The Battle of Wisconsin

(Added 4-6-16: See Battle of Wisconsin Election Results)

What’s So Special About Wisconsin?

As the presidential election season progresses and candidates proceed from state to state vying for support, there is much talk about the “Battle of Wisconsin,” portraying the primaries occurring here this Tuesday as being particularly crucial in determining the Republican nominee for the presidential election of 2016.

On the one hand, every primary/caucus in every state since Iowa gets built up by the press to heighten the excitement of the race and to boost network ratings.

On the other hand, Wisconsin does feature some characteristics that may be reflective of the evolving mind of the American people at large, and thus might give us a glimpse into what is to come.

Why is Wisconsin a Good Model for the National Struggle Between Right and Left?

A power shift from Democrats to Republicans has recently been witnessed in Wisconsin, and has made Wisconsin a sort of national battleground for the progressive agenda on more than one occasion.  This included the near-rioting union takeover of Wisconsin’s Capitol building in Madison in 2011, the Wisconsin Supreme Court Scandals on the eve of an important union ruling, and the present election to be held on Tuesday, April 5th, 2016, which represents not only the battle between Republican presidential hopefuls, but also the battle for progressive control, by hook or by crook, of the Wisconsin Supreme Court.

In each of these battles, progressive Alinsky tactics have been used by radical Democrats, testing frantically whether a minority can dominate in a democracy, by sheer bullying (Alinsky tactics). Incidentally, in Wisconsin, conservative values have won so far, despite the Alinsky tactics, and despite the progressivism of Wisconsin’s Capitol city, Madison.

Aside

It could easily be argued that Donald Trump’s rapid rise to popularity is a consequence of progressive bullying and Alinsky tactics of Democrats. Trump’s bold outspokenness and willingness to fight fire with fire, his unintimidated attitude, is garnering widespread support across the nation.

So It’s In Wisconsin…

And so it is here in Wisconsin, where close-to-rabid progressive crowds chased a Republican senator around the Capitol building, where a progressive Mayor called off  police from enforcing law and order during union demonstrations, where police were nowhere to be found and fire-fighters had to rescue a cornered senator, where conservative legislators had to be escorted out of town for safety after a Senate vote, and where Justices of the Wisconsin Supreme Court used assault and slander in attempts to progressivise the Supreme Court – it is here in Wisconsin, that Governor Scott Walker combined the necessary boldness, courage and justice to win the battle against Madison’s progressives Unintimidated (the title of the inside story). 

Wisconsin is where our unintimidated conservative governor was sustained by the support and gratitude of his people, where he balanced the budget and restored solvency, and where conservative values continue to return via legislative change.

Wisconsin is where Scott Walker went on to to win the progressive attempted recall by a landslide with more support than he got when first elected, and where Scott Walker went on to get re-elected yet one more time.

So It’s Also in Wisconsin Again…

So it’s also in Wisconsin where the Republican nomination will also be tested.  In this case, the choice will be between two candidates who share some of Scott Walker’s values.

Donald Trump certainly demonstrates the valuable quality of “unintimidation” needed to face today’s progressive agenda.
Sadly, his commitment to conservatism is newfound, and yet to be tested.
His flip-flop on important values has been highlighted just this week, with contrasting statements on abortion, which change with the media pressure that is placed on him.
Donald Trump would make an infinitely better President than any progressive opponent, like Hillary or Bernie.
But he pales by comparison with most other Republican competitors, particularly in the area of “social issues-” or, in my book, ethics – religious liberty, abortion, and marriage.
He also has me slightly nervous about the possibility of being a Trojan Horse.

Ted Cruz also demonstrates the unintimidation needed today.  He gets much better marks than The Donald on ethics – on religious liberty, abortion, and marriage.
If we are limited to the three Republican candidates today, he is unquestionably the best choice.

At the risk of almost omitting poor John Kasich from the discussion, Kasich has a significantly lower probability of success than Trump or Cruz.  He is too liberal for my taste, but I would vote for him any day above Hillary or Bernie. And God bless his heart, he helps both major candidates to remain short of the magic number of 1237 delegates.  This fact increases the probability of a brokered convention, for which I am rooting, and which would make it possible to return some very fine candidates into consideration– including Scott Walker, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, and many others.
(Stay tuned for another article coming very soon on the Brokered Convention and why that is a Godsend during this 2016 election, despite all the media hype that portray it as a looming catastrophe.)

But now back to the Wisconsin Primary of Tuesday, April 5, 2016, which is being veiwed by some as a pivotal “Battle of Wisconsin” in the Republican presidential nomination of 2016.

So What Are the Candidates’ Chances?

What are the candidates’ chances, nationally and in Wisconsin?

One indicator of the candidates’ chances is the (speculative) number of delegates each candidate has accumulated.

Despite attempts by Donald Trump’s campaign and by much media to imply that Donald Trump is entitled to being declared the Presumptive nominee of the Republican Party because he (speculatively) has accumulated 736 delegates in the primaries so far, Donal Trump is still far short of any such assumption.

The Republican nomination is not a horse race, and the winning candidate does not win by a nose.  Republican nominations, as are most elections, including the general election, require the support of more than half of the Republican Party.   When races are close, or candidates are numerous, runoff elections occur, designed to home in on a candidate on whom 51% of America can agree.

Looking at the (speculative) distribution of delegates won so far by various candidates below, it becomes pretty obvious that Donald Trump has no guarantee whatsoever of receiving the support of half of Republicans in the United States, and a runoff election, otherwise known as a brokered convention, is highly likely to be required.

Incidentally, the brokered convention is not an evil plot concocted by the Republican elites, as Donald Trump’s campaign and some media would have you believe.  The brokered convention is the natural result of numerous candidates, close races, or a split party – all of which are occurring in 2016 – and rules specifying brokered conventions have been around since Abraham Lincoln’s election.  Those rules are not stacked in favor of anybody, not “establishment” Republicans, not liberals, not conservatives, but are simply rules, like Robert’s Rules of Order (which govern the Rules of the Republican Party), which have been refined by experts and statisticians over decades to specify the fairest way to operate a runoff election.

NOTE: Looking at the pie chart above, you can see not only that neither Trump nor Cruz are the Presumptive nominee by any means, but also that Wisconsin’s contribution to the number of delegates up for grabs is not overriding, either.

So What’s the Fuss About Wisconsin?

So what’s the fuss about Wisconsin?

The fuss is two-fold:

• Wisconsin has succeeded in reversing a progressive liberal trend and restoring Wisconsin safely and efficiently to a more rational conservative government.  It serves as a model for the changes needed in our Federal government today.
• Wisconsin has also succeeded in rescuing it’s Supreme Court from radical takeover by progressives who were using Alinsky tactics.  This also serves as a model for the changes needed in our Federal Supreme Court today.

As goes Wisconsin, so might go the United States.
Or at least we hope so.
Our Lady of Good Help, help us!

The Wisconsin Vote

So What Will Happen in Wisconsin?
Republican presidential candidates are polling 40% Cruz, 33% Trump, and 19% Kasich.
One might add that conservatives are sometimes reluctant to participate in polls, pariticularly in the aggressive progressive Alinsky tactic climate we are presently in.  So polls often underestimate the magnitude of conservative support a conservative candidate might receive.  This happened to Governor Walker in the recall election of 2012, which Governor Walker won by a landslide.

So it will be no surprise if Ted Cruz wins Wisconsin by a landslide.
Let’s hope this happens, and that it is indicative of national attitudes.

However, it is most probable that nobody, neither Trump nor Cruz, will get the (speculative) 1237 delegates nationally, and a runoff election will be needed.
Again, a welcome development, which might even return Scott Walker, Wisconsin’s governor (or anybody else) into the running if Trump or Cruz cannot get 51% of the delegates in the first vote at the convention.

Equally Important- the Wisconsin Supreme Court

Equally important is Wisconsin’s Supreme Court, where a regressive progressive, JoAnn Kloppenburg, is challenging the seat of constitutionalist Justice Rebecca Bradley, who can be relied upon to stick to the constitution instead of legislating progressivism from the bench.

To complicate the matter, the good Justice Rebecca Bradley of the Wisconsin Supreme Court has the same last name as the horrible regressive progressive Justice Ann Walsh Bradley of the Wisconsin Supreme Court who assaulted fellow Justice Prosser in 2011, then lied to the press reversing the tables to smear Justice Prosser. See photos of the two diametrically opposed Justice Bradleys below.

So Let’s Get it Clear!

Let’s Get it Clear-

Vote for Ted Cruz, who supports Religious Freedom, opposes Planned Parenthood and abortion, and supports traditional marriage.  He’s a patriot who supports the Constitution of the United States.

Vote for Justice Rebecca Bradley, who is committed to the rule of law and applying the law fairly and impartially.

Vote for Ted Cruz on April 5th in Wisconsin!

.
Vote for Justice Rebecca Bradley on April 5th in Wisconsin!

Get Off Your Couch and Keep Wisconsin On Track-
It’s SO Important to Vote Tomorrow!

The Background

Much of the liberalization of our contemporary culture has been accomplished by liberal judges at various levels overruling the will of the American people.  Examples include the reversal of the Defense of Marriage Act and the Roe v. Wade legalization of abortion.

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court had it’s share of liberal judges, with three liberals out of seven Supreme Court Judges five years ago.

Some of the liberal Judges were spinning out of control, trying to smear one of the conservative Judges, Justice Prosser in an apparent effort to liberalize the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  Their attempts, if you believe the testimony of the majority of Justices who witnessed the event, included desperate measures such as assaulting a fellow Justice, involving the press, and then lying about what had happened.

The attempt to change that balance failed, and the conservative majority has since been strengthened in 2015 by Governor Walker’s appointment of Rebecca Bradley, another conservative Judge.  Justice Rebecca Bradley is not to be confused with the other Justice Bradley, Ann Walsh Bradley, who was the source of the problems in 2011, and who was responsible for assaulting a fellow Judge and trying to cast him as the aggressor, despite the testimony of witnesses.  This led to a shocking game of Which Supreme Court Justice assaulted which Supreme Court Justice, and which one lied?

So let’s make sure we get this straight:

• Just so there’s no confusion:
  Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley is the liberal Justice involved in the assault scandal in 2011.
• Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Bradley is the conservative Justice running for reappointment now in 2016, agains two liberals.

Two Judges With the Same Name in the Wisconsin Supreme Court?

Yes, the Wisconsin Supreme Court now has two women Justices with the last name Bradley.

The newly appointed Justice Rebecca Bradley (conservative) is running in a primary tomorrow with two Democrats, JoAnne Kloppenberg and Martin Joseph Donald.

The two candidates who receive the highest number of votes for Bradley’s seat in the February 16, 2016, primary will then face each other in the April general election. The winner will begin serving a 10-year term on the court.

If you care about the preservation of Christian morality and religious freedom for Christians in America, vote tomorrow for Justice Rebecca Bradley.

Vote for Justice Rebecca Bradley!

Check out Justice Rebecca Bradley’s website:

Why Rebecca Bradley is running (from her website):

After practicing law in the private sector for over 16 years, I answered a calling to public service as a Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge in Children’s Court, where I dedicated myself to strengthening families, protecting children in need, keeping the community safe, and treating all participants in the court system with dignity and respect. I then served as a Wisconsin Court of Appeals Judge, reviewing decisions made at the trial court level and writing opinions in all areas of the law. I am honored to bring over 19 years of experience in the legal and judicial professions to our State’s highest court. Serving the people of Wisconsin as a member of the judiciary has been the most rewarding experience of my professional life, and I am grateful to those who expressed confidence in me with their support and votes. I humbly ask the voters of Wisconsin to retain me as their Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice.

I became a judge because I care deeply about Wisconsin and its many communities. I was born and raised in the city of Milwaukee. After my Dad lost his job in the 1980s recession, my family struggled like many Wisconsin families. But I was blessed with parents who instilled in their four children a strong work ethic, the importance of education, and the value of a strong family. My sisters are stay-at-home mothers. My brother is a public high school teacher. My family’s experiences gave me a unique appreciation for the challenges faced by families all over our great state.

I am committed to the rule of law and applying the law fairly and impartially. When I proudly took the Oath of Office, I swore to support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin. I understand my duty to apply the law as it is written and not as I may wish it to be. I have faithfully exercised this duty in hundreds of cases as a judge on the Milwaukee County Circuit Court, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, and as a Justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court. It is my honor and privilege to serve the citizens of Wisconsin.

Herman Cain: Guilty or Not Guilty?

and Why Does it Matter?

False accusations should be punishable by law.

Herman Cain Suspends Campaign

Two Possibilities

The recent attacks on Herman Cain, the swiftness of his “trial” by media, and his rapid exit from the Republican presidential primary race have left many bewildered.  There lingers an uneasiness, as though a lynching had just occurred, and nobody objected.

There are two possibilities; that Herman Cain is guilty of recent accusations of sexual harassment and marital infidelity, or that he is innocent of these accusations.  We simply do not know which is the case.

If Cain were guilty, that would be unfortunate. His moral integrity would certainly be blemished.  However, to be fair, it must be pointed out that similar issues did not get in the way of Gingrich’s, Clinton’s, or JFK’s public careers.  In a society that has just removed the ban on bestiality in the military, with the White House laughingly declining to comment, surely Herman Cain’s weakness would not be as staggering as such transgressions might have been in the past?

Gingrich, Clinton, JFK

If Cain were innocent, however, then the extent of the coordinated slanderous attack on Cain would be historically significant and unnerving.  If President Obama’s campaign was prepared to coordinate such a vicious and fallacious attack on an opposing candidate, that really would make a story dwarfing other stories of political ethical misconduct, including Watergate and the more recent Blagojevich affair.

continue reading…

Prosser-Bradley Investigation Ends
“Chief, I Have Lost Confidence in Your Leadership”
Supreme Court Disgraced
Democrat Delays and Cover-Ups Yet Again?

Justice Prosser has finally been cleared in “Chokegate,” two months after Justice Bradley made the false allegations. National Review Online

Yet disturbing problems remain for Wisconsin in the aftermath of this scandal.

How is Justice Prosser supposed to regain his reputation?

How is Justice Prosser supposed to regain his reputation after Wisconsin Democrats tried to smear it twice with lies twice this year? –

• First smear attempt during election (Kloppenburg’s attempted smear)
• Second smear attempt during collective bargaining law ruling (see 3 links at SyteReitz.com for more):
  Which Supreme Court Justice Assaulted Which Justice?
  Media Malpractice and Justice Prosser
  Why the Prosser-Bradley Choking Investigation Is So Prolonged?

Which individuals need to apologize to Justice Prosser?
Where does David Prosser go to get his reputation back?

Why was Justice Prosser’s accuser, Justice Bradley, not charged?

Why was Justice Prosser’s accuser, Justice Bradley, not charged with politically motivated false accusation of criminal conduct against a fellow member of the bench, as well as with assault of a Supreme Court Justice?

Three Supreme Court Justices who were present support Justice Prosser’s innocence and refute Bradley’s account. They say that it was Justice Bradley who attacked Justice Prosser with raised fists, which caused Justice Prosser to

"smack upside the head"

block her, while a third Justice, Justice Roggensack, pulled Bradley off Prosser (National Review Online).  This report is quite credible, since Justice Bradley was previously known to strike a fellow Justice– she had whacked Justice Gableman on the head for addressing the Chief Justice by her first name previously, NOT in jest.  Apparently, Justice Bradley has a very protective attitude toward Chief Justice Abrahamson, and is quick to attack anyone who does not treat her as Bradley sees fit.   So why is Justice Bradley not being charged with criminal conduct? continue reading…

What’s STILL going on in Wisconsin?
or
Circus Madison Goes On
or
How Minority Can Dominate in Democracy
or
What to Do with Badly Behaving Adults?

Liberal to Conservative Shift in Wisconsin

Circus Maximus- Rome, 326BC-549AD.  Ancient site famous for chariot races, gladiator fights, Christian slaughter and games, as well as local marketplace.

Conservative fiscal thinking is catching on, and now “conservative is the new liberal.” Not only in Wisconsin, but in our entire nation.  As power shifts from liberals to conservatives, liberals are not relinquishing power gracefully.  They are frantically employing unethical Alinsky tactics , trying to get their way (despite being the minority),  “by hook or by crook”.

The power shift was very dramatic in Wisconsin, where Democrats have long been accustomed to being in power.  The situation was exacerbated by the fact that the state capitol of Wisconsin, Madison, has remained very liberal, and now has become an island of liberalism surrounded by a sea of conservatism in Wisconsin.

Madison Disapproves

Many people and officials in Madison do not approve of the conservative changes voted in by the rest of Wisconsin.  Yet the Capitol

The Madison Capitol Building- stage for extreme events in Wisconsin, capturing the attention of  the entire nation this year.

building, which houses the legislative chambers and the Governor’s Office, the place where conservative changes are now being implemented, is the central fixture around which all of downtown Madison is clustered.

One local liberal paper recently featured a front-page article entitled “Not my Madison,” in which the author bemoaned  “a new sense that normal citizens can’t change anything.”  The numerous long-ensconced Madison Democrats had come to feel an entitlement to Madison as well as to control of the State Government.  When conservatives finally gained power, liberals have become outraged and took over the Capitol, disrupting the smooth functioning of the Democratic process. continue reading…

Why the Bradley-Prosser “Choking” Investigation is So Prolonged

.

Overheard at brunch in Madison, WI; retiree attorneys (Democrats) conversing…

.

Attorney 1: “I’ve worked with Prosser for years.  My politics was completely different from his, entirely different.  But he was always very calm and composed.  My politics was on the other side, but when you met him on the street, he was always very pleasant.”

Attorney 2: “Well, every one of us has a veneer.  Under pressure, the veneer cracks and the real person comes out.  His veneer must have cracked.”

Attorney 1: “I never saw his veneer crack in 20 years.”

And yes, these were Democrats speaking.

.

The same conversation included a discussion of how the investigation on which Justice assaulted which Justice could not conclude with pointing a finger at either Justice– this would discredit the entire Wisconsin Supreme Court tremendously.

.

Yet, what are the options?
Pretend it did not happen?
Hope it goes away?
Censure the guilty Justice and let her/him continue judging after being proven a liar?
What about the witnesses who backed each Justice?  They are Justices, too, and clearly some of them lied – should those supporting the guilty Justice also be censured?

.

Even if a “choking” did occur, what was Justice Bradley thinking when failing to use legal channels, but leaking this story to Madison’s liberal press, to Bill Lueders, of the Soros-funded Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism?  Is this how the Supreme Court handles legal complaints? continue reading…

Media malpractice and Justice Prosser

or

We’re still in the U.S.A., aren’t we?

In typical Madison fashion, the biased media has yet again given voice to radicals – now to militant feminists and atheists –  in their attempts to smear Justice Prosser.

Isthmus – Madison’s radical “news” paper. No mention of the fact that Justice Bradley may in fact be the guilty party.

Justice Prosser has my support until someone is proven guilty —  we’re still in the U.S.A., arent’ we?

My contribution at Isthmus:

This story is a prime example of media malpractice.

No mention of the fact that numerous witnesses claim that Prosser was attacked by Bradley, not vice-versa? See https://sytereitz.com/2011/06/which-supreme-court-justice-assaulted-which-justice/ .

To make matters worse, radical females – militant atheist leaders and pro-abortion leaders are leading the attack on Justice Prosser.

How dare they pretend to represent all women, and how can Isthmus cast this twisted attack on Justice Prosser in a pro-woman light?

Tragically, abortion is used globally to eliminate female children selectively, a problem a bit more serious than whether Judge Prosser touched Judge Bradley’s neck while fending off her fisted assault on him.

Finally, if witnesses are anything to go by, Judge Bradley is not only guilty of assault, but also of shameful blatant lies and slander.

Judge Bradley should step down from her duties. Period.

Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Justice Assaults Fellow Justice

or

What is Happening in Wisconsin, AGAIN!?

or

Alinsky Tactics, Supreme Court level

or

Which Justice Assaulted Which Justice?

.

Madison media’s lack of balanced reporting is reaching epic proportions, while some members of Wisconsin’s highest court are making a mockery of the powers entrusted to them by the people.

.

Following Wisconsin Supreme Court’s June 14^th decision to uphold Wisconsin’s collective

Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson

bargaining law, Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson issued official statements criticizing respected members of her Court.  The stinging unprecedented dissent accused the conservative majority of the Court of making “numerous errors of law and fact” and stated that they “set forth their own version of facts without evidence.” She wrote that “They should not engage in disinformation,” and called their view “long on rhetoric and long on story-telling that appears to have a partisan slant.” The Chief Justice stated that this decision opens the Court “to the charge that the majority has reached a pre-determined conclusion not based on the facts and the law.”

What kind of leadership is this?

The Chief Justice’s job is one of upholding and respecting our democratic system of government, of fostering communication and unity in our highest court, not of fomenting division when a closely split ruling occurs, dividing liberal and conservative Judges of the Court.

Justice Ann Walsh Bradley

To further inflame the situation, now Justice Bradley (liberal), has accused Justice Prosser (conservative), of assaulting and choking her in the presence of 5 other Justices!  The correct procedure for such a complaint would be through legal channels, and the incident should not be discussed publicly before the investigation is complete, as any lawyer should know.  However, Justice Bradley made this accusation through the liberal media, and has not yet filed any official legal complaints in the 2 weeks since the supposed incident.

The conservative judges, as befits the legal profession, are not giving details to the press.  Justice Prosser stated his confidence that he will be cleared with investigation.  “Confidential sources” seem to indicate that Bradley has one witness supporting her claims, while 4 witnesses support Prosser’s innocence.  Yet Madison’s

Justice David T. Prosser

liberal media continues to decimate Judge Prosser’s reputation with headlines like “What To Do About High Court’s Prosser Problem,” , in which they question whether Justice Prosser remains fit to serve!

I have been struggling to assemble information on the latest happenings in Wisconsin’s dysfunctional Supreme Court in the absence of clear facts.

Now that I have managed to unearth facts that Madison’s media is unwilling to divulge, I can paint a more accurate picture.

Bottom line, for those who are impatient, is that liberal Justice Bradley seems to have used Supreme Court level Alinsky tactics.   –She physically attacked Justice Prosser, turned the tables by accusing HIM of what she had done, lied about the incident, leaked reports of the “event” to the obliging Bill Lueders of (George Soros-funded) Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, and now has the assistance of Madison’s media in smearing Justice Prosser and calling for his termination, in the hopes that the liberal 3 would shift the balance of the other conservative 4 judges in the Wisconsin Supreme Court.  With conservative Governor Walker at the helm, this seems to be a pointless pursuit.

The details of the sparring were uncovered and reported by Christian Schneider and can be found at the National Review.  If you read just one reference, this would be the one to read.

Another report summarizes events even more concisely:

Long story short: a liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice named Ann Bradley has apparently tried to claim that another Supreme Court Justice, David Prosser, “choked” her.

The story had been leaked to a George Soros muckraking group, and then the incident seemed to get turned on its head when other witnesses came forth to indicate that while Prosser did put his hands up and touch Bradley’s neck, it is because she was coming at him with fists raised, meaning the contact was defensive in nature, and Bradley was the aggressor.

The plot appears to be thickening now, with news that Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson may have had a hand in orchestrating the leak in an attempt to get the conservative Prosser impeached.

As the investigation moves forward, it appears than instead of collecting a conservative scalp, that the two liberal Wisconsin SCOTUS justices may face impeachment instead. If they are impeached—and that is far from certain at this point—Republican Governor Scott Walker will have the opportunity to add two conservative justices to the bench.

It appears that the plot to frame up Prosser has backfired spectacularly.

I can only wish for such a happy ending for all of convicted felon Soros’ investments in deception.

This report of two liberal Wisconsin Supreme Court Justices, one the Chief Justice, attempting to smear and discredit a conservative colleague with lies, is symptomatic of a more general dissolution of integrity among Democrats in Madison, Wisconsin today.  The problems with Madison’s Democrats, in turn, are reflective of a growing general dissolution of Democrat integrity in the United States.

Most of us trust automatically that respected high officials support the laws they were appointed/elected to administer and that their goals include the peaceful, fair and tranquil functioning of society.

There is, however, a growing new philosophy/methodology, particularly among some in high office, which attempts to circumvent the legal democratic process in order to implement radical change rapidly against the wishes of the majority.

The new methodology welcomes and creates chaos, in the knowledge that it is easier to implement change during chaos.  The new philosophy spurns dialogue and advocates polarization, demonization of opponents, and dispensation of traditional moral constraints such as truthfulness or limiting oneself to civilized behavior.

Saul Alinsky

The new methodology is patterned after what has become known as Alinsky tactics.  Radical Democrats, including President Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, teachers unions, and numerous Wisconsin Democrats have been implementing these tactics more and more often, particularly in recent months.

For example, in Madison, 14 Democrat legislators violated the Wisconsin Constitution by fleeing to Illinois to prevent a quorum on legislation they opposed.  Protesters at the Madison State Capitol have adopted new aggressive techniques, including blowing air horns in Republican Senator’s and in conservative demonstrators’ ears. Unions have shipped aggressive out-of-state protesters into Madison by the thousands, while Madison’s liberal Mayor called off the Madison police.  Radicals brag about “peaceful” protests, while Republican Senators are being chased around the Capitol building by hundreds of protesters, unhindered by police, and damage/security bills mount to over $8 million.  Madison’s police and firefighter’s unions, as well as Planned Parenthood (America’s largest abortion provider), have joined in support of teachers’ unions that are bleeding the State dry with benefits which radically exceed what other Wisconsin workers get.  Republican Senators have received death threats for carrying out campaign promises and attempting to pass responsible legislation.  Wisconsin’s liberal Secretary of State has helped to stall publication of the collective bargaining legislation repeatedly, enabling unions to rush through new contracts before implementation of the law.  Liberal judges have procrastinated making decisions on the pending legislation, taking vacation, and making bad rulings, which must be heard, reprimanded and reversed by the cooler-headed individuals on the Supreme Court.  Wisconsin’s media, seriously dominated by radial liberals, publishes only glowing reports of the radicals, omitting any of the reality mentioned above.  The dirty tactics observed in Madison are overwhelming.

I have been so appalled by the chaos and trampling of democracy I have witnessed in Madison recently that I have written numerous articles documenting and referencing the above facts on my website,  since February.

I don’t jump to the defense of people in the absence of conclusive evidence.  However, in the light of the above facts, particularly those collected by Christian Schneider, I am willing to stick out my neck and venture to say that there is only one logical interpretation of what happened between Justices Bradley and Prosser in Madison on June 13th, the story which was leaked to the liberal press by Justice Bradley and which has spread like wildfire in the national news, accusing Justice Prosser of choking her.  Radical Democrats, yet again, are using Alinsky tactics in an effort to further their (now minority) agenda by eliminating a conservative voice from the Supreme Court.

Prosser was smeared with lies previously by Democrats during his campaign , and his installation was delayed by Democrat challenges and recounts after the election.  The latest June 14 decision of the Supreme Court approving the collective bargaining legislation was almost made in the absence of Judge Prosser, when Democrat JoAnne Kloppenburg threatened to sue yet a second time for recounts, which would have delayed Judge Prosser’s appointment yet again.

Aside from the original reports accusing Justice Prosser of choking his colleague, Madison’s media is not correcting the skewed initial reports.  They are still spreading the dirt and calling for Prosser’s removal: Madison’s Cap Times wrote an editorial entitled “What to do about high court’s Prosser problem” yesterday (6-29-11), in which they suggested that Justice Prosser was “no longer fit to serve.”

The truth cannot be found in Madison media, with very few exceptions.  – go to the National Review for truth in reporting.

Finally, it is interesting to note that Bradley did not file charges against Justice Prosser, which would have put her credibility at risk when the truth was revealed.   She just leaked the fictitious smear story to newspapers to foment liberal frenzy, a la Alinsky tactics. This is certainly not the type of behavior expected from a Supreme Court Judge, or anyone whose job function is to provide reasoned deliberation on matters that distinguish our society from anarchy.

More references from both sides of the dispute, by date :

• Saul Alinsky Tactics Evident in WI Protests 3-15-11
  

• Full Text Of WI Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson’s Powerful Dissent Last Week 6-19-11

• Blaska Rules Who is Partisan on the Wisconsin Supreme Court 6-24-11   Blaska –  Madison’s Isthmus.

• Prosser Allegedly Grabbed Fellow Supreme Court Justice Bradley by the Neck 6-25-11 8:46 AM  Bill Lueders at Madison’s Isthmus – Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism – funded by George Soros.

• Bradley Says Prosser Choked Her 6-25-11
  Milwaukee Journal Sentinel online

• Sources: Argument between Prosser, Bradley Becomes Physical 6-25-11
  Bill Lueders : WI Center for Investigative Journalism,  Madison’s WI State Journal

• Wisconsin Justice Says Court Fight Led to Choking 6-26-11
  Fox news
• Wisconsin Justice Accuses Colleague of Choking Her 6-26-11
  msnbc

• Cops Look into David Prosser “Choke Hold” Charge 6-27-11
  Politico

• Tensions Run High, Very High, at Wisconsin Supreme Court 6-27-11
  Wall Street Journal

• More Details Emerge in Wisconsin’s “Chokegate” 6-28-11 ***
  Christian Schneider, National Review Online  ***

• Court Watchers Say High Court Has Hit New Low 6-28-11
  Madison’s Wisconsin State Journal – Abrahamson – “Observers noted that such a personal attack was unusual in the history of the court”
• Justice Shouldn’t Trump The Law 6-28-11
  Madison’s Cap Times – Chris Rickert: “When it comes to workplace violence, justice shouldn’t trump the law.”

• Dane County Sherriff Mahoney Turns Supreme Court Investigation Over To Chief Deputy 6-29-11
  Madison’s Wisconsin State Journal –questions were raised about Mahoney’s objectivity because he endorsed Prosser’s opponent in the recent election

• What To Do About High Court’s Prosser Problem 6-29-11  
  Madison’s Cap times editorial    “no longer fit to serve”

• Barbara Beck: Justices Should Go To Principal’s Office 6-29-11
  Madison’s Cap Times defending Bradley – “behavior rarely demonstrated by a woman”

• Liberal Wisconsin Justices Looking Bad in “Chokegate” 6-29-11

• Questions – and Answers – on that Wisconsin Supreme Court ‘Assault’ 6-30-11
  ***

More participants at "Walkerville" today, ~ 300

Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Collective Bargaining Law
or
“My ears are still ringing!”

Yesterday, prior to the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s approval of Governor Walker’s collective bargaining law, the unions did muster up a bit more activity in fizzled-out “Walkerville,” attracting about 300 demonstrators, primarily members of various unions.

I visited the Capitol at noon to document events, and was subjected by a liberal enthusiast to an air-horn blowing repeatedly 12 inches from my ear, presumably to punish me for interviewing some Walker supporters, which is what I was doing at the time.

Air Horn

A slide show follows below,  images from  Capitol Square yesterday afternoon.  About 300 demonstrators were there, numerous unions were represented, and there were lots of noisemakers – vuvuzelas, plastic buckets, air horns, and chanting – as soon as members of the press appeared.

My air-horn toting friend retreats

My air-horn toting friend was surprised by my reaction to his air horn; rather than being unpleasant, grabbing his air-horn, or cursing him, this grey old lady picked up my camera and started clicking away at him.  First, he turned his face away from the camera, but continued honking in my ear.  As I continued clicking away with the camera, he eventually backed away and went somewhere else to torture another victim.

His lack of civility was typical of liberal behavior in Madison in recent months.

The Governor Walker supporters pointed out to me that yesterday was Flag Day .  Their sign read “Raise your flag for Gov. Walker,” and they were waving little 12-inch American flags.  The group included a public school teacher who was opposing her union’s actions, a retired nurse, and a retired U.S. Marine.  They had driven in from an outlying town to show some support for Governor Walker.  Theirs were the only flags visible on Flag Day.

Governor Walker supporters- teacher, nurse, Marine

One Walker supporter my age told me that she was approached by a man sputtering at her, informing her that he comes to these events to punch the teeth out of the bodies of fat people like her.  She didn’t even look fat, but looked very pleasant, ladylike and motherly, sitting quietly on the edge of a concrete wall and waving her American flag.  She had come to support Governor Walker, stating that we must first stop the fiscal bleed going on in our State; later there would be time for civil discourse regarding the details of union contracts.

MC: young man in pink

Announcers were on the Capitol steps behind us, calling for people to approach the Capitol doors to demand entrance inside.  I did not see anyone responding.  The announcer was a young man dressed in a filmy pink dress, signifying I have no idea what – Planned Parenthood again? Just looking for attention?  Not sure whether he made a good spokesman for his cause.

.

Slide Show of Capitol Square on Flag Day, June 14, 2011:

The Supreme Court upheld limitation of collective bargaining law on the same day.

More on Flag Day (June 14, 2011) at Madison’s Capitol Square:

• Vicki McKenna, Madison newstalk 1130 radio host, describes mob reaction to Supreme Court announcement Tuesday and interviews Senator Grothman, who also had an air horn blown in his ear yesterday.

• Governor Walker’s reaction and statement on the Supreme Court decision.

• You Tube: one of protest leaders was arrested, wanted for an outstanding warrant in Waukesha, WI.

.

Clashes between Liberals and Conservatives – Washington, United Nations, Madison — Common denominator?

Dirty tactics in Washington

A group of Washington liberals apparently decided that the recent government stalemate on spending was entirely Republican Speaker Boehner’s fault, despite the fact that President Obama and his Democratic House and Senate failed to schedule and pass the budget in a timely manner last year before the November 2010 election. Not one or two, but over 8,700 of these liberals recently committed to a Facebook campaign to dump their trash outside Speaker John Boehner’s residence today, because a government shutdown (from failure to pass the budget) would have halted trash collection in Washington. When a compromise was reached late last night on Federal budget issues, preventing the looming government shutdown, the Facebook group claimed victory, cancelled the trash-dumping while ridiculing Speaker Boehner:

Liberal facebook campaign

“Moments ago, a very orange Speaker of the House just announced that he caved into some of our demands. This is Victory Accomplished.”

Trash dumping is illegal. Ridicule of elected officials is unprofessional. Speaker Boehner represents the majority of Americans who voted in an election.  The use of such bullying tactics in a democracy is unacceptable and uncivilized.

Dirty tactics at the United Nations

The United States State Department, headed by Secretary of State Hillary

Cllinton addresses Human Rights Coucil Feb 28, 2011

Clinton, has recently been misrepresenting the Catholic Church’s position on a sexual orientation declaration, in a effort to win votes for this resolution:

The officials (of the U.S. State Department) purposely misled Latin American delegations into believing the Holy See (Catholic Church) had changed its position on a sexual orientation declaration that called for “sexual orientation and gender identity” to be new categories of non-discrimination in international law… The Holy See, in fact, opposed the declaration…

– National Catholic Register

The US Department of State (headed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton) is telling Latin American delegations to the United Nations that the Vatican has changed its position on a sexual orientation declaration that was just released at the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

-Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute

The practice of such duplicity by United State officials at the United Nations is more than shocking.

Due to silence on these issues by the liberal media, few people know of United States efforts (headed by Hillary Clinton) toward the global spread of abortion rights and redefinition of marriage.

The fact that the U.S. State Department has been so emboldened now as to LIE about the Catholic Church’s position on these moral issues (in order to garner votes for this global liberal agenda), is very disturbing.

Latest dirty tactics in Madison

The latest development in Madison’s struggle between taxpayers and unions has involved the use of slander by liberals to influence Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice elections – an attempt to radicalize the composition of the Supreme Court, which will soon be making decisions on Governor Walker’s budget and collective bargaining law.

Toward this end, there was an outpouring of national union funds for defeating (and slandering ) Wisconsin’s conservative incumbent Supreme Court Justice Prosser.

Slanderous ad attempting to smear Jutsice Prosser

.

Democrat ads falsely accused  Prosser of injustice in the handling of a 35 year old Catholic Church sex scandal case – a double punch to conservatives and to the Catholic Church( If You’re Looking for Child Abuse, the Catholic Church is the Last Place to Look).

.

JoAnne Kloppenburg

Despite protests by the sex scandal victim and his demands that JoAnne Kloppenburg (the liberal candidate challenging Justice Prosser) pull the slanderous advertisements,  the untrue and malicious ads were not pulled. JoAnne Kloppenburg claimed that the ads were not run by her, but by a third party, and that she did not wish to deprive them of their “freedom of speech.”

Justice Prosser

.

.

Clearly a display of unethical behavior and a poor choice by a candidate who might have served on the Wisconsin Supreme Court for the next 10 years!  Fortunately, as of this writing it appears that she is no longer a contender .

.

I have survived a nuclear firestorm of criticism and attack and smear” –Justice Prosser

.

History of dirty tactics in Madison

Being driven to political activism has been a real eye-opening experience for me—occurring, as it has, in Madison, WI, where I have been living for 22 years.

Reeling in disbelief at the recent below-the-belt political tactics exercised by the left, and mystified by the escalating frequency of illegal and quite frankly uncivilized behavior of previously respected elected officials and “teacher” demonstrators, I embarked on some research into liberal tactics.  The name of Saul Alinksy began to surface—the author of a new disgusting form of “activism” which is in direct conflict with Judeo-Christian values and which specializes in undermining democratic rule, for use by radicals who want to force change against the will of a majority.

It was easy for me, as well as for many Americans, to steer clear of political involvement previously, under the pressures of career, child-rearing and (for me) home-schooling, particularly while practicing the forbearance we were taught as a good Christians —assuming the best possible about others; treating them as you would be treated; assuming they are doing the same to you.

.

Bad assumptions, as it turns out, in Madison, Wisconsin, USA in 2011.

SO bad, that I marvel at and have started blogging about the discontinuity between media reports and actual reality in the recently publicized budget struggles between Governor Walker and union leadership in Madison Wisconsin (A Word from the Silent Majority; What’s Really Happening in Wisconsin; What is REALLY going on in Wisconsin).  My blogging is the product of my frustration and indignation in watching the discontinuity between reality and left-leaning “progressive” media reports.

.

Fred Risser, the senior Democrat member of the Wisconsin Legislature

While unions (which historically have done much good work), and the Democrats who represent them, now break laws, slander, malign, misrepresent, and conspire to stall the democratic process, and while the Madison police who support them fail to enforce the law, while the Mayor of the City of Madison assists liberals in stalling the progress of the State Legislature’s work, and while liberal judges overlook State law (also helping unions to stall impending budget legislation), the media, and much of liberal Madison, continue to applaud and idolize all these agents who are actually impeding the fair implementation of democracy (A Word from the Silent Majority; What’s Really Happening in Wisconsin; What is REALLY going on in Wisconsin).

Dirty tactics appear systematic, not isolated

The tactics being used in Madison today (unreported by most media) are shocking even to someone like me, hardly an “innocent,” who grew up in New York City, commuting to high school daily on New York City subways, and attending the State University of New York at Stony Brook in the 1960’s and 70’s, at the height of student unrest in the Vietnam protest era.

Research on these tactics led me to findings that would surprise most Americans who value Judeo-Christian ideals (that would be over 80% of us).

The apparent abandonment of political ethics and morality which we have been observing evidently is not a random, unplanned general degeneration of public standards that one might initially suspect.  There are actually methods and calculated political action being implemented (primarily by liberal radicals, although occasionally conservatives have been known to lash back with similar tactics).  These efforts are well organized, and have achieved much success in implementing radical agendas against the wishes of the majority in the United States.

Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals

As it turns out, these “new” radical methods stem from the radical philosophy of Saul Alinsky (author of Rules for Radicals ), and have been embraced and used quietly and surreptitiously by powerful individuals and organizations including Hillary Clinton, Barak Obama, the National Education Association (NEA), and the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO).

Saul Alinsky

Saul Alinsky (1909-1972) was an American “community organizer” and writer .  Born in Chicago to an orthodox Jewish family, his plans to become an archaeologist were disrupted by the depression.  Instead, he embarked on a career of political activism, organizing first for the labor movement, then in ghettos across the United States.

.

Barack Obama, “community organizer”

Saul Alinksy’s radical methods for community reorganization (does this term sound familiar? Barak Obaman’s campaign credentials included being a “community organizer” in Chicago) were practiced by Alinsky since the Great Depression, were published in 1971, and have slowly been permeating the modus operandi of the unions, and of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) which represents them, since then.   Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, outlining his beliefs and methods, can be distilled down to an “anything goes” or “ends justify ANY means” philosophy—a philosophy unhampered by truth, fairness or lawful behavior. A philosophy that scorns communication, compromise and the democratic process, while extolling the intentional generation of conflict toward the purpose of manipulation through fear:

Alinsky was a bluff iconoclast who concluded that electoral politics offered few solutions to the have-nots marooned in working-class slums. His approach to social justice relied on generating conflict to mobilize the dispossessed. Power flowed up, he said, and neighborhood leaders who could generate outside pressure on the system were more likely to produce effective change than the lofty lever-pullers operating on the inside.—Peter Slevin, Washington Post

In his book Rules for Radicals, Alinsky himself writes:

“What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.”

.

Alinsky’s influence

Alinsky’s “community reorganization” methods have been a common ideological touchstone for Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama.  Hillary Clinton wrote her senior honors thesis at Wellesley College on Saul Alinksky, and was offered a job by Alinsky in 1968.  Following Alinsky’s death, Barak Obama was hired by Alinsky’s followers to organize black residents on the South Side of Chicago, while learning and applying Alinsky’s philosophy of street-level democracy.

Teacher’s groups like the National Education Association (NEA) used Saul Alinsky as a consultant to train their own staff, and unions like the AFL-CIO acknowledge their roots in Saul

Alinsky–inspired community organization , and list Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals” on their web page under training for shop stewards .

Radical liberals who embrace Alinsky’s philosophy and tactics are well aware of the unpopularity of such tactics with 80% of (Christian) Americans, and they are not in a big rush to acknowledge, name or publicize their techniques.

What ARE Alinksy’s rules?

Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals, is prefaced by an acknowledgement to Lucifer, the “very first” radical:

.

Lucifer

Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history ( and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins—or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.

– Saul Alinsky

.

Alinsky’s rulesinclude:

• “Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy. Here you want to cause confusion, fear and retreat.”
• “Make the enemy live up to his/her own book of rules. You can kill them with this. They can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”
• “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule. Also, it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.”
• “The threat is generally more terrifying than the thing itself.”
• “In a fight almost anything goes. It almost reaches the point where you stop to apologize if a chance blow lands above the belt.”
• “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it.” (Use name-calling to damage your conservative opponents.  Demonize them.)
• “One of the criteria for picking the target is the target’s vulnerability … the other important point in the choosing of a target is that it must be a personification, not something general and abstract.” (For example, choose a conservative to demonize aggressively for political incorrectness, while applying much more lax and forgiving standards to your own radical colleagues.)
• “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.” For instance, Democrats imply conservatives are racists or that Republicans want to kill senior citizens by limiting the growth of the Medicare system, they imply Republicans want to deny kids lunch money without offering real proof. These red-herring tactics work.

The contrast between Radical rules and traditional Judeo-Christian rules

The Ten Commandments

.. . .. These Alinsky rules can be contrasted with the Judeo-Christian 10 Commandments, which are based on Exodus 20:2-17, and which form the springboard of the U.S. Constitution and of most conservative thinking:

A new set of rules has been introduced by radicals

It is beginning to look like a new philosophy is becoming prevalent in the political arena – the strictly utilitarian Alinsky philosophy, which defies Judeo-Christian morality and despises the exercise of egalitarian democracy.  It reflects a culture of selfish entitlement, by whatever means necessary to advance oneself and one’s friends.  It strives to preserve the illusion that there is a community participating in the decision-making process, while in actual fact the citizens and their opinions are being squeezed out.  This Alinsky philosophy has been adopted widely by numerous liberal groups, including teachers unions,  the DNC, and President Obama’s community organizing friends, including ACORN.

Much evidence is accumulating that Planned Parenthood operates using these tactics too. For example, it has successfully propagandized gullible Americans into believing that killing an unborn human is a “choice” that improves a woman’s “health,” when in actual fact abortion is associated with an increased chance of death in comparison with childbirth.  Even President Barack Obama uses this “progressive” jargon in reference to abortion, contrary to the beliefs of the majority in America.

.

Saul Alinsky

Practioners of the Alinsky method welcome conflict, and use conflict to their own advantage, to circumvent the will of the majority.  Their method often goes unidentified, or lurks under many titles, but is rarely identified as the Alinsky method.  The method often adopts or transforms other techniques such as the “Delphi Technique,” creating spin-offs under different names.

ridicule

Until we responsible conservatives recognize this new breed of liberal, and develop our own plan of action for identifying and countering these opponents who despise and violate common sense rules of morality and the foundations of a healthy democracy, much ground will be lost.  While we spin our wheels, bewildered and incredulous, the Alinskiites are continuing to acquire power and to erode our freedoms.

What next?

Knowing the enemy is the principal step towards victory.

Ridicule is the radical liberal’s biggest tool.  Religion (Judeo-Christian values) is their biggest target.

This is a war of values, and we must guard ourselves carefully against the new barrage of lies with which responsible conservatives are being attacked.

Once we learn not to take their attacks personally, and once we realize that our opponents have no interest in honest negotiation, we can move forward with determination and with strength, which, incidentally, leaders like John Boehner and Scott Walker are doing for us.

We must support our conservative leaders with our votes, with our confidence, with our emails, with our words, and with our pocketbooks.

Related Article, 7/27/13: