The foggy oracle of 2008

Each year at this time I peer into the magic crystal ball, and each year I just see my reflection. But I still make predictions. Using the typical sportswriter's accuracy for predicting NFL games as my benchmark, I don't do half badly. On the other hand, have you noticed how few sportswriters chuck the job and move to Las Vegas?

Herewith are the results from last year's predictions with the update in italics.
1. Despite high turnover on the Waukesha County Board, Jim Dwyer will remain as County Board Chairman. Meetings will still continue to be held during the day preventing many qualified people from running and serving.
Well, yeah. I gave myself an easy one to start.

2. The Waukesha School District will win its arbitration case with the teacher’s union. The teachers will retaliate by behaving unprofessionally even though the district didn’t get very much.
The school district opted instead to punt.

3. At least one local radio personality will be suspended for something said on air.
Not even off air. I was really betting on Joel McNally.

4. State Representative Bill Kramer will only face token opposition from the Democrats.
Well, define token. Okay, I was wrong, but it proved to be a safe Republican seat.

5. There will not be a school referendum in 2008 in Waukesha.
Hah! Score one for me.

6. Jonah Goldberg’s book will be judged more by its cover than by its content.
Too easy.

7. Mayor Larry Nelson will wear a suit, tie and even real shoes to a city function.
Yes, yes he did. Unfortunately, it was Governor Lee Dreyfus' funeral.

8. Alderman and County Supervisor Kathleen Cummings will be caught talking to herself oddly. No, but how can you be in favor of train whistles?

9. I will lose weight, stop snoring, and figure out my sinus problems. (Cross-reference my New Year’s resolutions) I stopped snoring, just in the nick of time.

10. The Dallas Cowboys will win the Super Bowl. Only if you play Madden 2008.

11. Rumors will start about Waukesha County Executive Dan Vrakas running for governor in 2010 (even if I have to start them). I'm trying Allison, but I'm the only one mentioning his name. The problem is there's this guy over in Wauwatosa...

12. The Milwaukee Brewers will finish 88-74. (88+74=162, okay I didn’t screw that up this year.) 90-72, not a bad prediction.

13. Bud Selig will not finish 2008 as Baseball Commissioner. This was wrong early.

14. Some politician will go to jail in Madison but it won’t be Governor Doyle or former Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen. Close. How's the drunk tank, Representative Wood?

15. Paul Soglin will be arrested for counterfeiting tickets to enter downtown Madison on Halloween. He’ll be sentenced to community service – snowplowing Madison’s bike trails. He'll be caught this year.

16. The Republican nominee for President will be… Mitt Romney. So much for the barnstormin' Mormon.

17. The Democratic nominee for President will be… Barack Obama. Do we have to kiss his ring?

18. Joe Liebermann will run for Vice President. And I’m leaving it at that. He gave a great vice presidential speech at the Republican convention.

19. Britney Spears will be pregnant. With John Edwards' love child.

20. Assembly Democrats will win the state assembly and State Senate Democrats will retain control. Oh, the humanity!

21. There will be a human rights protest or incident at the Beijing Olympics that will be ignored by the media until the blogs and talk radio forces them to cover it – too late. The protestors were better organized worldwide than the Chinese.

22. Jim Doyle will propose his own version of Healthy Wisconsin. Lord help us, but Doyle may be the only one to save us from the madness.

23. Jim Doyle will propose shifting school funding to the sales tax. He’ll call it "property tax relief." I think this idea is actually DOA. How'd that happen?

24. State Supreme Court Justice Louis Butler will win re-election. Federal Judge Louis Butler. It's like whack-a-mole.

25. Local activist Steve Edlund will be caught skinny-dipping in the Waukesha South High School Pool. No, but we had to hear about sex in Frame Park. Ewwww.

26. Ed Thompson will be elected mayor of Tomah. Somebody in the family has to hold a steady job, even if he is a conspiracy theory nut.

27. The United States will have forces inside Pakistan by the end of the year. Barack has a list of 41 other countries to invade, too.

28. Ann Coulter will be fined by the FCC for uttering an obscenity on the air. She will blame her critics. I think the broken jaw saved her.

Bonus leap year prediction:
29. JB Van Hollen will not find any terrorist training camps in Wisconsin.
No, the GAB doesn't count.

I count 10 of 29 for a correct score of 34%. Better than your daily horoscope, almost as good as the weatherman.

Government Accountability Board disenfranchises everybody

The Government Accountability Board decided Tuesday to require local clerks to cross check voter registrations since January 2006. That’s right. The GAB is adopting the Van Hollen standard.

I'm waiting for the rioting and looting to begin because the GAB is standing in the way of people voting. "No cross checking, no peace" or something like that. Perhaps, "Hey hey, ho ho, DOT list checking has got to go." This outrageous decision by the GAB can only have been made with the malicious intent to align with evil forces to keep us from voting. Who's running the GAB behind the scenes? Karl Rove?

Right?

Or do you think those that went completely bonkers before the election because JB Van Hollen wanted the GAB to do exactly what they're doing now might owe the attorney general an apology? Maybe before some on the left get themselves get themselves into a rabid frenzy they might want to gain a sense of perspective.

Van Hollen wanted the GAB to actually check to January 2006 as the law required, that was disenfranchising the poor and the elderly. The GAB picked a date twenty months later, that was perfectly wonderful in left-wing la-la land. Before November 4, 2008, cross checking voter registrations would disenfranchise minorities and the elderly. After November 4th, it’s just another bureaucratic decision.

Perhaps the Democrats should ditch the Donkey as their symbol and adopt an outraged contortionist instead.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Late, late Friday afternoon cocktail

Couldn't be helped this week. Sometimes the office calls, and all hope of making happy hour vanishes.

Summer ends this weekend, as does the Milwaukee Brewers' chances of making the playoffs. Maybe because it's the end of summer, or the Milwaukee Brewers are playing the Cincinnati Reds, or to celebrate JB Van Hollen's lawsuit to try make Wisconsin voting less like a banana republic, I thought a cranberry recipe or two were in order.

Rum Runner
Ingredients:

* 1 1/2 oz Malibu rum
* 1 oz Blackberry brandy
* 3-4 oz Orange juice
* 3-4 oz Pineapple juice
* 3-4 oz Cranberry juice

Mixing instructions:

Mix all ingredients in glass & add ice.

The "Holy Autumn":

1.5 oz cranberry vodka
1/4 oz Chambord
1/2 oz cranberry juice
garnish with 3 fresh cranberries

And of course, the cosmopolitan.

Maybe we'll be lucky in 2008 and Wisconsin won't matter

From the latest Wisconsin Club for Growth newsletter:

Partisan Winds

Last week, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen filed a much publicized lawsuit against the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board (GAB), in an attempt to force the GAB to comply with a federal law to ensure the integrity of elections. Those of us who champion the cause of ballot security applaud the Attorney General, but his critics, including Governor Jim Doyle and the mainstream media, are assailing the move as political because Van Hollen is co-chair of GOP nominee John McCain's Wisconsin campaign. Never mind that Doyle has been barnstorming the state for Barack Obama for months.

Congress enacted the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), in 2002 to require that states keep accurate voter databases to prevent people from voting under false names. The law requires states to perform periodic reviews of the voter files to ensure accuracy – which Wisconsin has not been doing. As a result, recent news reports have shown thousands of voter records to be inaccurate. while at the same time dozens of Democratic campaign workers are under investigation for trying to fatten the voter rolls with fraudulent voter registration cards.

The Wisconsin Democratic Party which is heavily invested in making sure voter fraud persists, has filed a motion to block Van Hollen’s lawsuit. The increasingly liberal Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has been quick to carry their water, editorializing that Van Hollen’s lawsuit to force GAB compliance with the law has a “whiff of partisanship.” The paper failed to mention the “stench of incompetence” emanating from the GAB staff and Doyle Administration members charged with overseeing the project.

Last year, a state audit showed that the new voter identification system would not be ready for the 2008 presidential election. The system is now two election cycles late, and without it, municipalities won't be able to determine if felons or other ineligible voters are casting ballots. Four years after deadline and more than $22 million later, Wisconsin still has no list.

The GAB signed a state contract with Accenture in 2004 to compile the list. The agreement paid the company $13.9 million to create a statewide list, with the help of local clerks. Yet in December of 2007, Accenture was forced to cut ties with the state, as very little progress was being made on the project. Despite not producing any list of value, Accenture was able to keep $7 million in taxpayer funds.

All of this has occurred under the watchful eye of GAB Director Kevin Kennedy and the Doyle Administration which has thrown tens of millions of tax dollars at other computer projects that never materialized.

The bottom line for voters this year is the louder the Democrats and the GAB kick and scream about having to follow the law, the more clear it becomes that vote fraud is critical to their election strategy. It is ironic that the GAB – which has the power to prosecute individuals for real or imagined campaign law violations – refuses to even follow the law itself.

Now Van Hollen wants cases reviewed

JB Van Hollen is reviewing the UW-Milwaukee building contract controversy involving the Doyle Administration claiming he's not sure that any actual investigation took place.

Van Hollen said he may have been kept in the dark on the progress of cases overseen by Division of Criminal Investigation Administrator Jim Warren, who retired in January after clashing with Van Hollen.

The division is the state's elite crime fighting unit and is overseen by the Department of Justice, which Van Hollen took over in January 2007 after winning election.

Van Hollen said he has no evidence investigators ever looked into allegations that Gov. Jim Doyle's administration improperly influenced the award of a major University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee building contract. The case was closed without his input or knowledge, and it's possible others were too, he said.

"We are in the process of reviewing all of those," he told reporters at the grand opening of a new crime lab in Madison.

DCI administrator Mike Myszewski, who took over in March, is conducting the review, Van Hollen said. He cautioned it will take time given other investigations and personnel and funding problems Myszewski is handling.

Of course, when the case was dropped by Van Hollen's office, he didn't seem to have a problem basking in the glow of support from those on the Left who praised Van Hollen for his non-political handling of the case. In fact, Van Hollen lashed out at his critics on the political right at the time.

Now Van Hollen (who graded his first year in office an "A") is now claiming he has no idea what his chief investigators did or didn't do.

I wonder what grade he'll give himself this year?

Packing concealed heat

Wisconsin Attorney General JB Van Hollen has been upping the ante in the concealed weapon debate, issuing a permit to former Justice Department investigator Tom Steingraeber.

It's illegal for citizens to carry a concealed weapon in Wisconsin. But Van Hollen says the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 sets out guidelines under which qualified retired law enforcement officers can carry concealed weapons.

The former investigator, Tom Steingraeber, retired from the Justice Department in 1993. He served as director of the White Collar Crimes Bureau.

I believe (and my 2nd amendment reader fans will correct me if I'm wrong on this) that the actual illegality of carrying a concealed weapon is in doubt because of the state constitution's right to bear arms. It would be interesting if Dane County suddenly decided to get into a fight with Van Hollen over this, especially with the addition of Gableman to the Supreme Court.

I loved this comment from a reader of the Capital Times:

How many murders and liquor store robberies has this armed citizen committed? I can't believe Van Hollen would endanger the people of our state with such an ignorant decision. When will we learn that guns are a regrettable part of our violent past that should be done away with? Evolve, man! Give peace a chance!

Hey, that's why they're known as peace officers.

Amendment preserving traditional definition of marriage passes court challenge

Judge Richard Neiss of Dane County rejected a lawsuit claiming the referendum amending the constitution to ban same-sex marriage was itself unconstitutional.

UW-Oshkosh instructor William McConkey challenged the amendment, arguing Wisconsin statutes limit referendums on constitutional amendments to a single question. McConkey’s attorneys argued that the marriage amendment asked voters to respond to two separate questions: how marriage should be defined in Wisconsin and whether marriage benefits should be allocated to unmarried people.

But Judge Richard G. Neiss ruled that the separate propositions on the ballot were constitutional because they addressed the same general legislative purpose.

“These propositions clearly relate to the same subject matter and further the same purpose,” Neiss said.

Wisconsin Attorney General JB Van Vollen was quick to claim credit. Here's the press release:

Van Hollen Successfully Defends The Constitutionality Of The Legislature's Presentation To Voters Of Marriage Amendment Ballot Question

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
May 30, 2008

Madison - Ruling from the bench today, Dane County Circuit Court Judge Richard G. Niess upheld Wisconsin 's Marriage Amendment in the case McConkey v. Van Hollen. The decision dismisses a legal challenge questioning whether or not Wisconsin 's marriage amendment had been properly placed before the voters.

"I'm pleased that we were able to prevail today and that the Court adopted our arguments," said Van Hollen. "We argued that the marriage amendment was properly submitted. Today's ruling defeats a legal challenge that was aimed at undermining the will of Wisconsin voters."

At issue before the Court was whether the marriage amendment as submitted to the voters during the November 2006 elections met the State Constitution's requirements for amending the Constitution. Judge Niess found that the marriage amendment ballot question did not violate the constitutional requirement that each ballot question contain only one amendment. Judge Niess found that the question was a single amendment because that the propositions contained in the text related to the same subject matter and were designed to accomplish the same general purpose.

"As Wisconsin 's Attorney General, I am committed to vigorously defending the state's constitution," said Van Hollen. "In this case, the Legislature acted well within its constitutional discretion in forming the ballot question."

Assistant Attorney General Thomas Balistreri represented the state in this case.

We'll see if some of Van Hollen's liberal defenders will be quick to jump to his defense in this case.

Does Van Hollen know the definition of marriage?

Now I'm really sorry I can't go to the Americans for Prosperity Summit tomorrow. Perhaps someone else in attendance can ask him what is the definition of marriage?

There is a case before the state supreme court regarding the definition of marriage and whether same sex couples should be given benefits as if they were a married couple. This case does not affect those communities and insititutions that are already giving benefits to same sex couples, but instead affects those communities, businesses and government institutions that do not.

Michael Dean of the First Freedoms Foundation (FFF) represents "eight Wisconsin municipalities and school boards who were not parties but are trying to intervene to defend and introduce evidence supporting the legislative definition of marriage." The state supreme court ruled against them today, moving what should have been interested parties in the lawsuit to spectators on the sidelines.

Interestingly, Dean points out in the FFF press release:

The court acknowledged that the attorney general isn’t putting any evidence in the record to support the legislature’s decision to define “dependents” to include “spouses” but not same-sex partners. The court says that when the case comes back a second time for a decision on the merits of the plaintiffs’ claim, it can order the case returned to the trial court yet a third time so the attorney general can do his job and actually put evidence in the record. The court doesn’t promise it will do that, nor does it explain why the attorney general should be permitted to put in evidence after he’s refused to do so twice already.

State fire marshal suspended, but no one's saying why

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is reporting the state fire marshall was suspended indefinitely by JB Van Hollen, but nobody knows the reason.

Carolyn S. Kelly, who was appointed as director of the Justice Department's Arson Bureau in 1994, was suspended indefinitely with pay from her $87,107-a-year job, sources said.

"As a matter of general policy, we do not comment on personnel actions concerning individual employees," said Special Assistant Attorney General Kevin St. John, chief spokesman for Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen.

It's a matter of policy the state AG's office doesn't comment on anything anybody wants to know.

Kelly, a member of the state civil service system and also a senior homicide investigator for the department, refused to comment Tuesday.

She has worked for the Justice Department for about 25 years.

Obviously she wasn't experienced enough for the job.

Here's one for all of you still suspicious of what happened up in Crandon,

Kelly had also been part of the team of state and local officials reviewing the Oct. 7, 2007, shooting deaths of six people at a party by Tyler Peterson, a Crandon police officer and Forest County deputy sheriff who investigators say then killed himself.

Van Hollen has promised to make public some records of the investigation in coming weeks.

Kelly's suspension was the second change in recent weeks at the top of the state Division of Criminal Investigation.

Maybe Kelly said something insubordinate like, "Couldn't we just release everything to the media?"

Van Hollen 4 Block World

With sincere apologies to the indispensible Tom McMahon.

Not Just a Pretty Face

Van Hollen propaganda tour continues

For a politician who gave himself an "A" for his performance last year, Van Hollen has certainly been busy trying to improve his image. Now he admits he has no plan to help Milwaukee's crime problem, a big issue in the 2006 campaign.

Van Hollen said he has a more realistic grasp of what the attorney general can do to fight Milwaukee crime: Team up with city leaders.

"It is not up to me to determine what is in the best interest of Milwaukee," he said.

After meetings with Milwaukee leaders, Van Hollen said, his message is that "We want to be part of the team."

In retrospect, any promises of a sweeping anti-crime package for the city were unwise, he said.

The article is noteworthy for the complete absence of any Republican on the record defending JB Van Hollen, and it mentions his unhappy base. The article (and Van Hollen) mischaracterizes the criticisms as Van Hollen not being political enough or visible enough. Democratic Party Chairman Joe Wineke finds some words of praise for Van Hollen:

Despite running as a conservative Republican, Van Hollen has "not followed through with a rigid, ideological agenda . . . he didn't take up certain issues that he ran on," Wineke said.

As does Bruce Nilles, director of the Sierra Club's National Coal Campaign.

Perhaps Van Hollen should take a look at his new friends. After all, it's by them that he builds his reputation.

I think he deserves an award

A new year and a brand new start for everyone by JB Van Hollen. He started off the year by telling a "whopper" that even Burger King couldn't sell. Van Hollen told the Associated Press he deserved an "A" for his performance last year. (Ht: Right Side of Wisconsin)

Republican J.B. Van Hollen made a lot of promises when he was running for attorney general.

Attack the state's DNA backlog. Restore professionalism to the Department of Justice. And keep a low profile.

Done, done and done, Van Hollen told the Associated Press in a recent interview. Give his first year in office an A, he said.

"We accomplished more in the first year than I perhaps envisioned we could have during my whole term," Van Hollen said.

But he still has plenty to deal with in 2008. Critics contend the attorney general is nearly invisible, his legal stances are too liberal and he mishandled the media after a grisly North Woods mass murder.

Crime in Milwaukee remains rampant, the Justice Department needs a new top investigator and Van Hollen has yet to follow through on vows to police elections more strictly.

Now the question arises, is Van Hollen delusional? Should he be referred for psychiatric treatment and/or confinement? It would explain the terrorism remarks.

Because there is no way any politician who has had the year Van Hollen had can possibly score himself that high unless he's being graded by a really "progressive" report card scale where everyone get A's so everyone feels special.

For his special contribution to the dulling of political discourse in this state, for failing to live up to his many campaign promises and then claiming to have done more in one year than he could've expected to in his entire term, I hereby award Wisconsin Attorney General JB Van Hollen with the 2007 Whopper of the Year. As the cliche goes, Van Hollen certainly takes the prize.

Find classic movies at Amazon.com

The Big 7 for 2007

The Big 7 for 2007

The seven events of 2007 shaping Wisconsin

1. The State Senate Democrats overreach with Healthy Wisconsin, a plan to double state taxes to provide “universal” health care coverage. The plan fails to receive the endorsement of Democratic Governor Jim Doyle and Assembly Republicans and causes state budget negotiations to collapse. Eventually Healthy Wisconsin fails and State Senate Leader Judy Robson is overthrown. Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch emerges from Jensen/Gard shadow demonstrating ability to hold caucus together under pressure to negotiate with the Governor.
2. Stem cell researchers, including UW-Madison’s James Thomson, discover a method of programming non-embryonic stem cells to behave like embryonic stem cells, further vindicating the pro-life position of limiting embryonic stem cell research and beginning the end of stem cells as a political weapon.
3. Judge Annette Ziegler wins election to state Supreme Court under ethical cloud, preserving near-even division of the court. Despite Ziegler’s margin of victory and that the ethical questions were all raised prior to the election, left-wing activists still seek to overturn election.
4. State GOP leaders fail to recruit top-tier candidate to challenge State Supreme Court Justice Louis Butler. This follows Republican failures to attract top candidates to challenge Senator Feingold in 2004 and Senator Kohl in 2006.
5. Tyler Peterson kills six people in Crandon, WI. Slow release of details by local authorities and State Attorney General JB Van Hollen, plus Van Hollen’s suggestion to the Crandon community to stop talking to the media, cause more questions to be asked about JB Van Hollen. The Crandon murders follow a series of opinions issued by Van Hollen that causes his political base some discomfort. Previously talked about as a candidate for governor, Van Hollen announced that he would seek re-election for SAG in 2010 and wait on running for governor.
6. Tommy Thompson for President frenzy reaches its peak, debates reveal Thompson’s shortcomings, and then Thompson’s campaign fizzles with the Ames, IA Straw Poll. Nobody noticed he endorsed Mayor Rudy Giuliani.*
7. Georgia Thompson has her conviction overturned. Van Hollen declines to pursue investigations against Governor Doyle, effectively ending scandals as issue.

* Originally and incorrectly wrote "endorsed Senator John McCain". Endorsement so inconsequential Waukesha Freeman columnist James Wigderson was quoted as saying, "Who endorsed whom?"

Maybe the party should recruit a Republican to run for attorney general

Charlie Sykes asks an excellent question. When the WIVA case was being fought, where was State Attorney General JB Van Hollen? Excerpt from an e-mail sent to Charlie by an attorney for the WIVA parents,

Perhaps even more disturbing, the first time the assistant attorney general (who represented Superintendent Burmaster) asked for the defunding injunction was at oral argument on appeal. WEAC named Burmaster a defendant in the original action in 2004, and I intervened on behalf of parents in 2005 when she moved for summary judgment against herself. She didn’t moved to realign as a plaintiff, amend the caption, file her own complaint against the school or plead for an injunction – the AG just filed a motion asking the court to find that she was violating the law. Then, almost 4 years after the case began, the AG showed up at oral argument and out of the blue asked for an order effectively killing the school. I responded that the appropriate remedy is to order a school to comply with the law, not kill it, but the court ordered the injunction anyway without discussion. (WEAC did ask for an injunction below, but even they didn’t ask the court of appeals to kill WIVA – that was the AG’s request.) Thus, if the order stands, the court of appeals has effectively killed a duly created public school with no pleadings, no briefing, no written motion for injunction, and a total of 20 or 30 seconds of discussion at oral argument.

The AG requesting the “death penalty” for WIVA without identifying applicable standards by which it could become “legal” was utterly inappropriate and irresponsible. Unfortunately, it was not surprising. Once again, J.B. Van Hollen is simply missing in action, apparently taking no interest in what his associates are doing in his name. I have no problem with an assistant AG aggressively representing his client. I do have a problem with an attorney general taking no interest whatever in the implications of his office’s conduct of a high profile, enormously important case. Because of J.B.’s indifference or incompetence, WEAC and DPI have once again flexed their political muscle, and are a huge step closer to killing a tremendously effective educational innovation.

Perhaps he's too busy keeping the lid on the Crandon killings and being the only state attorney general trying to block the XM-Sirius satellite radio merger.

Reince Preibus, have you thought about whom the Republicans should run for Attorney General in 2010?

Hey, we found a Republican in the AG office!

MADISON (AP) - Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen says illegal immigrants cannot receive professional licenses or credentials from the state.

Van Hollen says in a formal legal opinion that the Department of Regulation and Licensing should verify the immigration status for all of those applying for professional licenses.

He says the department can do so by using a database operated by the Department of Homeland Security.

The department issues 128 different types of credentials in over 55 professional fields. They include many health and business professions.

I haven't read the opinion yet so I'll withold judgement. Now we'll see if Van Hollen's defenders like Bill Christofferson rush to defend Van Hollen's interpretation of the law.

Find classic movies at Amazon.com

Just because I haven't caused enough trouble lately

From IMDB, the Internet Movie Database, Flash Gordon (1980) trivia:

"The insignia on Klytus's uniform is based on Masonic symbols."

Really?

Costume designed by Danilo Donati?

Commander Zero

JB Van Hollen is trying to get more money from the state legislature, $2.2 million to fight sexual predators.

“Make no mistake,” Van Hollen wrote, “those enticing Wisconsin’s children in chat rooms and those offering to distribute images of sexual assault are sex predators. With good reason, the Legislature has made a significant commitment to monitoring convicted sex predators after they are released from custody. I believe it is time for the Legislature and the Governor to make an equally significant commitment to investigating sex predators that are not in the corrections system, taking them off the street before they can do more harm to Wisconsin’s children.”

Very few will disagree with the idea of getting these sexual predators off the streets. And I'm sure channel 4 WTMJ TV would love to have more footage of guys getting trapped in internet predator stings. But "Zero-based" budgeter JB Van Hollen, who said it is not the "conservative thing to do" to keep spending money, has so far proposed over 14% in budget increases.

Who does he think he is, a road builder?

Find classic movies at Amazon.com

Maybe they're too busy looking for terrorists

Despite adding more analysts than even what the governor suggested, despite throwing money at the problem like a member of Congress, JB Van Hollen is already planning on breaking his promise to erase the back log at the state crime labs. (Ht: McBride)

Compounding the problem are the well-documented shortage of qualified DNA analysts and a backlog at the crime lab of more than 1,700 cases.

The state Legislature recently passed emergency funding to hire 30 DNA analysts and one technician.

Van Hollen anticipates they will have the backlog cleared up during 2010, but he added: "I'd never be so foolish as to make a promise."

Except during a campaign, when his ambition exceeded his ability to be honest.

Find classic movies at Amazon.com

Those darn extremists

Owen Robinson and Sean Hackbarth offer some advice for bloggers. I would add one piece of advice, every word you type can and will come back to haunt you.

For example, sometimes you feel like a nut:

I thought Sommers was just some crazy guy running a protest campaign. Pro-Life Wisconsin has decided he's a crazy guy worthy of their crazy endorsement. I wonder if it was more contingent on the number of children he has or his "no exceptions" pro-life stance.

Sometimes you don't:
"How is he extreme?

1. He does not support gay marriage, something 60% of Wisconsin citizens agree with.
2. He is pro-life.

When looked at in combination with his extremist rhetoric regarding the marriage amendment, Van Hollen's statement regarding reproductive rights suggests that Roys is on target when she says the candidate is displaying "a callous disregard for the health and privacy of Wisconsin's citizens."

There are many social conservatives who offer principled arguments for changing laws regarding abortion.

J.B. Van Hollen is not one of them. He has placed himself outside the mainstream, and that ought to place him outside of consideration by responsible Republicans.

While this editorial is factually incorrect (none of J.B.'s views make him extreme, and he is by no means out of the mainstream), the CapTimes coming out against this candidate makes me all the more enthused to support him."

Pro-Life Wisconsin, you may remember, endorsed JB Van Hollen for Attorney General in last year's primary.

The lesson: Don't hurt your credibility by sneering at an organization just because they didn't endorse your candidate this time in this election, especially if you defended their principles in the past when they did endorse your candidate.



Buy Wisconsin Stuff Now!

Paying for it

Bill Lueders in the Isthmus has discovered the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund is not letting Van Hollen drop his defamation lawsuit until they recover some of their legal costs. They still maintain their ad (still available on Wispolitics.com) was factually correct. (Besides the lawsuit, Van Hollen also ran a television ad in response. At the time, I described the Greater Wisconsin Ad as "terribly clumsy".)

Without getting into the merits of the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund ad (which was criticized by both Democrats and Republicans at the time), if JB Van Hollen really believed he had grounds for a defamation lawsuit he should have pursued it. If Van Hollen didn't believe he had grounds for a defamation lawsuit and was just filing it in an attempt to give legitimacy to his counterattack ads, then he owes the public and the Greater Wisconsin Political Fund a public apology for attempting to use the courts to silence his critics, a precedent I think partisans of both parties should be uncomfortable with.

To avoid the frivolous use of defamation lawsuits in the future, last week I proposed the following reform:

I think a better reform would be to require any candidate for public office filing a law suit for defamation within 30 days of the election to post a $5000 filing fee or bond refundable only upon successful conclusion of the lawsuit. If your reputation has truly been wrongly wounded, $5000 is a small price to pay.

This would not discourage out of court settlements as the $5000 could easily be a part of that, but the amount should be enough to discourage the filing of suits merely to attempt to intimidate your political opponents.