"Why not wait for the investigators' reports?"
-
Good question sarah, why did you not wait before making your remarks against prosser?

Very insightful and accurate posts johnadams (12:23am) & kiowamohican(1:26am), kudos.

But....according to John... We The People should not elect judges. We're to dumb to put the right...or should I say "Left"... people on the bench.

CLARIFICATION: The WE THE PEOPLE blog is a professional and personal commitment I made when asked by gazettextra.com late June 2009 and we lauched the first "community blog" on July 2, 2009, "WE THE PEOPLE." I am NOT in any way tied with Bliss Communications - The Janesville Gazette, WCLO. I have FULL EDITORIAL FREEDOM. I am NOT paid in any way whatsoever to do the blog. ALL posts are done on my own computer through my own personal Internet access. There is NO misuse of any State resources, including any UW resources. Here we go... John W. Eyster

John, you certainly attract a enviable crowd.
What always impresses me is how loyal they are to your blogs and how passionately they comment.
They thunder in like the rhinoceros in The Gods Must Be Crazy to stamp out the embers of your liberal (according to them) campfire.

Wislady......Thanks for the link.......As expected, Abrahamson and Bradley(or Blakely to you Sarah) are looking more and more pathetic every day--if that's even a possibility. Prosser was way too kind when he labeled that beast a b#tch........

Progressive Media Narrative Unravels in Prosser vs. Bradley

http://is.gd/VPlir1

Huzzah, johnadams & kiowamohican, very well said indeed!

"Are you ready to RUMBLE?" - that's the title PHIL HANDS, Wisconsin State Journal political cartoonist, has put on his cartoon published today. (NOTE THE ALL CAPS! Contagious?! HA!) Take a LOOK: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/opinion.... What do YOU think? Here we go... John W. Eyster

I seriously hope they do not pay him, or they need are in desperate need of a financial consultant!! I assume the blog is mostly for entertainment, much like Rush Limbaugh, Belling, and all those in your face-know everything, ranters on AM radio everyday.

When is the Gazette going to get rid of Eyster?

No doubt johnadams:
Wasn't just Boston, but Chicago, NY, Detroit, and all your major metropolitan cities. The Mob had total control of the judicial system simply by buying off the politicians who would then appoint judges of their choosing. For decades organized crime had a strong hold in most every major US city, do not kid yourself. Any time you have a politician who is corrupt, that corruption takes even STRONGER hold the more power he-she is given. When they are given power to appoint judges, you can bet your bottom dollar that those judges are bought and paid for.

If anyone truly wants is to be somewhat "fair" you should be for open election of all public offices. No doubt the author, and those who want a different system, are obviously bitter because they lost the most recent open election, and did not get the judge they wanted. Of course if they won the election they would be ALL FOR open elections, and claim that it was the will of the people prevailing. Now, of course, the people are clueless morons, and we obviously now need a new system of selecting judges. AMAZING how that works, isn't it?

I've always been a proponent of the very radical system of ancient Greece, in that common citizenry is randomly selected to serve in public office. So any law abiding citizen of age could be selected to represent your district in congress.No election at all, just a a lottery. Kind of like a jury is selected. No doubt you'd get some clueless idiots in office, but look what you have now. Could you really do any worse? Gallop had a poll not to long ago with the question being who would do better: the current congress, or a randomly selected group from the phone book? The randomly selected group won the poll hands down.

Appointed justices have no accountability to the people. In Massachusetts all judges are appointed. The recent capture of the FBI's most wanted, gangster James "Whitey" Bulger, has been accompanied by stories that he and his brother, the former president of the state senate, Billy Bulger, were able to influence the appointments of numerous judges in Massachusetts for several decades. The problem in Wisconsin with incivility in politics comes almost entirely from the left. The left, of which Anne Walsh Bradley is a part, feel they are justified in all manner of incivility. I witnessed many crass signs proudly displayed by leftists at the protests in Madison this year. Nothing at the tea party events were remotely close by comparison. We don't need justices who are less accountable to the people. We need the leftists to start treating those with whom they disagree with a little more respect. Anne Walsh Bradley should be put at the top of that list with Rep. Fred "Smack her around" Clark right behind her.

In the Prosser-Bradley scuffle, I think we should take Eyster's advice and wait till we know all that happened(even though he doesn't seem to be following his own advice). So to those who say that Prosser should go if he choked her, I ask if Bradley should go if she attacked him? Maybe both should stay on the court but in seperate corners! I personally like electing judges. I also like that they serve elected terms. If you think this is not so good, I point you to the federal system of appointing judges for life. Half of those people, both on the right and left, go crazy soon after they're appointed!!!

Let's see, Walker has been able to balance the budget, while at the same time eliminate a 3.x billion dollar projected deficit. All while not laying off any public sector employees, that didn't have their unions rush to sign a contract prior to the budget being signed into law, and you want to recall this man? If the Janesville Teachers Union would have re-opened their contract and accepted some of the same concessions that were in the budget, there wouldn't have been any layoffs, but the pig-headed teachers in this city chose to let their fellow workers get laid off. What a bunch of dolts. And you think you're going to get enough votes to recall him? You should be thanking him for making the difficult decisions that the prior administration was to spineless to do. Recall, what a bunch of hogwash. Wisconsin didn't move from the 41st best state to do business in to 26th, all in about 8 months, because of these pinheads that want him gone. Why can't you losers accept the fact that he won, and is going to do what needs to be done to get this state back to fiscal prosperity.

http://recallwalkercountdown.appspot.com...
rimmer ...... you leave.

John, Prosser was rushed by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley and he defended himself. She should be tossed off the court for the aggressive antics of one who needs anger management, not Prosser.
.
Get a real life and get a real job.
Clean your act up and stop being a nob
Get it together like our Governor Scott
Stop sending articals from your office desk job

After reading Abrahamson's dissenting "opinion" of the collective bargaining case I think Prosser hit the nail on the head with his comment of her.
-
Also I find it awfully concerning that Abrahamson told Prosser that her opinion "could take up to a month" but yet she miraculously had it done less than 24 hours later when the decision was released. Sounds like school yard games to me.

It seems that the Dems would like to see the rules changed, now that they are 0 for 2010/2011. They haven't won anything worth winning in the past year and a half, so they want to change how things are done. The Donkey motto should be "If we can't beat'em, change the rules"

I think John Eyster should use a bowtie.

Ok, let's see how this works John.
First Kloppenburg lost in her race against Prosser.
Then Kloppenburg failed to overturn the decision of the voters in a recount.
Oh what to do?
Hey let's make up a ruckus among the justices and call for judicial reform.
Yea, thats it!
Roll out the accusations so we can harp on them later even after they are disproven.

More and more leaking out that doesn't look good for those two women.

Prosser hit the nail on the head when he threw out the label that PERFECTLY describes the beast Abrahamson. With any luck, both her and her little lap dog Bradley(that would be Blakely to you, Sarah:)) will be out of a job.........

http://mediatrackers.org/2011/03/chief-j...

Prosser is obviously in need of treatment!
Wisconsin State Journal 66/25
"In March, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that, in a disagreement over a case last year, Prosser had called Abrahamson a "total bitch" and threatened to "destroy" her.
Prosser, the paper reported, confirmed making the remarks."

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/28/br...

Well I dont see you Sarahb1 jumping all over Eyster for writting in this blog that it was Prosser.
At least that is what is implied when he links articles like the one he did.

Eyster, wasn't it you who said the recount was he way to go. It's funny how you decide to throw in the statement Prosser was told to get anger management when he was the one defending himself. This is so laughable because the person who said he needed anger management was the same person who attacked him.

So Eyster, Prosser gets charged at by a woman and puts his hands up to defend himself and still you're trying to say it is his fault. Nice.

Also, I bet any amount of money that if Prosser had lost the election, you would not be here today advocating the alteration of the democratic process used to choose WI Supreme Court justices.

Pathetic, hypocritical and shameful. You need to quit this job and go back to being a full-time lobbyist.

Well said Northman !

Northman- All very true but that really was my point to rimmer. At the time the constitution was written, there were no amendments, no taxes, slavery existed, women could not vote and so on. We do not live in the same world that our forefathers lived in. We live in a mobile society where government controls have been set up to protect such things as water, food handling, environment, building codes,city services, etc. Some government involvement is absolutely necessary.

Sorry analertcitizen, but one of their biggest concerns was limited government. Thomas Jefferson particularly prized self-sufficiency, self-government, and individual responsibility. Hamilton aside, most of them thought big government was bad government. There was indeed concern about big corporations, though they saw it more in terms of large central banks. But as for tax breaks, it may interest you to know there was no income tax at that time, or for some time afterwards.

bebe- Actually I think I'll just stay here and vote then you can move to a country that has a dictator.

alertcitizen-our forefathers were also against government wanting to control every aspect of our lives-there are plenty of socialist countries to move to if that is what you want

Yes Northman they would cringe at the direction this country is going but they would cringe not at progressive nature of the country but at the regressive nature of this country. The forefathers were all about the common man, not about corporate interests and tax benefits for the wealthiest among us.

bebe53: Thanks!

analertcitizen: Where are you going with your line of reasoning? Are you suggesting our forefathers were evil and wrong about everything? Do you advocate tearing up the constitution and starting from scratch? I thought rimmer’s post was a little over the top, but I’d agree that the signers of the Declaration would cringe if they saw the direction that today’s liberals/progressives are trying to take our country.

rimmer, take no offense but I think you've got it backwards. Modern Progressives stand first and foremost for the ballot box. Everything else is secondary. The government madness you speak of is created by the immoral infatuation of money and power - not Progressives.

Northman-well put!!!

rimmer- Our forefathers also thought slavery was just fine and women shouldn't/ couldn't vote because they couldn't understand it all anyway. Do you believe we should go back to that?

Fox News.

Once again, trying to parse through all this liberal ranting is a migrane-inducing chore, but it seems Eyster has two unrelated points to make. First, he has charged, tried, and convicted Prosser of workplace violence, and then bemoans his assumption that no justice will come of this because Prosser is “elite”. Second, he thinks we need to reform our system of choosing Supreme Courte justices, because . . . well, just because.

As for the Supreme’s recent kerfuffle , I’ve seen varying accounts of what happened. So far, it’s the classic “he said, she said”, and there are two investigations underway to try to get to the truth of the matter. It certainly sounds like somebody was out of line and needs to be disciplined, but let’s wait for the facts before we start cinching up the nooses. Eyster leaves an amorphous inference that somehow, our method of electing justices leads inevitably to black robe donnybrooks, but provides no chain of logic to back this.

For reform, Eyster is firmly in George Soros’ back pocket. Surprise! The Fox website had an interesting article on Monday detailing Soros’ priority of “replacing elections for judges with selection-by-committee”, which “has critics accusing him of trying to stack the courts.” (Just go to Fox and type “Soros” into the search box, you’ll find the article quickly enough.) As the article points out, these committees will normally consist of lawyers – saying “left-wing lawyers” is pretty much a redundancy – which leads to more liberal justices. Expecting these committees to act in a nonpartisan fashion is about as reasonable as expecting unions to contribute to the Republicans. True, no single process is perfect, but selecting the process that’s heavily stacked towards a more liberal judicial branch is the height of folly.

delivering INFORMATION and PERSPECTIVE for WE THE PEOPLE of WI to know what is REALLY going on in our WI Supreme Court........

Please take time to read Blaska's Blog.

http://www.thedailypage.com/blaska/artic...

Reporting for National Review On-line, Christian Schneider reconstructs the episode, which occurred the day before the June 14 release of its important decision affirming, by a 4-3 vote, the collective bargaining changes.

It has the four-justice majority searching the Capitol for the chief justice to ascertain whether she would fulfill a promise to release the decision timely. They find her in Justice Ann Walsh Bradley's office. Prosser is standing in the doorway. Words are exchanged.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/270...

Take time to read the links provided in Blaska's blog regarding:

Abrahamson is the one constant

The late Bill Bablitch, a former Democrat(ic) state senator, joined three other justices in 1999 to endorse Shirley's opponent, almost unheard of before or since. Media Trackers recounts "Chief Justice Abrahamson's Stormy History on the Court."

http://mediatrackers.org/2011/03/chief-j...

"that there is one system of justice for the elite and one for the rest of us.
And that's just as disturbing as having a Supreme Court that appears to have gone completely berserk."

Great link to Chris Rickert article. I am very disturbed and embarrassed by the behavior of our court.