Ironic Twist of Fate In Wisconsin Recount
By demanding a statewide recount, and insisting that the recount continue to the end even as it became clear she had no chance of success, JoAnne Kloppenburg has seen her public persona devolve into a caricature of a bitter partisan lacking the necessary judgment for the job she seeks.
By contrast, Kathy Nickolaus, the Republican Waukesha County clerk who was harshly criticized by Democrats for an election night reporting mistake, is seeing a rehabilitation of her reputation as the city of Brookfield and Waukesha County recounts demonstrate no meaningful errors much less fraud.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, noting many complaints about Nickolaus over the years, also reports that Nickolaus is receiving support:
Despite the high-profile blunder, Nickolaus has won support from many local and statewide clerks.
Brookfield Clerk Kristine Schmidt, who was irritated that she learned about the error involving her community during the televised news conference, nonetheless had a positive outlook.
“Truthfully, she’s one of the clerks in the state of Wisconsin who really makes an effort for her municipal clerks,” Schmidt said. “In general, she has made a lot of effort on our behalf to make sure we work together.”
In emails to Nickolaus, a number of clerks expressed empathy for her election night error and offered encouragement.
Kevin Kennedy, executive director of the Government Accountability Board, declined to comment on Nickolaus’ performance but did say she and her deputy are among the very few in the state and 500 nationally who are certified by the national training center for election officials. In 2004, she was also named to a 12-person Wisconsin Special Committee in Election Law Review that helped implement the federal Help America Vote Act of 2002.
Nickolaus made a mistake and apologized when she realized the mistake. Kloppenburg made a mistake but refuses to acknowledge much less apologize for it.
The Wisconsin recount has created an ironic twist of fate. JoAnne Kloppenburg set out to vilify Kathy Nickolaus, but in so doing rehabilitated Nickolaus while damaging herself.
There must be a Bible passage, parable or fable on point, I just can’t think of one right now.
Update: This may explain it, but not excuse it, Kloppenburg Etymology.
Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Time wounds all heels?
the sign of the beast is liberalism?
wait, thats not correct 🙂
"Any why seest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye; and seest not the beam that is in thy own eye?" – Matthew 7:3
Proverbs 26:11 (KJV)
As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.
Reap what you sow?
Not sure about a parable… "and the truth shall set you free"? comes to mind? Anytime someone makes a mistake in the Bible, they're murdered, so I'm not sure any really fits.. Either way, I'm gonna have a lot of fun shoving this article in the faces of unhappy WI liberals!
For some reason this comes to mind:
"Bread obtained by falsehood is sweet to a man,
But afterward his mouth will be filled with gravel."
Also (why, I can't imagine…. /sarc):
"I'm rubber, you're glue.
Everything bounces off of me and sticks to you."
Nickolaus=rubber; Kloppenburg=glue. Heh.
Kloppenburg's childishness and pettiness is pathetic. "Not fit for the position" is an understatement.
There must be a Bible passage, parable or fable on point, I just can't think of one right now.
The story of Queen Esther comes to mind. Haman, the king's right-hand man, set out to destory Mordechai, Esther's cousin, because Mordechai refused to bow to him at the palace. After Mordechai exposed an (unrelated) plot against the king, the king asked his right-hand man Haman how to honor someone who'd done the king a great service. Haman assumed that he'd be the one so honored, and gave details for a grand, public ceremony. The king thanked him for his excellent suggestion, and told him to carry it out, and oh by the way, the guy I want to honor is Mordechai the Jew.
Between that and what happens to Haman at the end (he's hanged on the very same gallows that he'd planned to have Mordechai hanged on), the story of Esther is the earliest "hoist by his own petard" story I'm aware of.
You know, there is a senate seat opening up in Wisconsin, and Kloppenberg has outstanding name recognition.
Kloppenburg made a mistake but refuses to acknowledge much less apologize for it.
Asking for a recount is a perfectly valid response under Wisconsin law when the vote is close and there is evidence of problems. So what was Kloppenburg's mistake?
@Zachriel – Kloppenburg could have requested a recount only in Waukesha County, but then she would have had to pay for it. With such a large vote difference, the only issue which could have overcome the gap was whether Brookfield properly was included. By the time she requested the recount, the GAB already had investigated and found no wrongdoing, verifying the fact that it simply was a reporting error on election night by Nicholaus; this was consistent with the fact that Brookfield itself publicly reported the results on election night. So, there was nothing to suggest that a statewide recount would overcome a 7316 vote gap, and as results have come in from the recount, this has been confirmed. Yet the Kloppenburg campaign continues to make objections based on "ballot bag security," suggesting there was fraud even though the vote count shows otherwise.
Kloppenburg had a statutory right to a full statewide recount at taxpayer expense, but that doesn't mean she was right.
There's a certain amount of schadenfreude to be enjoyed here at seeing a Democrat pull this recount stunt and not only lose but make pretty much become unelectable in the future.
Let me start with the fact that I live in the City of Waukesha, in Waukesha County, WI.
The fact that Kloppy's only real concern was Waukesha County, yet she chose an entire statewide recount, not only proves her unsuitability for the Supreme Court of WI, but dare I say her current job?
What I find even more amusing is listening to the Democrats tripe about how the Waukesha County recount is taking so long because of a plethora of 'anomalies', when these same 'anomalies' occurred in Dane County (Madison, etc.) yet went wholly UNCHALLENGED by Kloppy's lawyers. How odd [/sarc].
Kloppenburg, and those deranged democrats (but I repeat myself) in Wisconsin are some scary folks. I can see them parading for Hitler, Chavez, Mao, or supporting Stalin with the same viciousness.
As for Kloppenburg, she reminds me of the bitter and frustrated ex-girlfriend who you tried to let go of and who just wouldn't let go. In a Fatal Attraction kind of way.
Kloppenburg would rather drag her opponent, herself and the entire process through the mud. In her mind, if she can't have it, it isn't worth having. Which shows how much she actually values a position on the bench, for anything other than furthering her agenda. The scariest thing to imagine is that this woman might have become a judge.
@Juba Doobai! – Never underestimate a Democrat's willingness to eat dirt for the team. If she's on the ballot, a substantial percentage will hold their nose and vote for the D. Yes, I know judicial elections ares supposed to be nonpartisan, but we've just seen what that's worth.
"…There must be a Bible passage, parable or fable on point, I just can't think of one right now. .."
Book of Numbers 22 – 24. Story of Balaam and the Donkey; in which a Moabite King's elaborate attempt to curse the Israelites backfires…big time.
You mean to tell me a we-do-it-for-the-children speaking-truth-to-power unicorn-ranching leftist Democrat is in reality, a grasping bitter partisan hack???? I'm shocked, SHOCKED, I tell you!
This is a woman who doesn't want kids to keep score in soccer. Yet a 7,000 count loss is impossible for her to get her mind around. Like most of the Madison maggot legal battalions, she is a creep.
In Jesus parable of the "Pharisee and Tax Collector," found at Luke 18:9-14, he addressed the effectiveness of prayer, between those whose sense of personal righteousness caused them to talk down others (by way of comparison with themselves) as juxtaposed with those who just simply and humbly admit their errors.
"For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles
himself will be exalted."
"substantial percentage will hold their nose and vote for the D."
All you need to remember about how Democrats determine who to vote for:
"So what was Kloppenburg's mistake?"
Declaring victory from an unofficial 200-vote lead.
After that, contesting an official 7000-vote lead seems a bit petty. Sure, she's legally entitled to spend the taxpayers' money like that, but it doesn't really earn her any respect.
@Vinny at May 16, 2011 10:43 AM . . .
"The fact that Kloppy's only real concern was Waukesha County, yet she chose an entire statewide recount, not only proves her unsuitability for the Supreme Court of WI, but dare I say her current job?"
I agree. And that is was not just because she was technically entitled to the recount, but because even the liberal-leaning newspapers acknowledged that the size of the gap (7,316 votes) was sufficiently wide to virtually preclude any possibility of her winning — and yet she went ahead and wasted the state's dearly needed resources on the recount anyway.
Now, with these "selective" ripped bag complaints of hers (and you should include Milwaukee County as well as Dane County amongst those about which she remains silent) her dogged pursuit of the recount enforces the overall impression that she obviously does not have an appropriate judicial temperament at all. This woman seems completely unfit for a judicial office because she lacks good judgement!
As I noted in prior threads, she also undertook actions during the election that, in my opinion, constitute or at least border on unethical behavior.
Specifically, on two separate occasions during the judicial campaign, Joanne Kloppenburg leveled an egregious and patently false personal charge at Justice Prosser, written about here (w/link to debate):
"In a videotaped interview on March 16, 2011, Kloppenburg declared that Prosser had 'prejudged matters that are likely to come before the court. '
She repeated the charge in a debate six days later, saying: 'I, unlike my opponent, will approach cases with an open mind and without having prejudged the matters that come before the court. '"
Asked about the claims, her campaign spokesperson had to admit that they could not point to a single factual instance to back up that charge, or of any evidence validating the claim.
Located here is a specific ethics rule for lawyers in Wisconsin:
"SCR 20:8.2 Judicial and legal officials.
(a) A lawyer shall not make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office.
(b) A lawyer who is a candidate for judicial office shall comply with the applicable provisions of the code of judicial conduct."
You be the judge!
Finally, to this day, she is still incapable of facing up to the obvious, opting instead to pursue a politically partisan course of action of challenging the election outcome presumably in order to undermine public confidence in the electoral process, and she may even be attempting to improperly influence, or at least skew the outcome of unrelated matters — i.e., the ultimate Court review of legislation passed by the Walker Administration.
So, I would agree with you about what appears to be her lack of fitness for her current position, not just her apparent lack of qualifications for the judicial office she thankfully failed to secure!