The Shark’s Comment Line is Open!

Zach recently posted the links to the 84 pages of emails that the republicans were desperate to keep from the public. While it is somewhat tame, with just a few gems sprinkled in (they admit to “wildly gerrymandering, they continue to go to convicted felon Scott “scooter” Jensen, etc…), one of the interesting emails involves Professor Rick Esenberg.

It turns out that when they finished their maps they called the good professor to testify on how great and legal these new district maps were. The professor gladly agreed to do so, there was just one problem. He had not even seen them yet. A classic case of the republican party saying “jump” and Mr. Esenberg saying how “yes sir, how high and how often?”

While this did not surprise most political followers in Wisconsin, it was nice to have it confirmed on paper. The Shark himself, took time away from his prior job of desperately trying to minimize the John Doe investigations to address this issue.

The problem is, as is typical for far right extremists, he closed down comments. The republicans in this state have let it be known, they will speak at us not with us.

Finally, I’m closing comments on this. I understand that there all sorts of (generally anonymous) people in the blogosphere who seem to fill some psychic need by flaming people who disagree with them. They can do it elsewhere.

Well, we at Bloggingblue have always welcomed comments from all sides of every issue so I am opening up comments to Professor Shark here. Bloggingblue can be elsewhere.

I will even start the comments(and not even anonymously):

Why anyone cares about my testimony is beyond me

We agree on this completely. I hope that no media outlet ever goes to the Shark again for an actual legal opinion. They can call him up when Reince Priebus is busy and they need a republican party spokesman but let us not pretend he brings an independent legitimate voice to any discussion.

Maybe I’m wrong. But I am consistent.

Agreed! 100% consistent!

Fourth, in case you’re wondering, I was not paid for this. I received nothing. No compenation. No mileage. No parking. Nothing.

Someone once asked “With the fact that there was a secret illegal email network with Governor Walkers top advisors fundraising for a majority of their day 20 feet from his office, what is worse? That the Governor knew this was going on or that he did not?

That being said you look at the political landscape and you see people like Sarah Palin, Sam the plumber and Dr. Tim Nerenz, who use their position within the right wing to milk every single penny they can get out of the “movement” before they get exposed for who they are and are no longer relevant.
Then there are the people like the shark who do it all for free.

That the maps were shared with Scott Jensen a few days before they were made public is not interesting.

They did not feel like driving to Waupon.

There is no prohibition against showing people drafts of legislation that have not yet been introduced

Tell that to Evan Wynn & Steve Nass!

[Evan] Wynn said he has no problem with signing the agreement.

“I agreed not to talk about what I had learned because it was preliminary and not in final form,” he said. “It had nothing to do with secrecy. It was very much like the process we go through when we are developing legislation.”

[Steve] Nass agreed that the agreement had nothing to do with secrecy.

“It’s similar to the legislative process,” Nass said. “You don’t go around publicly discussing bills when they are still in draft form.

I wonder if there was a “convicted felons do not count” out clause in the secrecy agreement that all of the republicans signed.

Those are my comments, to the rest of you “people in the blogosphere who seem to fill some psychic need by flaming people who disagree with them.” The comment box is open!


Related Articles

8 thoughts on “The Shark’s Comment Line is Open!

  1. Well, at least we know that The Wanker’s Administration has created a couple jobs….. Normal people refer to them as “BJ’s” and it appears that the nutty professor Esenberg has provided the GOP with one….


  2. Let’s not miss the Reflective Moment, okay?

    Most bloggers blog for free, they do it because they think they are doing the right thing, “fighting the good fight”, helping advance society and hopefully halt or slow the progress and influence of people and movements they feel are destructive, or even “evil”.
    Blogging and political involvement VERY quickly become a social and emotional center for the invovleved person’s life. You could even say it all gives meaning to a person’s life above and beyond the daily drudgery. Getting comments and being ‘recognized” as having done or said something “special” or worthy-of-note is hugely rewarding. Many people do not get that kind of feedback and exchange from work or even at home. People do not always share this interest.
    Paid newspapers and the “higher-ups” within politics also notice and value the contributions of people who speak out, anonymously or not. The rewards of “flaming” people we do not agree with, and supporting those we do accumulate exponentially.
    Huge news orgs. have “saved themselves” from obsolescence by mimicking Internet and blogger behavior.

    The problem with Prof. E is that he cloaked all his partisan and ideological commitment (which is fine in and of itself) as Professionalism. Any discerning person knew he was a Team Player. Many many bloggers are. You can check yourself with regards to the same by simply asking if you self-censor, make excuses for “bad behavior” on your side, jump on bandwagons regardless and so forth.
    Many bloggers will do just as he does with quasi-religious fervor and devotion to The Cause. Y’all don’t need pay. I myself have done plenty of stuff in the past for free, in the belief that I was “helping” the cause of justice or whatever.
    The difference between Prof. E. and myself is (as I often have heard) I have “no credibility”. Prof. E. willingly and knowingly took the credibility he had worked hard to attain, and used it to manipulate the Public. He mis-used his power, the power that society gives a person who completes the RIGORS of law school. Unfortunately these rigors do not create or improve character.
    Had Prof. E. handled himself in a more controlled manner he could have attained AND KEPT a kind of Expert Status or lived out his life as a Lay Consultant, one who’s words had actual respect. In the old days, we had people like that in society. Now, everyone is a partisan sell-out. When exposure eventually comes the person’s contributions, whatever they were are devalued. A professional and highly educated conservative voice would have been a positive thing. Mr. E went too far, as he was encouraged to do by people who are on top of the system. People who just consume and use others. Now Mr. E is like a fat girl that got used by the quarterback and tossed aside. He won’t get the mantle of credibility back.
    I myself would like to have position and/or education to a level that my words would carry weight. But I don’t.
    I wish I was a law professor who had people listen to my views and give them respect. To squander such status is kind of obscene to me. Over-reach and hubris always amaze me….Dude, you had it all. wtf
    If I was such a person I would not flush it all via excessive Following and Obedient behavior. You can contribute without prostituting yourself.
    He doesn’t need comments from “flamers”, he already knows he fucked himself over.
    I guess maybe I’m glad I’m a Nobody and I have no lofty height from which to fall . I think I’ll make Newt proud and go clean a bathroom.

  3. We should cut Adjunct Professor Pro Forma a bit of slack here. His own imperious ego prevents him from seeing, much less admitting, the problem. And in a way he’s inadvertently right. His own hackishness and bogus “disinterested academic” shtick is old news and really isn’t the story here.

    Hilariously Esenberg thinks his lack of intimacy with the plan and process is a defense, and in praising his sometimes partner in frivolous lawsuits, Jim Troupis, as a nationally recognized redistricting expert points to the problem. That is, the conspicuous absence of Troupis or any other of the Fitz Bros.’ counselors at the hearing.

    Jon Erpenbach saw the real problem at the hearing: Esenberg was recruited not just as catspaw to spatter glittering legal generalities for the press, but as an insulting substitute for the legal team working on the maps. Committee members didn’t just want to ask about the plan’s constitutional viability, they had many other legal questions about the maps and were effectively stonewalled because Esenberg didn’t know jack.

  4. Hey, in Rick’s defense, you get really good perks and access when you become a GOP Koch-sucking hack, including huge face time on TV for being the “Republican view” on legal matters, no matter how full of crap and erroneous the views are.

    But if Marquette keeps this corrupt fool on the staff after this year, thir credibility deserves to be called ut, as should any media (I’m looking at you, JS) that gives this partisan hack any more column inches in the paper as an “expert.”

  5. In the GOP emails that they fought to keep secret, there was one cryptic reference to paying bills, needing money, and getting it from the trust.

    Anyone know what this trust is? Who bankrolled it? Whether it’s legal?

  6. La la la la la.

    Marquette Law Professor Rick Esenberg was also among the few who supported the redistricting plan during the day-long hearing. Esenberg believes it will stand up to scrutiny.

    “Having looked at the maps it was my view that they don’t look odd or strange at all,” Esenberg says.

    When it comes to the legal challenges, Esenberg says the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled more than once in favor of parties that have drawn such maps.

    “The standard for attacking a plan as a partisan gerrymander was extremely high, and plaintiffs who had attempted to challenge maps on that basis virtually always lost,” Esenberg says.


Comments are closed.