This is great news for Milwaukee County…
After making Gov. Scott Walker the issue in a Milwaukee County Circuit Court race, state Administrative Law Judge Carolina Maria Stark led Walker’s appointee, incumbent Circuit Judge Nelson Phillips III, in Tuesday’s primary.
Gov. Walker appointed Phillips, a former state and federal prosecutor, to the Branch 17 seat in October, and Stark has made Nelson’s appointment by Gov. Walker a centerpiece of her campaign to unseat the incumbent. Last week Stark released a video making it clear she didn’t apply for the Circuit Court post because she didn’t want to be associated with Walker.
In addition to her work as an administrative law judge for the Wisconsin Unemployment Insurance Division, Stark has been an attorney in private practice and is an active board member of the Wisconsin Hispanic Lawyers Association.
Stark and Phillips will advance to the April 3 general election, while Glendale Municipal Judge Christopher Lipscomb will watch from the sidelines, having been beaten in a Circuit Court race for the third time (give the guy credit for being persistent!).
Here’s Carolina Stark’s statement following her primary victory:
“Voters recognized my years of experience as an Administrative Law Judge making fair decisions based in the law and my years of proven dedication to public service and community engagement as important qualities for a judge,” Stark said. “My campaign is a true grassroots effort fueled by the support of volunteers from across Milwaukee County. Communities across the County responded to my promise to be a champion of fairness, and fight for the values of Wisconsin. I won’t bow to influence outside the letter of the law, and I will never accept anything less than a totally independent judiciary. I deeply appreciate all my support and our victory on Tuesday. ”
Hopefully Carolina Stark can build on the momentum of her primary victory and beat Judge Phillips in the general election, because the last thing Milwaukee County needs is a Walker appointee sitting on the Circuit Court bench.
Is there a problem with any of Judge Phillips’ decisions? I reviewed Stark’s campaign website and she didn’t have explanation of why she thinks Phillips is a bad or unqualified judge.
Political grandstanding sounds great until you actually have to argue in front of these individuals, which as an attorney, I do. I’ve encountered great judges on both sides of the political spectrum and horrible judges on both sides of the spectrum. I’ve also supported Judges on both sides of the spectrum.
I haven’t seen much from Stark’s background (albeit she’s only been out of law school for 8 years) that would suggest that she is marginally competent to make rulings on the types of issues she would encounter as a judge. However, the fact that she is attempting to make this a political issue about Walker, rather than one of competence suggests that she lacks the judgment to review cases on their merits.
For me that is a major concern.
There’s no analysis involved, SuperID. Just anti-Walker hatred and a desire to seek out anything to claim as a victory against him.
@ Roley Poley
“Just anti-Walker hatred”, huh? (*laughing*)
In California, we just call it common sense.
Take the partisan blinders off, Roland [seriously, WHO names their kid, “Roland”, or takes it as a Nomme De Partisan Histrionics?]. . .
I realize that they don’t teach “math” over at Wingnut Tech, but the numbers here don’t lie. Walker has alienated the voters of Wisconsin. Carolina Stark’s election is a clear indicator of that. You can call it “hatred” if you want, but intelligent people just see it as an expression of common sense, as an eminently logical reaction to Walker and the corrupt, ineffective and divisive policies that he and the Republican Party have pursued.
So, take the partisan blinders off, Roly. It isn’t “hatred”, your rightwing histrionics, notwithstanding, It’s just common sense.
Oh yeah, and LOSE the Obama photo. Maybe replace it with a picture of David Koch or a picture of Scott Walker talking to David Koch, huh?
Roland appears to use a pseudonym. He hasn’t explained why.
Some people just can’t stand behind what they write, so they hide behind anonymity.
You call it partisan while having that picture across from your name? How can you expect any kind of respect with that sort of blatant hypocrisy? Man, you are an idiot.
“Anti-Walker hatred”
Isn’t that a double negative?
Bizarre. I want a judge who is experienced not a partisan who is going to prejudge cases. And no I am not a crazy conservative, I am a liberal who is voting for Kathleen Falk in the recall.
Walker appoints a successful African American with bipartisan support and now they think he should be removed because Walker appointed him. As it stands, there are too few role models of successful African Americans in this city. To me the claim that Nelson Phillips is some unqualified simply because Walker appointed him reeks of overt racism.
So you pulled the race card, huh? This has nothing to do with race, but you did it anyway. Wow!
It really has nothing to do with race?
You have an obviously more qualified African American, that has bipartisan support (his supporter include numerous democrats.) Nearly every judge on the bench is supporting him. The Milwaukee Bar association has declared him more qualified him. You are not objecting to any single decision of his.
And, yet you want us to believe that you are opposing him because he applied for an opening on the bench (along with others) and was appointed by Walker? Right.
I would believe an admission of ignorance before that.
Race card. Is this the first time you’ve used it in your life?
Prove me wrong.
Which of Phillips’ legal decision do you disagree with and why?
Nice try, Super Id. Prove your “it’s all about race” premise first.
Honestly, Super Id, you’re better than this, aren’t you?
Super Id: “And, yet you want us to believe that you are opposing him because he applied for an opening on the bench (along with others) and was appointed by Walker?”
Yeah. You brought race into this.
Super Id: “I would believe an admission of ignorance before that.”
How very ignorant of you.
I met Phillips briefly at “A Taste of Greece” last weekend. Seemed like a nice guy.
But, but, but, John, HE’S black. . .
(*laughing*)
Super ID wants to know HOW can you possibly evaluate his niceness without factoring in his race.
Super Id done gone around the bend on this one. I had absolutely no idea that Phillips was black. The post and the discussion that followed was entirely colorblind until Super Id showed up.
Chill out, Super Id.
I posed a fair question. What is the basis for opposing Philips?
He is considerably more qualified than Stark and as a successful African American he is a positive role model for this community.
Zuma, you indicated that you had no idea he was black. Fair enough. But that suggests that you don’t know anything about him other than he was appointed by Walker.
You also indicated that you were from California, which begs the question about how much do you know about the judicial appointment process in Wisconsin?
There’s an application process and based on qualifications and recommendations are made. The Governor, who happens to be Walker, is obligated to appoint the individual to the bench. Now, I suppose the Governor would have some discretion on who he would appoint, but I’ve seen no evidence that Phillips was a partisan political appointment.
Nor, have I seen any evidence that Phillips is some raging right wing tea partier. His website lists a ton of known left leaning supporters including Marvin Pratt who ran as a Democrat for mayor of Milwaukee.
My frustration with Caroline Stark’s position is that she is equating Phillips with Walker because she knows that is not as qualified as him. And, if those are the types of connections she is making on her campaign. Then, I don’t want her deciding my cases as a judge because she is not addressing the merits of the position.
@ Super Id
Super Id: “I posed a fair question. What is the basis for opposing Philips?”
No, you didn’t, Super Id. You put out a red herring, one that you had apparently left out back for quite a while before bringing it here.
First, your “question” presupposes that people are voting against Phillips, and not FOR Starks. It also injects your apparent preoccupation with race into the discussion from out of left field. A fair question? Yeah, I don’t think so.
Ever consider that the voters who preferred Starks over Phillips, your wisdom and preferences notwithstanding, did so for exactly the reasons cited by the candidate in her statement on the election?
Carolina Starks: “Voters recognized my years of experience as an Administrative Law Judge making fair decisions based in the law and my years of proven dedication to public service and community engagement as important qualities for a judge,” Stark said. “My campaign is a true grassroots effort fueled by the support of volunteers from across Milwaukee County. Communities across the County responded to my promise to be a champion of fairness, and fight for the values of Wisconsin. I won’t bow to influence outside the letter of the law, and I will never accept anything less than a totally independent judiciary. I deeply appreciate all my support and our victory on Tuesday. ”
Anyway, Super Id, I don’t have to be from Wisconsin to see that you’re miffed because Phillips’ loss says something about how voters feel about Walker and because it very well presages what is going to happen to Walker in the very near future.
Super Id: “My frustration with Caroline Stark’s position is that she is equating Phillips with Walker because she knows that is not as qualified as him.”
“[S]he [KNOWS]”, does she?! (*laughing*) Okay, Mr. “I see no evidence”, what’s your evidence for that proposition?
“And, if those are the types of connections she is making on her campaign. Then, I don’t want her deciding my cases as a judge because she is not addressing the merits of the position.”
Well, again, you haven’t provided any evidence for your premise, have you, Super Id? Dang! And you were rolling right along there, logical, colorblind and Wisconsin-centric arguments and all, weren’t you? (*laughing*) Then, you had to go trip over your partisan blinders like that. Sad.
Okay, I keed, I keed, Super Id. But I think that you’re all wet on this one.
Or is it, as Zach queried you, that you have something against Latinos? (*wink*)
Nothing to see here, Super Id. Move along.
So wait….what does my opposition to Nelson Phillips have to do with the color of his skin?
So what do you have against hispanics, super? After all, you seem to have a problem with Carolina Stark, so your opposition to her reeks of racism.
Zach, you haven’t exactly explained what your opposition is so I’ll await for you do to so.
If I was opposing Caroline Stark in support of less qualified candidate without a rationale basis for that position It should open the door to a lot of questions.
However, I believe Phillips is substantially more qualified , as does nearly every judge in the Milwaukee County courthouse.
Super ID- exactly.
Who are they? Voters? Damn them for practicing democracy.
Super Id,
Did you vote for McCain/Palin?
That’s why I asked about McCain/Palin. Palin was/is not qualified. If you voted for that ticket, then your reasonably intelligent comments are suspect as partisan.
I voted for Obama. But I admit I struggled with it.
Super Id…you seem like a guy who uses his “thinking brain”, so why whip out the race card? As much as I disagree with these guys, the thought of going there did not occur to me. Doing so is usually a lazy way out of a debate/argument.
If your intent was to encourage them to back up their position with reason, that didn’t work out too well, eh? It hijacks the discussion (such as it was) and creates a useless argument: “You’re racist!” “No, you’re racist!” *Yawn*
Sifting through this and other diversions, I notice that the best justification for Stark was a cut-and-paste of her own campaign talking points.
The last line of Zach’s post says it all. Stark is anti-Walker and that’s good enough for them. Same mindset propelled Kloppenburg into the race against Prosser.
Zuma Bound wrote: “…you’re miffed because Phillips’ loss says something about how voters feel about Walker…”
Actually, Phillips hasn’t lost yet. He merely came in 2nd in a low turn-out primary…the kind of race that is easily influenced by a motivated, organized special interest (unions). The general election may look a lot different.
Roly: “Actually, Phillips hasn’t lost yet. He merely came in 2nd in a low turn-out primary…the kind of race that is easily influenced by a motivated, organized special interest (unions). The general election may look a lot different.”
Gee, Roly, I hope those little rationalizations of yours make you and Super Id feel better. You’re making a lot of lazy (and no less lazy than Super Id’s use of race) and self-serving assumptions about why the election turned out the way it did, aren’t ya, big guy? “[T]he kind of race that is easily influenced by a motivated, organized special interest (unions)”? Talk about being lazy. (*laughing*) Your evidence for that particular proposition, kind sir? (*laughing*) That’s okay, Roland, we both know it was just more blue smoke and mirrors. I also loved the “[t]he general election MAY look a lot different” canard you relied on.
Yes, Roland, just SOLID evidence on your part that the Starks primary victory wasn’t simply a reflection of a proper, dutiful and objective evaluation of the candidates by the electorate, an electorate increasingly alienated by Walker and his corrupt, anti-democratic legislative cronies. shenanigans
The truth is that Super Id rolled out the race card because, deep down, he fears what Phillips’ primary loss reflects about how voters are now looking at Walker, Fitzgerald, etal, and what it portends for them in the upcoming recall elections.
Well, you tried, Roland. I know that you’re a little upset, maybe a little embarrassed, that one of your partisan brothers “lost it” there for a minute and inexplicably trotted out the race card, but, hey, that’s life, huh?
Honestly, Roland, 2012 is not shaping up particularly well for conservatism, is it? People are starting to wake up to the fact that conservative ideas don’t work. If I were you, I’d spend less time obsessing about Super Id’s faux pas, and more time reflecting upon just how badly Republicans are going to do this year.
This may very well be the “tipping point”, beyond which history books will begin to relegate the Republican Party and the [ever-rightward lurching] conservative movement to the dustbins of history, right alongside the Whigs and Know Nothings.
Anyway, Super Id, BUCK UP, man. Being on the wrong side of history isn’t THAT bad. Well, yeah it is, BUT you’ve still got Roland to hang out with, right?
Cheers, my misguided wingnut brothers.
Listen, guys. I’ve got to go. The “unions” are calling me to update me on how well their “all in” strategy to sway the all-important, albeit obscure, Starks/Phillips election went.
Playing with my name…calling me a wingnut…demanding “evidence” while offering nothing but opinion…is silly. You remind me of a commenter named “mickey/gus” who used to post at my blog. Ask one of your “partisan brothers” to explain the comparison.
If you want to make Stark/Phillips a referendum on Scott Walker, the Republican Party and Conservatism in general…be my guest. The last time you guys did that was in a Statewide (as opposed to a single county in this case) election between Kloppenburg and Prosser. That race turned out pretty well for my side.
“You remind me of a commenter named “mickey/gus” who used to post at my blog. ”
Another interesting comment from Roland Melnick. So…”mickey/gus” doesn’t comment at Badger Blogger anymore? Why doesn’t he post there anymore? Is he prohibited from using his computer?
I wouldn’t know, but I don’t miss his comments.
Ask him yourself.
Awwwww, touched a nerve, did I, big guy? SO sorry.
(*laughing*)
For having done this for as long as you have, ROLAND (still a dorkish, doofish name, homeboy), you’re pretty thin-skinned, ya know that?
(*laughing*)
Well, good. Always glad to be of service.
Love and kisses,
Zuma
P.S. You may go by “Roland Melnick”, but you ALWAYS be “Arnold Horshak” to me. . .
ROLAND: “Playing with my name…[is silly.]”
“Silly”? (*laughing*) What are you, six? Whatever you want to call it, ROLAND, your chosen pseudonym, not to mention your “Obama as gangsta” icon, is as dorkish and as pathetic as they come, and just cry out to be made fun of especially if you’re as hardheaded as you seem to be.
Arnold, uh, I mean, ROLAND: “[C]alling me a wingnut…[is silly]”
I used the word “wingnut” ONCE when I used it in the sentence, “Cheers, my misguided wingnut brothers.” I’m truly sorry that THAT little tongue-in-cheek, but oh so affectionate, ditty gave you the vapors, my misguided wingnut brother (oops. . .I did IT again. . .*laughing*). God, you’re thin-skinned. “Silly”, if I can stoop down to the third-grade level of your reaction to what I had to say, just about says it all. I said a lot in my post, but THAT is what you chose to respond to?
(*laughing*)
Rolando, El Mas Pseudonymbo Dorkando: “[D]emanding ‘evidence” while offering nothing but opinion…is silly.”
Well, Rolando, I offered common sense and logic in response to the wild-eyed speculation which you intitially offered, and simply said, in so many words, “Couldn’t THIS explain it?” I didn’t have to offer evidence to support what I was saying. You did, at least if you wanted your points to be taken seriously. That’s still true by the way. I note that you still haven’t proven your “the unions were behind this victory” BS. Care to do it now?
You know what, Mr. Horshak (I really hope that there are people here who remember, “Welcome Back, Kotter”), I mean, ROLAND? You really are a, what was it you called yourself up above? Oh yeah. A blowhard.
Nice chatting with you. Next time, bring your “A” game.
The Kloppenburg/Prosser race only worked out for your side Roland because time ran out for Kloppenburg. There was less than two months from the time your buddy Walker,
” dropped the bomb” to election day, and if people had gotten more organized around Kloppenburg and less scattered through spontaneous rallies around the state protesting every republican official in sight, she might have won. If she’d had another month I think it would have turned out very differently.
Did the Earth stop spinning? Roland was actually reasonable. I may have to change my opinion.
“Did the Earth stop spinning?”
You just said I’m reasonable…so yes, I think it did!
I think you’re more reasonable than most right-wing bloggers….at least some of the time.
No, he’s not. He’s worse than many.
@Roland
Smart-aleck.