frozen lifeline.

 

To lift the blockade, the tribe is demanding $20 million for a 15-year easement. This is an exorbitant sum for a simple easement, but the tribe seems content to hold non-tribal homeowners hostage in order to extort the sum. For comparison, the most recent offer that the tribe rejected was for about $1.1 million plus all future state gas tax revenues from the town for perpetual access.

 

The most innocent party in this whole dispute is the one suffering the most — the homeowners. They bought their properties in good faith and have been dutifully paying their taxes to maintain the schools, emergency services, and, yes, roads. Yet their property values have been obliterated, their lives are being disrupted, and their safety is being endangered.

 

The situation has reached a crisis point and real leadership will be needed to resolve it. It is unacceptable that one group of Americans should be blockading another group of Americans as a negotiating tactic in a legal dispute. This is not about sovereignty or some noble cause. It is about cold, hard, cash. If the tribe will not immediately lift the blockade and return to the negotiating table, the governor must step in to protect the homeowners from being used as hostages.

Login | Register

Archives

Categories

Pin It on Pinterest