Make no mistake about it. In Tuesday’s state supreme court race, Michael Screnock is the conservative and Rebecca Dallet is the liberal.
The difference between the two is whether one interprets the law as written (Screnock) or as one would wish the law to be written (Dallet).
That is why the Left is pulling out all the stops in this campaign and the right is countering. Failing to persuade the people of Wisconsin through the ballot box, our acquaintances on the Left have resorted to the courts to write policy. They’ve appealed to the courts to overturn Act 10 after voters reaffirmed their support, and failed. They’ve asked the courts to strike down Right to Work, without success. They cry “gerrymandering” after each lost election, even though a Democrat won the Trump-voting 10th Senate District in a special election this year.
That is what the Rebecca Dallet campaign for state Supreme Court is all about. You don’t go to San Francisco, to Nancy Pelosi’s backyard, groveling for cash without promising to be a social justice warrior in robes. Dallet has San Francisco values; Screnock played the tuba in the University of Wisconsin-Madison marching band.
ACLU backs abortion, race-based justice, and Dallet
If there was ever any doubt of its partisan nature, the ACLU dropped a campaign card in the Stately Manor’s postal box. Dallet, the ACLU brags, supports LGBT rights, is opposed to Voter I.D. laws, and is pro-abortion without restriction. (Planned Parenthood endorses Dallet.)
On what it calls “criminal justice reform,” the ACLU quotes Dallet thusly:
“There is clearly a problem with mass incarceration and the racial bias that permeates the system. Wisconsin should be especially ashamed that we incarcerate African-Americans at a vastly higher rate than other racial groups.”
Your Squire has elucidated on the phenomenon of disparate impact, wherein identity-blind policies nonetheless result in different outcomes among demographic groups — as conclusive proof of discrimination. Dallet would lift the blindfold off of Lady Justice so as to promote separate but unequal application of the law. No wonder the police officers union, 44 circuit court judges, 54 sheriffs (active and retired), and 23 district attorneys have endorsed Screnock.
Yes, Screnock has been endorsed by the NRA, which hopes he will interpret the law as written. We say again, state supreme court justices should be appointed by the governor, subject to confirmation by the legislature. That’s how federal judges are named.
Dallet has an agenda
But there’s a difference between accepting an endorsement from an interest group, as Screnock has done, and actively campaigning on behalf of an interest group, as Dallet does. Her participation in a gun control demonstration earlier this year is proof. Dallet apologists, answer this question: How many other judges are taking to the streets to campaign on legislative issues?
Dallet left the courtroom to joust in the legislative arena with partisan campaign ads attacking Donald Trump. Attorney Rick Esenberg writes at RightWisconsin that Dallet celebrates a Democrat(ic) congressional victory in Pennsylvania, claiming that Wisconsin is “next.” He writes:
Her judicial values include “a strong public education system, clean air and water, the rights of working people to organize” and taking on “vestiges” the “racial and patriarchal system.” … How to achieve them are, for the most part, policy choices for the legislature and governor. To suggest that they ought to inform judicial decision-making is to suggest a significant expansion of the role of the courts.
Blaska’s Bottom Line: Dallet is seeking the wrong office. After she loses Tuesday, she can still file for governor.
Blaska Policy Werkes 
29 responses to “Dallet is running for governor, not for supreme court justice”
More than a little over the top. And there is an obvious error in the headline that any sentient being would catch. Just more fake news from the squire.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Love the idea of the cable car on the Capitol Square. To make the event even more authentically San Franciscan, I suggest a re-creation of the Folsom Street Fair, an annual outdoor event held since 1984 in downtown SF, which celebrates the joys of bondage, discipline, and sadomasochism. Part of the festivities include demonstrations of whipping, spanking and other “alternative” forms of sexual expression as part of “Leather Pride Week”–not to be confused with Gay Pride Week–and enthusiastically endorsed, needless to say, by city government. Nudity is encouraged on the part of participants and observers; efforts are underway to re-brand this event as family friendly with parents urged to bring their children to expose them to the wonderful “diversity” of the city immortalized in song by Tony Bennett. (I wonder if Tony is aware of this quirky little corner of his town in which he left his heart.)
If Soglin somehow becomes the Democrat candidate for governor, I suggest installing a diorama of a Cuban prison camp on the Square just to remind voters of his decades-long bromance with a mass-murdering dictator.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Homophobe much?
LikeLike
You’ve left out a few things that would complete the experience; bums defecating on the sidewalk, junkies passed out in doorways, the smell of piss, the magical sparkle of glass from broken car windows on the sidewalk, encounters with bat-crap crazy homeless people and the constant (though carefully swept under the rug) presence of violent crime.
Bob’s uninformed assertion to the contrary, you don’t need to be homophobic to find the Folsom Street Fair distasteful. Your grandma’s gay pride parade, it is not.
LikeLike
I’m hungry for some Rice-A-Roni
LikeLike
The San Francisco treat!
LikeLike
You guys never seem to have any problem with state GOP candidates whoring themselves out to Seldan Adelson, The Koch Brothers, or the DC lobbyists.
LikeLike
Or Diane Hendricks. And republican party donations to Scofflaw Screnock now top $200K. Another case of the pot v. kettle.
LikeLike
It’s your guys’ candidate – address the hypocrisy and optics of Dallet going to San Francisco! If you are A-OK with that, pitch the criticism that you always have for everything Koch.
LikeLike
I don’t really like any of it. I’m just calling out the hypocrisy of conservatives. You think it’s fine when you guys do it, but not when Dems do?
LikeLike
And you compound the hypocrisy with some good old-fashioned gay bashing. The party of hatin’ on the gays. That’s all SF means to you? Maybe it’s also Silicon Valley and all those business leaders don’t like the way conservative GOP judges rule.
LikeLike
bobo the troll says: “Homophobe much?” and “good old-fashioned gay bashing.” in two separate posts no less. Probably more upset than usual.
Always quick with a label or name calling when his big brain is hypoglycemic.
Please explain how Kriewald bashed gays.
There should be a—- Batman Pride Week.
LikeLike
Yeah, I didn’t like his post. It’s naked bigotry. It’s ugly. He held up the most extreme examples of gays he could come up with in an attempt to smear a candidate. Nothing complicated or subtle about it.
Serious question: you don’t see it? Or worse, you think it’s OK?
LikeLike
Alright, Dave, I see my comment is awaiting moderation. Meaning, I guess, you want me to moderate it. I stand by my words, I think GLK’s words ARE bigoted and ugly, but there has been a lot of name-calling here lately, so let’s try this:
Yes, Batty, I find GLK’s words offensive. I fail to see the connection between a WI Supreme Court candidate and the Folsom St. Fair, just because she attends a fundraiser in SF. He’s using the most extreme and pejorative images of gays he can come up with to smear a candidate. There’s nothing subtle about this. You don’t see it?
The final irony is that a Batman Pride Week would most likely be held in SF.
LikeLike
Just for the record, Bob, I’m gay (and definitely not the self-hating variety). You seem to be operating on the presumption that anything a gay person does or says in public is beyond reproach. We’re just as capable of obnoxious speech/behavior as anyone. And I find your patronizing attitude every bit as offensive as the antics of the Folsom Street Fair.
LikeLike
bobo,
I fail to see the connection between GLK describing the visuals of Leather Pride Week and gay bashing.
And do you seriously believe he is a “homophobe?”
Perhaps Kriewald will clarify.
LikeLike
If I wanted to provide the “most extreme and pejorative image of gays,” I could supply examples that would make the FS Fair look like a Sunday School picnic. But I realize that would expose prissy liberals like Bob to a potentially fatal case of the vapors.
LikeLike
Oh my! Billy Bob finds the Folsom Street Fair presents “extreme and pejorative images of gays”? I think it’s clear that he’s a closet homophobe who’s made uncomfortable by gay people freely expressing their sexuality. It’s entirely possible he may even be a Nazi.
Having actually lived there, I can state with confidence that anyone who wants to bring San Francisco values to Wisconsin is cancer. What San Francisco values means is the only people that matter are the enlightened patricians and their petting zoo of defectives. Anyone who actually gets up in the morning, goes to work, and makes it through the day without committing a crime is simply a resource to be mined.
LikeLike
My understanding is the Folsom Street Fair is a celebration by and for the BDSM/leather community and not a gay event, although some may be. GLK made that distinction in his OP. That is why I do not understand the homophobe/gay bashing comment by bobo.
LikeLike
The BDSM/leather community in SF is primarily (but not exclusively) gay. He made the distinction that Folsom is a different event than Gay Pride Week.
LikeLike
You may also be derided as a “breeder.”
LikeLike
It used to be that everybody running for judge would proclaim that they would be fair, impartial and unbiased in applying the law. Yes, many of them were lying, but at least they understood the dance. Rebecca Dallet has stated from the beginning that being fair or impartial is not her schtick. She’ll pick the right winners and losers in her court, you can rest assured.
LikeLike
Gary Kriewald raises an interesting question. If one parades and publicly demonstrates whipping, spanking and other “alternative” forms of sexual expression with full nudity, etc. MUST the observer approve or may one be permitted to disapprove without being castigated as a beyond the pale?
LikeLike
No, the question is not interesting. The question is not whether one can express approval or disapproval of these activities – express all you want. (And rest assured, this stuff doesn’t float my boat). The problem is labelling said activities as San Francisco Values and linking them to a judicial candidate based on…what? That she held a fundraiser in the city? Was it billed as a fundraiser for “leather sympathizing Dallet?” I doubt it. This was simply an ugly way of smearing a candidate.
LikeLike
bobo; read GLK’s post again. It is actually quite objective. He presents the info and suggests, quite possibly tongue-in-cheek, that this could be the way Madison is heading, and with government endorsement. Really not far fetched at all for Madison.
You are the only one here labeling the BDSM activity as ugly.
LikeLike
Reread Dave’s post, the comments by GLK and Koolkevs, and my comments. Read for comprehension. I did not label BDSM ugly. Associating it with a candidate to smear them is.
LikeLike
Without knowing the sexual orientation of those who attend, I cannot say if you are correct bobo.
Still, your remarks about GLK indicate that you completely missed the point of his OP and chose instead to bash him. You should have requested clarification before launching more of your word bombs.
LikeLike
Batty, just do a simple google search and you’ll figure out “the sexual orientation” of most attendees. It ain’t rocket science.
LikeLike
bobo,
Duh; of course I did, but without a scrupulous headcount google knows shit.
Is it 90/10, 70/30, 50/50; does it change yearly…Not the point anyway.
Why are you ignoring the fact you besmirched Kriewald with ugly slurs without first requesting clarification. His post was factual and objective. You are the one defining what he posted (the actual event) as ugly and then labeling him as a homophobe and gay basher.
Have you just now discovered a little taste for virtue signaling?
LikeLike