Friday, October 24, 2014

Schimel signaling 'ollie, ollie in come free' to solve Walker Doe woe

In the AG debate with Democrat Susan Happ tonight, GOP hopeful and Scott Walker protector Brad Schimel retreated from an earlier principled position and toed the party line as the election looms which is to strangle the Government Accountability Board next year.

Schimel also dished up a side of contempt for state campaign finance law that bars the kind of candidate campaign/third-party strategy and fund-raising coordination that got Scott Walker's 2012 campaign a cool $700,000 from the iron mining company which is planning to blow up the pristine, water-rich Penokee Hills for the continent's biggest open-pit iron ore mine.

Sounds more like a partisan Scott Walker foot soldier than a fair-and-open-minded top state lawyer.


Anonymous said...

When the United States Supreme Court passed Citizens United, didn't the majority assure us that we didn't have to be concerned because “[t]he absence of prearrangement and coordination . . . alleviates the danger that expenditures will be given as a quid pro quo for improper commitments from the candidate"? In other words, because it is still illegal for groups to coordinate with campaigns.

Scott Walker and crew knew coordination was illegal, and that's why they went to great lengths to hide what they were doing.

The Republicans may not like it, but we average citizens still have SOME protections under the law.

Anonymous said...

Schimel demonstrated his inability for an objective mind during his debat with Happ. For example he stated he was pro life because his wife and he adopted two girls whose Mothers chose not no abort them. But this generalization is a tiny slice of the real issue. What about if one of his adopted daughters became pregnant with a baby that was genetically deformed; ancephalic with a "waterhead"/hydrocephalic and the baby could not be delivered vaginally and had to be removed ASAP. Or what if one of their daughters was raped at gun point, gagged & tortured: would he support her choice to take the "day after" pill which works before fertilization takes place? Schimel's personal situation is being generalized to ALL cases of pregnancy in his mind. Also Schimel used a false equivalency in comparing the room the debate was held in with the WI Capitol rotunda. The rotunda was built expressly for the public to gather, protest peacefully, sing & converse with each other. The public building used for the debate cannot be compared with the rotunda as quiet is necessary for the discourse and filming etc. Generalizing, creating false equivalencies demonstrate a less objective, less disciplined mind/way of thinking. Years of that kind of experience are not an endorsement for AG. Susan Happ presented with a more objective mind which results in clearer reasoning, a characteristic desperately needed in WI.

Anonymous said...

In other words Schimel is generalizing all pregnancies & births with his own situation which is a very egocentric/immature point of view. But after all, it's all about me myself & I when it comes to the "good ol' boys".

Boxer said...

Schimel's prosecutorial philosophy: Republicans? Slap 'em on the wrist or let 'em off the hook entirely. Twelve year old girls? Charge them as adults and throw the book at 'em.** It's pretty simple, really. If they can't vote for you or give you money, they're goners in the slippery, slimy schimel-y world of "justice".

** Make sure their full names and pictures are published in the Freeman, too.

Jake formerly of the LP said...

Egocentric and immature define the guys in the Waukesha County GOP machine. And Schimel is the definition of a machine politician- letting his buddies like Jensen, Wiesmueller and Kramer off with slaps on the wrist for serious wrongdoing, allowing them to keep donating funds and helping the machine stay in power.

Calling Schimel unqualified for the job is being kind.