Thankfully, the race to fill the seat on Wisconsin's Supreme Court will be over in a matter of hours.
It wasn't just a dirty campaign. It was filthy. Toxic waste.
Opposition research is commonplace, but Linda Clifford's camp took it to new heights. (Perhaps "new lows" is more appropriate.) She didn't only go negative; she enlisted liars to do her dirty work to slime Annette Ziegler.
And just a day before the election, Clifford stooped even lower, bombarding Wisconsinites with misleading automated phone calls.
Madison -- Recorded phone calls urging people to support Linda Clifford for state Supreme Court have created confusion among some voters.
The call by Clifford's campaign touts a Journal Sentinel editorial page endorsement for her, leading some to believe the newspaper - rather than her campaign - is behind the calls.
"It sounded very much like that to me," said Jerome Weinhold of Milwaukee, who plans to vote for Clifford's opponent, Washington County Circuit Judge Annette Ziegler.
I can understand how someone would be confused.
Read a transcript of one of the automated calls.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel endorses Linda Clifford for Supreme Court.
The Journal Sentinel says that her opponent Annette Ziegler's conflicts of interest make Ziegler unsuited to be a justice on the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
Almost every major newspaper in Wisconsin has rejected Ziegler.
The Journal Sentinel says it's Linda Clifford who is the quote "clear choice".
Vote experience and integrity.
Linda Clifford for Supreme Court.
Authorized and paid for by Linda Clifford for Justice, Mary K. Rouse, Treasurer.
If one only listens to the beginning, as I typically do when scanning messages on my machine, it would be very easy to think that the call came from The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
It's sort of funny because I wouldn't put it past the lib JS to do something like that.
After receiving complaints, the JS actually sent a letter to Clifford's campaign to stop the calls.
Madison -- The Journal Sentinel sent a "cease and desist" letter to the campaign of state Supreme Court candidate Linda Clifford over automated phone calls this afternoon, but the campaign said it had already stopped making the calls.
Paul Bargren, a lawyer for the paper, said in his letter that the calls misled voters into thinking they were made by the newspaper.
Clifford campaign manager Nicholl Caruso said the calls were not intended to trick voters and noted they said at the end they were paid for by the campaign. She said the campaign calls ended shortly after 3 p.m., more than an hour before the campaign received the letter.
"We followed all the rules," Caruso said. "We were very proud of the Journal Sentinel endorsement and we wanted readers to know about it. There's no inaccurate information in this call at all."
The Journal Sentinel sent the letter after receiving calls from people who said they thought the calls came from the paper.
"We understand the First Amendment right of free speech," Editor Martin Kaiser said. "However, the Journal Sentinel cannot stand by while its readers are confused and misled by political telephone calls that undermine the newspaper's integrity and independence.
"Any calls that mention the newspaper's editorial page endorsement should let callers know immediately and clearly that the calls are coming from the political campaign and not from the newspaper."
I wonder if The Journal Sentinel regrets its endorsement of the desperate Linda Clifford.
Again, it's funny. What an awkward position to be in!
I would guess that the paper was annoyed by the calls of complaint and having to get a lawyer involved. But I'm sure it stands by the Clifford endorsement.
The Journal Sentinel hasn't retracted its endorsement of the slimy Jim Doyle and its accusations that Mark Green was corrupt. It's not about to withdraw its endorsement of Clifford. Libs are willing to excuse a lot.
I saw portions of the We the People Supreme Court debate. That's the same group that hosted the Wisconsin 2006 gubernatorial debates.
The format of the debate was different from others in that there was a segment where Clifford and Ziegler asked each other questions. They had a back and forth exchange without interruption from any moderator. It was ugly. Clifford was so icy. She was Nurse Ratched scary and completely creeped me out.
I have some issues with Ziegler that are disquieting, but they pale in comparison to Clifford's inexperience and liberal baggage.
I believe a Supreme Court justice should interpret the law. That's Ziegler's philosophy.
Clifford, on the other hand, believes her role is to legislate from the bench. She promises that she will be an activist judge.
Even if Clifford hadn't run such a dirty, dirty race right down to the wire, even if Clifford seemed like a decent person, I wouldn't vote for her because of her judicial philosophy.
That's what this race is about.
I want to elect a justice, not a legislator.
There's no question that Ziegler is the right choice for the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment